Quotes - Jewish and American.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 12:20 AM
Posted 03 May 2003 - 01:55 AM
Based on their interpretation of the Bible and its prophecies, fundamentalist Christians see the Holocaust and Israel as fulfillments of these prophecies, equate today's Israel, with Biblical Israel, and that today's Jews as the descendents of Abraham. As a result, fundamentalist Christians face the same dilemma that faces Israel today, namely, who fits the definition of a "Jews". This also ignores the Jews' assimilations throughout the centuries and the claim that many Ashkenazi Jews are Caucasian (descendents of the Khazar), i.e., non-Semitic. Fundamentalist Christian supporters of Israel include renouned evangelists Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Thus, fundamentalist Christians shy away from criticizing Israel, while blaming the Palestinians and Arabs for the problems in the Middle East, often using distorted, out-of-context facts to support their claims. At the same time, they ignore Israel's sins, especially the original sin against the Palestinians that started the conflict.
"In the former days God did separate Israel for Himself and give her the land promised to Abraham. Israel was special among all the nations of the earth (Deut. 7). But ultimately the blessing upon Abraham was to be given to all the nations (Matt. 28:19-20). With the coming of Christ God fulfilled all the promises to the fathers (Rom. 15:8). In this age, "God does not show favoritism, but accepts people from every nation who fear Him and do what is right" (Acts 10:34).
All of Israel's institutions were fulfilled in Christ -- including the land concept (Heb. 3-4). The Old Testament clearly states that God kept His work and gave the land to Israel. The notion that God had to give the land "again" is without Biblical foundation.
There is nothing wrong with Jews living in a certain land, but to claim a "divine right" to it and to employ this claim as a basis for disrupting, hurting, and killing others is wrong. God is not with people when they manipulate and intimidate others. God uses the wicked actions of people in His purposes, but He does not sanction them. "
-- Jon Zens from an article (included below) "Today's Israel: Is God on her Side?
Posted 03 May 2003 - 02:24 AM
Posted 03 May 2003 - 02:50 AM
HAZ , you are NOT the only one to think like that. THEY are dangerous even to themselves.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 02:57 AM
From wire services. Dec. 23, 1997
NEW YORK - Two rabbis and another Jew pleaded guilty to money-laundering charges for funneling more than $3 million in Colombian cocaine proceeds through a Brooklyn synagogue and yeshiva.
The perpetrators were charged with being part of a group of Orthodox Jews who laundered the $3.5 million from Colombian and Dominican drug dealers in 1995 and 1996.
By channeling the drug money through the Eitz Chaim synagogue and a Jewish school, the Bobover Yeshiva, as well as another Jewish institution, the Chaim Shel Shulem, all located in the heavily Orthodox Jewish Borough Park section of Brooklyn, they were able to move the money to Swiss bank accounts and then back to the dealers.
Rabbi Mahir Reiss, 47, and his brother Abraham Reiss, 48, pleaded guilty in Brooklyn federal court. Rabbi Reiss faces up to four years in prison, while Abraham Reiss faces three years.
The men, who will be sentenced in March, agreed to give up $1 million hidden in bank and stock accounts.
In one incident , the defendants wired $2.4 million through their Swiss bank account to pay for an airplane. The plane was eventually delivered to the Colombian drug cartel.
Another rabbi, Bernard Grunfeld, 67, pleaded guilty to "structuring," a legal term for breaking up bank transactions into amounts of less than $10,000 to avoid detection by federal authorities, as part of the conspiracy that laundered the cash. Rabbi Grunfeld faces two years in prison and a $100,000 cash forfeiture.
Another alleged member of the scheme, former Yeshiva student Israel Knobloch, is due to go to trial on similar charges in the spring. Another suspect, Jack Pinksi, a relative of Rabbi Reiss, is a fugitive. Five Latin American drug dealers who were the Jews' partners have also submitted guilty pleas and face four years in prison and deportation.
The Jews had received a 15% commission from a Columbian cartel for all drug money which they managed to launder through the accounts of the Jewish school and synagogue in New York.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 04:05 AM
Checking the News. Reuters.co.uk -
UK cameraman killed in Gaza
Israel cracking down on peace activists
Rules issued for U.S. 'terror' trials
Hong Kong SARS virus mutating rapidly
Caped crusader saves the day
BBC News - China fears many new Sars cases
These guys seem to be getting almost over confident and much more open. So it seems suprising to me that they are still getting away with it. Which is odd. Then all this talk abut SARS. Do not people know that we do not have protection against new viruses. It is just is not possible to develop immunization fast enough. The mathematics of infection are quite simple. On average each infected person must infect more than one person for the epidemic to grow. If the population is naive to the virus it will spread until there are sufficient immune survivors to limit its spread. AIDS was/is so dangerous because of the very long incubation period, resulting in a huge reservoir of infected individuals. And HIV seems to hit at the heart of the immune system in depleting T-Killer cells.
All this before I've checked Haaretz, or any other news. This is absolutely bugging me. I've posted list of links to my local MP, and liberal Democrat Party, and they probably have not opened them, or even bothered to look.
Then I came across another conspiracy web site, which is even more over the top than the black pope one. Not really time now to read more than a bit, as this sort of thing gives me more and more mental indigestion.
Makes me recall receiving a circular from a purported psychic, who said here spirit guide had related that our planet was to be taken into the 5th dimension, and this could not go ahead with such an evil man as saddam. She did add that she did not like the spirits way of doing this. I seem to recall sending her an email asking her what sort of entity she might have got in touch with! Reminds me of reading a quirky book called "The only planet of choice", where this medium relates a series of seances where she was contacted by a spirit who claimed to be one of the nine. Didnt really tell her anything you would not learn from other sources. Didnt sound very keen on the Nazorean, but purported to have taken him round the planet! Also said that the spirits of the jews who were killed during the nazi holocaust had all gone to that fate voluntarily! and consequently went immediately straight to the nine! Think I recall the spirit saying Atlantis was somewhere in the Atlantic. But we know from Continental drift and the fact that the Atlantic has been charted that there is nowhere for such a continent to have existed.
Now I quote the above because I think it is strange. I wonder what other people make of this. Are we really to believe the spirits are on the side of what is hapening? Frankly I doubt it. Have my own quirky ideas; not trusting ones either.
So many of the local people go totally along with what they see on the telly. They all laugh at me.
Another odd strange item of news is that I noted a report from aircrew of a UFO, which apparently broke up an asteroid entering our atmosphere. Please under stand that I am only repeating what I read. I am not a UFO watcher.
Then in trying to find out what on earth was going on I keep on comming across crazy Fundamentalist web-sites. One of these has pages and pages of extraordinarily tortous logic, which is so contorted it is nearly impossible to follow. According to one the final battle has already started. No indication where this information was supposed to come from. Seance, or channelling too??
Now understand that in scanning news science etc I not only look at orthodox news sites, but keep my eye on the odd etc., albeit mentally labeling such information as odd in my mind.
You see if one looks at enough information, then one starts to see a pattern emerging. One is not trying to explain or make theories about this pattern. One is just noting what seems to be a pattern. This is similar to the statistical fact that in times of economic boom womens skirts are shorter, and in times of recession they are longer.
What we do have though is enough information to determine what might be appropiate action. Loosely stated it seems that we have something like a badly enacted film set, only real people are getting killed.
Logical action one can take is
1) Try to make people aware of the problem with the Western Media, and shortcircuit it. This is a very high priority.
2) One hopeful bit of news is that in Iraq clerics are warning people not to attack the US. One must stop organisations like Hamas. Terrorism and suicide bombing only help the aggressors in this situation.
Note actions 1) & 2) go hand in hand.
3) Seriously question the illogical basis of Fundamentalist Christianity and Zionism. The posting on this news group have shown that the information for this is already available. Collating the information on Christianity is harder as it is dependant on the finding of lost Gospels as at Qumrun. The logical basis for negating Fundamentalis Christianity and Zionism is mostly already available.
I was side tracked writing a long disertaton on why I believe science and spirituallity are compatable, and that if one rejects the dogmatic illogical parts of religion the universe is still a wonder. In fact more so in its complexity. And further that it is my belief that mind , spirit and soul are real, and not imaginary as some would have us believe. That humanlife is sacred.
It is my belief that Scientific Atheism in not right either. The disertation I wrote is far too long to post with my comments here.
4) How does one limit the Bush administration? It is quite apparent from past performance tha they have no intention of listening to reason, nor rational argument. It is a grave mistake to think of these people as being rational ordinary human beings. The UN must be convinced fo the danger of thinking that rational argument will work.
5) Things that come to my mind as action against the USA are world wide request to remove all overseas bases. Remove all foreign support. Globally and worldwide.
In the USA to expose the past criminal nature of the Bush administration. e.g. Enron. etc, etc. All these things have taken a back seat due to Sept 11th, and the so-called war on terrorism.
There are a lot of conspiracy theories about regarding Sept 11th. None of these seem to me to be very realistic. If Sept 11 was a conspiracy it would be probably impossible to prove this. erhaps it might be pertinent to think what motivation there might have been for such conspiracy to have taken place. Certainly it appears there have been a lot of very dubious goings on concerning Enron. If we had peace it will probably years to untangle the mess, and we will never know the full truth. To my simple mind there seems to be enough evidence to justify severe doubt as to the suitability of these people that I think it is possible to state that we shold not let them near any control of nuclear weapons, nor any thing at all for that matter. If you simply do not know whether to trust a person just get someone you can trust.
6) Regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the most important fact is that the west should at least know what is happening in Palestine. Unfortunately the effect of this is not going to be fast enough. Idears (sensible please, and not terrorism anyone)
Summary: - At the moment these criminals are just getting away with it. No-one is even shouting.
7) In the light of the fact that there could be more than adequate motivation for Sept 11th to have been engineered. i.e various very suspicious goings on. Far too close an affiliation of the Bush administration with Ariel Sharon's Likud Government. i.e. One might state with a fair degree of certainty that they see the situation from an Israeli perspective, and are not acting on behalf of the country that elected them.
8) How does one get a criminal government removed. Legally that is. Without hurting the people of the USA. Exposure of their past criminal act might be one way.
If you read the above, this makes a very tall order. Which needs international cooperation.
9) In the light of their appearing to be motivation for Sept 11th to have been engineered, do you think we ought to be very alert to the possibility of another terrorist attack. Note that this argument is valid whether or not Sept 11th might have been contrived. It is unnecessary to have to prove that any terrorist event was contrived. One merely has to know that there seems to be a strong motivation. By the fact that these people have paid no regard to world wide protest, one may predict that they are not likely to behave any differently in the future. I think the above news demonstrates this.
Note on Reuters there is another report "Powell urges Syria to Act"
Also note reports in this country of Labour, and Tory MP's calling reporters who report the truth disloyal.
Now I feel unhappy. Many demonstrations, but not thinking. So it is so good to have so much sensible and intelligent information from Saddam.
But we are so behind in time, and this has been going on for how long a time.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 04:54 AM
"Throughout the world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely to be displaced, tortured, killed or 'disappeared', at the hands of governments or armed political groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame. " -- Amnesty International, 1996 (Quoted by Author William Blum on his webpage)
" I want to scare the hell out of the rest of the world."
-- US General Colin Powell talking about US military power prior to the Gulf War in 1991
When it suits its interests, the United States waves the U.N. flag high calling for the "implementation of the security council resolutions." When it's opposite to its interests, such as in the case of Israel, no mention of the U.N. resolution violation by the latter. Furthermore, the US often undermines the U.N. by vetoing, threatening to cut funding, and other means to protect its interests. In addition, when a dictator serves the interests of the U.S., e.g. the Shah of Iran or the monarchs of the Persian Gulf, then rewards will be showered on them by the U.S., conveniently ignoring the plight of the people whose voice is repressed by the dictator. Consequences, in the case of the dictator's disobeying the U.S., can be extremely severe. In the case of Iraq, the response was several orders of magnitude of the dictator's crimes against his people. A slow and merciless death of the population by ostensibly legitimate sanctions killing thus far 1.5 Million Iraqis, mostly children under 5. All done while chanting pro-democracy and human rights slogan, waving the flag of "making the world a safer place," ... etc, pointing a finger at the dictator, not the U.S., as the cause of genocide.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 05:03 AM
Israeli law forbids the extradition of its citizens, (some other countries have similar laws). Theoretically, hence, any Israeli citizen around the world can commit a crime, run to Israel, then (maybe) stand trial there, far away from the scene of his crime, where witnesses and evidence are way beyond the horizon. Note: Israel HAS in the past extradited Israeli citizens to stand trial elsewhere, but the inconsistencies in implementing this gives the worng message to Israeli citizens/Jews living abroad. (Would, say, Israel be willing to extradite Israeli/Jewish terrorists who committed crimes against the Palestinians, to the Palestinian Authority?)
In Sep 1997 when a Jewish Maryland teenager, Samuel Sheinbein was accused of killing and mutilating another teenager, fled to Israel. Israel first refused to extradite Sheinbein, then agreed, when the U.S. (Robert Livingston, R-LA) threatened to halt the next installment of the Billions of Dollars of aid the U.S. hands to Israel yearly. Israel said its consent to the extradition of Sheinbein is based on a technicality of Israel's citizenship law as Sheinbein's father left Israel before 1950. This is, possibly, an attempt by Israel to save face, so as not to show that it gave in to American financial pressure. Finally, on February 25th, 1999, Israeli courts decided against extraditing Sheinbein.
"We're not pleased with the result, because it's still a very short sentence in terms of what he would have gotten here." - Maryland prosecutor Douglas Gansler in response to Maryland teenager Samuel Sheinbein's sentence to 24 years imprisonment when he enters a plea in the Tel Aviv District Court, adding that Sheinbein would probably have received a life sentence had he been tried in the US. (from Jerusalem Post 08/25/1999)
Posted 03 May 2003 - 05:04 AM
By Yossi Melman, Ha'aretz Correspondent, 02/10/2000
Israel has rejected a demand by the Lithuanian government that it extradite Nahman Dushanski, who is accused of "genocide" by Lithuanian authorities. Irit Kahan, director of the department for international cases at the Justice Ministry, sent Israel's response to the Lithuanian government through diplomatic channels.
The Lithuanian authorities allege in their extradition request that Dushanski, a former officer in the Soviet security agency NKVD, the precursor of the KGB, took part in the murder of Lithuanian prisoners during the Soviet occupation in 1941. In her response, Kahan stresses that not only does Dushanski deny the allegations against him but historians and other witnesses support his claim that he was not involved in the massacre.
The Israeli response also notes that 20 senior officers of the former Soviet security agency involved in similar incidents currently reside in Lithuania and the authorities there have made no efforts to bring them to justice. According to the response, the Lithuanian position is surprising and raises suspicions of prejudice.
Dushanski emigrated to Israel in the 1970s and worked for the Ministry of Defense, from which he retired.
Israel's refusal is based on the Law of Legal Assistance, which allows the Justice Minister to refuse extraditions. According to Israel's legal system, the law supersedes all international agreements to which Israel may be a signatory. This is the first time that the Justice Ministry is making use of the law.
The Lithuanian extradition request angered many Holocaust historians and Jewish organizations who saw the demand as a "despicable action," especially since the authorities there are methodically and for years delaying legal proceedings against Lithuanians accused of involvement in expulsions, abuse, torture and murder of Jews during the Holocaust.
Lithuania has also made an extradition request for Simion Borkov, who was allegedly involved in killing Lithuanians during the 1944-1947 period.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 05:06 AM
The Associated Press
Monday, December 7, 1998; 5:26 p.m. EST
WARSAW, Poland (AP) -- Israel has refused to extradite to Poland a Jewish man accused of atrocities against German prisoners after World War II, the Justice Ministry said Monday.
Solomon Morel, who commanded a camp for German prisoners in southern Poland, allegedly tortured inmates and was considered responsible for at least 1,538 deaths, according to the ministry.
Poland requested Morel's extradition in April on charges of beating and torturing prisoners and creating inhuman conditions at the Swietochlowice camp, which he commanded from February to November 1945.
Israel refused the request last month, saying the statute of limitations had run out on the case.
A spokeswoman for the Polish Justice Ministry, Barbara Makosa-Stepkowska, said the charges against Morel failed to meet the definition of genocide under Israeli law.
She said Israel's decision ends the case in Poland, which lacks the power to appeal. Morel could only be arrested if he left Israel, Makosa-Stepkowska said.
The investigation into Morel, begun in 1992, was the only one in Poland against a Jew accused of retaliating against the Germans after their defeat.
Polish investigators said ``extremely bad conditions'' at the camp, including hunger, overcrowding and epidemic diseases, led to an unspecified number of deaths.
Morel, who lost his parents and two brothers during the war, moved to Israel in 1994.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 05:08 AM
December 15, 1999
TORONTO (AP) -- Police issued a murder warrant Wednesday for a youth who flew to Israel a week after the beating death of a teen-age boy.
Daniel Weiz, 19, was charged with second-degree murder in the death of Dimitri Baranovski, 15, who was attacked by a group in a city park on Nov. 14, said police Sgt. Joe Gataveckas.
He said Canada is working with Israeli authorities to "make sure he can be brought to justice."
Weiz's mother lives in Israel and his father lives in Canada, and Weiz has traveled between the two countries since becoming a permanent Canadian resident in 1995, said police spokesman Devin Kealey.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 05:09 AM
By Yossi Melman, LA Times, Sunday, February 25, 2001
TEL AVIV--In 1984, the U.S. Justice Department sent a "red notice" to its Israeli counterpart demanding that it arrest fugitive financier Marc Rich, an Israeli citizen thanks to the Jewish state's "right of return" law, the next time he visited the country. In 1994, Israel's Ministry of Justice formally replied to the U.S. request: "No."
Michael Ben-Yair, who was then Israel's attorney general and chief legal advisor to the government, explained his decision last week. "The 'red notice' was not followed by an extradition request or a copy of the charges and affidavits," he said. "We considered the issue and found it had no legal validity. The charges against Mr. Rich were fiscal and not fraud, and, therefore, the extradition treaty between the two countries did not cover his case."
But sources in the Ministry of Justice tell a different story. According to them, Rich paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to several prominent Israeli lawyers to use their influence and contacts on his behalf. Among them were Avner Hai-Shaki, a former minister of religion; Yaacov Neeman, who later became finance minister; and Amnon Goldenberg, an external legal advisor to the Mossad, Israel's foreign espionage agency. The U.S. Justice Department protested the Israeli decision, to no avail. Israel remained firm. Rich would not be arrested.
The episode is part of a larger story about how money buys Israeli politicians and influence and how Rich used Israel as a lever to obtain a pardon.
In his apologetic explanation for his controversial pardons of Rich and his partner, Pincus Green, former President Bill Clinton said that Israeli officials had asked him to grant the two men clemency. In response, Israeli leaders charged that Clinton was groping for an "excuse" by trying to deflect blame to Israel.
Yet, more than 50 prominent Israelis from all walks of life--politics, intelligence, universities, medical institutes, cultural and religious organizations--sent letters to Clinton urging him to pardon Rich and Green. These Israelis included caretaker Prime Minister Ehud Barak; Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami; Shabtai Shavit, a former head of the Mossad; Barak's Cabinet secretary Yitzhak Herzog; and Ehud Olmert, mayor of Jerusalem. They all praised Rich and Green for their charities--the Israel-based Doron Fund for Arts and Public Welfare and the Rich Foundation--and their generosity. Equally important, though not mentioned, were Rich's and Green's business relations with the Jewish state.
In the 1970s, the two men and their trade company, Marc Rich & Co., were significant suppliers of oil to Israel. A senior Israeli official said that Rich and his company bought oil either on the spot market or in Arab countries, then sold it without the sellers' knowledge to Israel's major oil companies. Rich and Green made big profits from these deals. A senior Israeli Cabinet minister said that the two were also instrumental in Israel's acquisition of "special strategic supplies" during the the 1991 Persian Gulf War, when Iraqi Scud missiles hit the Tel Aviv area.
Through these and other transactions, Rich and Green--especially the more social Rich--befriended and gained unlimited access to all Israeli prime ministers from Menachem Begin to Barak. To extend his influence and prestige in the corridors of power of Israel, Rich agreed to work with Mossad by becoming a "sayan," Hebrew for "helper" or "assistant."
Sayan play an important and unique role in the Mossad. Mostly of Jewish origins, they are the security net upon which Mossad agents can rely in emergencies or as providers of special assignments. Shavit defended his petition to Clinton by revealing that Rich had helped to establish contacts with authorities in Yemen, Ethiopia and Sudan during Mossad's operations to rescue Jews in those countries and bring them back to Israel.
But Rich's connections with the Mossad ran much deeper. His company's extensive branches throughout the Middle East were occasionally used to help Mossad gather intelligence and recruit agents.
Two years ago, the Belgium-born Rich gave a rare interview to the Israeli daily Maariv. In the interview, he categorically denied that he had ever contributed money to politicians and political causes in Israel. "I prefer to leave that to people who live in the country," said Rich, who has been living in the Swiss town of Zug since he fled the United States in 1983. Avner Azulay, a former Mossad operative who once provided personal security to Rich and his family and now serves as his Israeli fixer and as managing director of the Rich Foundation, confirmed Rich's statement. But both turned out to be inaccurate.
A recently obtained state comptroller's report revealed that Rich had contributed $25,000 to Olmert's campaign for mayor of Jerusalem in 1993. Later, he donated substantial sums of money to Shimon Perez' "peace center." While Rich mostly gave to organizations identified with the center and the left, Green donated to right-wing causes, including Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Did Rich buy Israeli politicians?
Rich, Pincus and their foundations have donated nearly $60 million to Israeli and Jewish concerns in many countries. But they are not simply philanthropists, as their public relations minions and lobbyists want to portray them. They not only gave money. They also made some. They came to Israel not merely out of personal choice but also to find refuge from U.S. justice. They made acquaintances among Israeli politicians and other pillars of society and used them as insurance against future extradition. Their tactics and the millions of dollars they poured into Israel paid off when Clinton pardoned them. - - - Yossi Melman Is an Israeli Author and Journalist for Haaretz
Posted 03 May 2003 - 05:18 AM
Jews seem to have more rights than other people. Why is that ?. Are they "chosen" not to be treated like the rest of us ( goyim ) ? Are they untouchable ???
Posted 03 May 2003 - 12:30 PM
One has to ask the question as to why the Fundamentalists Christian and Zionist are now endangering the whole of the USA, in that the policy pursued must ultimately devastate the USA. e.g. the financial cost is right OTT. The world is now much more dangerous. etc etc.
Considering their actions entirely from a cold logistical viewpoint, they are so extraordinarily destructive that one should become very interested as to why this is so. Are they just like a mafia criminallity who are too stupid to understand that the policy that is now enacted must destroy them, and will endanger the whole world in the process, if there is much left of mankind.
That is to say they are now getting away with blue murder, because of the credibility time gap. (i.e. they got away with crude deception because other governments and the world are still thinking of the Bush administration as being made up of people who are fundamentally rational and reasonable.) That will not last forever. It may take 6 months, or a year, or 5 years. By that time the USA will be irretrievably weakened politically, financially, and totally bogged down with a huge and untenable commitment to the middle East.
So the policy makes no sense, if you discount all the ethical and moral values that Saddam has covered so very well.
These crazy conspiracy theories say that the idea is to involve mankind in wars which will destry our culture, and ability to defend ourselves. (from what?) So why? Are they just a criminally mafiosi who no matter how clever they are in the short to medium term lack the long sight to see where their policies are ultimately taking them.
So one needs to know, rather than crazy conspiracy theories which are factually incorrect, what is really happening. i.e. we need to replace the eroneous information in these crazy conspiracy theories with correct information wherever possible.
Now after I posted that thing about Marx from the dotty Black pope theory, Houlin correctly pointed out the extraordinary degree to which "They have so thoroughly screwed up the canvas of history and the events that occurred in WWII and in the Middle East that it would take a professor like Saddam to clear up all the lies that they have printed in their Medias
throughout the world. What type of mentallity would go to such extraordinary lengths?
Yesterday I received this link from an email: -
Zionism: Compulsory Suicide for Jews http://www.savethemales.ca/091202.html
Now I apologise for posting this as much of it is crackers. But in the present situation we need to look at the unusual.
They were united also by a commitment to freemasonry, which at the top, is dedicated to the destruction of Christianity, the worship of Lucifer, and the rebuilding of a pagan temple in Jerusalem. They see most of humanity as "useless eaters" and pioneered eugenics to decrease population and weed out inferior specimens. The eventual annihilation of non-Zionist Jews was rooted in this English movement.
In 1897, the first Zionist Congress took place in Basle. In 1904, the founder of Zionism Theodore Herzl died at age 44 under suspicious circumstances. The movement was taken over by the Round Table. The purpose was to use it and Communism to advance their plan for world hegemony. During the same week in November 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution took place and the Balfour Declaration promised Palestine to the Jews.
The Round Table group planned three world wars to degrade, demoralize and destroy mankind, rendering it defenceless. The Third World War, now beginning, pitted the Zionists against the Muslims. "
Now ignoring the bits about Lucifer, and anything else that seems crackers etc. If there is any truth in the involvment of freemasonary, then perhaps we ought to know a lot more about what freemasons are doing and what their beliefs are. i.e although much of it is OTT, is there any truth in the theory of Zionism being hijacked? Why this mania for rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem? Remember in thinking about Freemasonary that they have never been attacked by the press (UK Royal Family have been attacked) Their roots are deep in society. Does the structure of their organisation form a logical basis from which such a complicated operation as Houlin described?
It has a cell like structure. The financial and social benefits for membership are enormous. It is secret. Many of its members are very rich and influential. Is it possible to get its members to do things without giving them the real reason.
If you think seriously about Freemasonary; what is one to make of the fact that many members of the General Medical Council in the UK are freemasons, make strange oaths while dringing wine from a skull; undergo strange initiation rites such as the Scottish or York rite. Does one really want people of this mentallity in public positions of high office? Without considering odd strange conspiracy theories; is this desirable?
One might make a statement along these lines; There appears to be nothing positive about Freemasonary, except to its members. On the other hand it has an unquantified potential for corruption and favoritism. e.g. If a judge, is a freemason, one should ask whether his loyalty is to justice or to his freemason brothers. My argument is that Freemasonary appears to have no positive aspect to society, and every potential for negativity, either real or potential. i.e. there seems to be nothing in its favour. Houlins description of parasites seems entirely applicable to them. i.e. Definition of Parasite compared with symbiosis: A parasite is entirely detrimental to its host. It contributes nothing to its host. In a symbiotic relationship there is a positive benefit to the host. e.g. consider Lichens. (a fungus which has a beneficial relationship with a green algae i.e. cyanobacterium )
So perhaps we ought to find out about freemasonary. Not something I have explored in any depth.
Conclusion: - Nothing positive. Entirely negative. Therefore on the basis that one thinks they might just might be up to some sort of mischief one can justify clipping their wings, and you will not do any harm at all. Action: - make any public person declare membership of freemasonary. Make it a right not to have a case heard by a freemason judge for example. Every politician must declare his freemasonary. If they are public people we have a right to know about their personal private belief system. So we want to know about the York rite, and the Scottish rite. etc etc.
Argument is: - Even on very scant and inadequate information, it is possible to devise an effective policy, which if it does no good will do no harm. This might be more economical than going to all the hastle of trying to find out the truth. While it might be interesting to know the truth, this would take a great deal of time.
Conclusion: - Bush administration policy seems totally screwballs. Quit what goes through their minds must be very odd. If there is truth behind this do they know it? Are they just another lot of people who in turn are being used and maniplated? (carrot is religion, power, money etc - relying on their arrogance and greed etc)
Posted 03 May 2003 - 04:10 PM
(Go ahead call me a Nazi, I could care less)
I mean no disrespect to Russians, Nazi's should have never committed the terrible crime of invading your country, It was wrong and i think a working friendship should have been the long term solution.
There was no jubilation by the German people when news came that Germany invaded your country. only quiet fear and reserve....
Posted 03 May 2003 - 07:56 PM
The purpose of negating wrong interpretations of religion is to prevent the distortion of religion for the purpose of evil. This does not mean throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One sees on the telly in the UK a female psychologist trying to make out that our mind is imaginary and not real. Now such a statement is not logical for the following reasons. It is only the mind that can imagine something. The fault in the logic is the same as the picture in a Boy's own Annual circa 60's, where you see a picture of a man looking at a computer in side someone's head. This generates an infinite series and is therefore not an explanation. To my mind a simpler explanation is that consciousness is a universal primary force, similarly to the electromagnetic, weak nuclear, and strong nuclear forces, and cannot therefore be generated from these other primary forces. Maxwell's field equations describe an electromagnetic wave. One might imagine that one can picture an electron, or other fundamental particles, however it is neither a particle, nor a wave. Even time is not really understood. On a nuclear scale it is not possible to distinguish the arrow of time. the arrow of time is only apparent in large aggregations of matter, when the direction of the arrow of time is evident from the statistical probability of the system. i.e it would be unusual to see the milk you put in a cup of tea unstir it self. Trying to find out what the Copenhagen interpretation is took me quite a little while. Apparently it states that the quantum mechanical description of an event is a complete description of that event. i.e there is no overnight to the event that is observed. What I am trying to say here is that these well known fundamental particles are, although we take them for granted as mysterious as that which we call mind.
I do not think it necessary as Eccles has proposed to imagine that consciousness occurs at some specific place in a cell. More I am proposing that it is a universal force that at a very primitive level is integral with perhaps all matter. Perhaps with the cosmos.
The implication of the above is simply that our mind and spirit is real, and not imaginary. There is no need to demean ourselves by saying that we are not real.
Toying with ideas, it appears to me that such a consciousness field is integrated in some way, so that all the primitive consciousness fields from our neurons and synapses combine to form a much more involved and complex consciousness field. I recall seeing an article in New scientist that stated it was the simultaneous firing of neurons which seemed to integrate a mapping.
I did have quite a long and enjoyable news group discussion with a man who was obviously very familiar with computing systems. He understood what I was saying, and did remark that my ideas solved Drefus Box problem .
Please note that the fact that it is possible to stimulate the brain directly by intense magnetic fields produced by superconducting magnets, which produces temporal lobe psychic disturbances does not affect the above argument, as has been reported in Scientific American. Such stimulation is logically entirely equivalent to early neurologist mapping the cerebral cortex by stimulation with electrodes. Or for that matter equivalent to sticking a pin in someone which stimulates nerve pain endings, which produce action potential in peripheral nerves which travel to the central nervous system and there elicit the psychic sensation of pain. There is a phrase "Although pain is not real, when I sit on a pin I dislike what I fancy I feel". Note that pain is entirely a psychic phenomenon. You cannot pick it up, nor see or touch it. However if I stuck a pin in a person or an animal, you may get a very real reaction, such as being bitten.
The above stimulation of the brain by intense magnetic fields was done to try to show that that the experiences reported from near death experiences are entirely due to the dying brain, and not related to any spiritual phenomena. It seems to me rather futile, as it is well known that people with temporal lobe epilepsy experience feelings of deja-vu, or unfamiliarity. I think it was Dostoyefski, who experienced enormous guilt all his life, which I think was attributed to temporal lobe epilepsy. And I think Van Goph had epilepsy, and in the aura preceding an attack he saw crows, which figure in his paintings.
The point of this crude idea of mine is that is an attempt to show at a very own level that our mind is real, and not imaginary. It represent an attempt with what little I know to show that our universe is not just material. That we are more than just things. When trying to think about this it became evident to me that I found myself getting into difficulty trying to find words to express myself. The nomenclature becomes quite inadequate when trying to communicate about such abstract concepts. It is surprising how many words that seem to have a meaning in fact are use for many different concepts, and the meaning is implied by the context in which they are used.
The point of the above argument is that there is not necessarily a conflict between science and spirituality. The current axis of Fundamentalist Christianity decries science. Scientific Atheism denies the reality of mind, spirit and soul, as current science cannot explain our imaginary minds, and consciousness, and therefore says mind spirit and soul do not exist. Do remember that the people who make such statements are not like the pioneers of science. e.g. Sir William Crookes, FRS did do "experiments" on spiritualism. He is known for the crookes tube, which is the basis of fluorescent lighting.
This long aside is also to try to show that it is entirley an illusion that we really have no idea as to how the universe works. Then to think that we understand the human brain is another illusion. We know quite a lot of things about it. But do bear in mind that many discoveries are almost accidental. e.g. the effect of Electric shock therapy on depression. A physician noticed that Epileptics not only had amnesia for event before the fit, but that their depression might have been alleviated.
It never failed to amaze me how during the Iraq war many people could make extraordinarily stupid statements. It will be better afterwards. It appears that when thinking about the war their logic makes no allowance whatsoever for the human emotions, and ethical and spiritual values, nor sanctity of human life. Which fact is quite extraordinary if you think about it. While one sees body bits all over the place, and these people seem totally removed from any human, ethical, or spiritual evaluation of the situation. Which tells you that they think of people just as things. Can anyone explain this? Because it seems quite remarkable to me.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 11:08 PM
By Dr. Israel Shahak, July/August 1995, pgs. 18, 119 (This is an abridged translation of an article by the author published in the Israeli newspaper Davar on March 15, 1995.)
The rabbis of Safad, joined by the Chief Rabbi Bakshi-Doron, recently issued a judgment prohibiting Jews living in the Land of Israel to lease or sell any real estate property to non-Jews. These rabbis are on the State of Israel's payroll. Yet all too clearly, their judgment contravenes Israeli state laws proscribing public expressions of racism and utterances hurtful to human dignity.1
Nonetheless, the rabbis of Safad did not invent this prohibition. The racist ruling is part and parcel of Jewish religious law (halacha). Furthermore, all the rulings of Jewish religious law concerning non-Jews, and incidentally, also Jewish women and some other Jewish sectors, are racist and discriminatory. Yet for years such rulings have been routinely invoked by rabbinical courts which are a recognized part of the State of Israel's judiciary.
Two examples show what the application of such laws may involve. According to Jewish religious law, both non-Jews and Jewish women cannot validly testify in rabbinical courts. True, Jewish women are permitted to testify in a few strictly limited matters considered "female affairs." If a case involves "a major judicial effort," however, a Jewish woman's testimony is perforce invalid,2 because "all women are lazy by nature." But even in cases not involving a "major judicial effort" when Jewish women can testify, a problem appears when the testimony of a Jewish woman is contradicted by the testimony of a Jewish man. Jewish religious law solves this problem by the formula that "a testimony of 100 Jewish women is equivalent to a testimony of a single Jewish man." 3
The second example concerns the definition of the term "harlot" in Jewish religious law. "We have learned by tradition that the term 'harlot' as designated in the Torah means any woman who is not a daughter of Israel (i.e., not born Jewish), or a daughter of Israel who has had intercourse with a man she is forbidden to marry" (Maimonides, The Book of Holiness, Forbidden Intercourse, Chapter XVIII, Law 1, translated in Yale University Judaica series). According to this racist definition, all women who happen to have been born non-Jewish are automatically considered to be "harlots." On the basis of this definition every female converted to Judaism is still considered by Jewish religious law to be a "harlot"-and as such forbidden to marry a Jewish "priest" (i.e., a supposed descendant from the Biblical "Aaron the priest").4 It is easy to imagine what the Jews would have said if any religion or movement branded all Jewish women as "harlots" and maintained that they remain "harlots" forever only because they were born Jewish.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 11:10 PM
All too clearly the enforcement of such laws in the State of Israel is irremediable unless the religion is separated from the state. It is impossible, and in my view even improper, to demand that Orthodox rabbis not issue rulings conforming to Jewish religious law which has for them an incontestable validity as the Word of God. But it is reasonable to demand that those who do not believe in the sanctity of Jewish religious law know what is its real content. The secular Jews should not fall prey to an indoctrination presenting "the Jewish morality" as supposedly enshrined in Jewish religious law, or extolling compatibility between the norms of historical Judaism and modern democracy. As Jews, we should be aware of the undeniable historical fact that for long centuries the entire Jewish nation really believed that all non-Jewish women were "harlots" and that the religious Jews in Israel still so believe.
What is really surprising is that people so seldom realize that laws of the State of Israel pertaining to the use of land are no different in essence from the rulings of the Safad rabbis. The State of Israel has turned most of the land, whether in Israel or in the West Bank, into "state land." After these lands are defined as owned by the State of Israel they can be leased only to Jews. The right to lease such lands is denied to all non-Jews, without a single exception. This denial is enforced by placing all state lands under the administration of the Jewish National Fund, a branch of the World Zionist Organization, whose racist statutes forbid their lease or any other use to non-Jews. It is easy to see that such Israeli regulations are nothing but an effect of corresponding rulings of Jewish religious law, just as secular anti-Semitism is often an effect of secularization of religious anti-Semitism.
On closer inspection it turns out that almost everything the State of Israel does or says in its relations with non-Jews is an effect of such a secularization of religious notions. As an example let me give the recent spontaneous pronouncement by senior officials of the Housing Ministry in justification of their policy of supporting the Jewish settlers who squat in houses that the ministry builds. In such cases the ministry's policy is to spend public money for connecting such houses to the electricity, water and sewage networks. When asked why they do it, the Housing Ministry officials answered that "it was inconceivable to leave the Jews without electricity or sewerage, no matter what they do."
Posted 03 May 2003 - 11:11 PM
It is not difficult to point to Arab villages in Israel (let alone in the occupied territories) whose residents have been left for decades "without electricity or sewerage," often until the present day. It is not difficult to point to the striking contrast between spending tax money for construction of magnificent public buildings in the center of Jewish Gush Etzion (in the West Bank) or Jewish Gush Qatif (in the Gaza Strip) and the dilapidation of Druze villages in Israel which are not being granted budgets for the most essential amenities, even though a large majority of their residents serve in the Israeli army. We are often told of "an alliance of blood" between the Druze and the Jews. For all such talk, however, the Druze are Gentiles, which automatically turns them into frequent victims of discrimination, both by Jewish religious law and Israeli policies.
There are well-intentioned people who believe that this situation could be significantly remedied if the Knesset enacted more laws against discrimination, or if the Supreme Court passed more verdicts against it. In fact, there is no basis for such hopes because the State of Israel has a multitude of ways of circumventing legal obstacles. The Supreme Court verdict which ordered the government to let the Arab villagers of Baram and Ikrit return to their villages has never been made effective5 and the Meretz ministers in the present government did not help these villagers either. Racist and inciteful pronouncements of Jews against non-Jews, especially against Arabs, abound in the State of Israel. Yet I do not recall a single instance of a Jew being convicted for such an offense, although many Arabs have been convicted for incitement against the Jews. I do not deny the existence of major differences between Israeli laws and Jewish religious law. But the most important of these differences seems to be that the manner of drafting the Israeli laws permits obfuscation of what Jewish religious law states with bluntness.
Official racism and discrimination pervade all walks of life in Israel. Israel is not the only state which robbed the natives of their land, whether in the West Bank after 1967, or by more legal means in Israel in the 1950s and 1960s. In those decades most land owned by the Arab citizens of Israel (let alone the refugees) was in effect filched from them. There are many states which in the past were systematically engaged in land robbery. The U.S., for example, robbed Indians of their land, transforming most of it into state land. Nevertheless, this land is now available for use by any U.S. citizen. One of the differences between Israel and other states is that the latter might have practiced racial or ethnic discrimination in a specific period of time in the past, whereas in Israel such discrimination still is practiced.
We need to recognize that in Israel the real issue is discrimination not only against the Palestinians (including those who serve in the Israeli army, police and Shabak), but against all non-Jews. This discrimination has the same character as that which the anti-Semites want to apply against the Jews. Unless we understand those realities, we will not be able to change them. But these realities include the fact that Israel practices systematic discrimination against non-Jews because it defines itself as a "Jewish state mandated to preserve its Jewish character."
Until the beginning of the Jewish Enlightenment6 all Jews firmly believed that non-Jews should be discriminated against whenever possible. It now turns out that the Jewish Enlightenment failed to change the attitudes of all, or perhaps even of most, Jews in this respect. Many completely irreligious Jews still believe that for the sake of the Jewish tradition which commanded discrimination against non-Jews, the latter should be discriminated against in the "Jewish state" forever.
Of course this argument cannot justify discrimination against non-Jews. On the contrary, it closely resembles the arguments of anti-Semites in favor of continued (or renewed) discrimination against the Jews, to the point of virtual identity.
Challengers of the view that adherence to tradition justifies discrimination can be divided into two completely different categories. Some argue that a racist and discriminatory tradition is to be denounced in any event, even if in the past it helped provide a state or society with some cohesion. The advocates of this view assign to justice a priority higher than to tradition and are accordingly willing to oppose their own or their ancestors' tradition if it conflicts with the principles of justice. According to this view, social reforms should aim at a removal or change of such traditions. I fully concur with this view.
Posted 03 May 2003 - 11:11 PM
But there also exists a second category of challenge to tradition. Its advocates can be recognized by their refusal to adhere to universalist values and, even more typically, by their hypocritical and self-interested recourse to democratic principles. A good example of that is the behavior of a great majority of diaspora Jews. They have always been vociferous in demanding equal rights for themselves. Of course, in this they have been right. Accordingly, they are right when they become enraged at opponents abroad of equal rights for Jews and proponents of at least some anti-Jewish discrimination who invoke the need for social continuity and respect for tradition. For example, the current official definition of the concept of a "Frenchman" in France or a "Turk" in Turkey, includes the Jews of these countries. But in France before the French Revolution the Jews living in that country were not considered French, whether by officialdom or by common people. Likewise, before the reforms of Kemal Ataturk, neither the Jews nor the Christians living in Turkey were regarded as Turks. Now, both the French fascists and the Turkish Islamic extremists want to re-enact the traditional definition of nationality in their respective countries: a definition in which nationality is roughly co-extensive with religion.
Let me sum up. A solution to the problem of discrimination against non-Jews by the State of Israel seems to me much more important than the peace process. Such a solution, however, in turn depends on the rejection of the linkage between Israeli policies and Jewish traditions. At the same time, we must never lose sight of the fact that all the problems stemming from the linkage between the state and its national character also exist in all other Middle Eastern states, with the exception of Turkey. All these states define themselves officially as either "Arab" or "Muslim" or both. Needless to say, I oppose the concept of an "Arab state" or a "Muslim state" no less than the concept of a "Jewish state." This is why I believe that the separation of religion from the state in all Middle Eastem countries is a precondition of a true and durable peace between them. Before the struggle for such a separation is crowned with at least a partial success, we can at best expect only truces and cease-fires, even if some of them would be dignified by naming them peace treaties.
This applies not only to the Arab-lsraeli conflict but also to all other Middle Eastern conflicts. Needless to say, a truce is preferable to a war, but it should not be regarded as a "solution." A true peace in the Middle East can be made only between the citizens of democratic states rigorously applying the principle of equality before the law, resting on adherence to universalist values. Such a peace can only be established by looking forward, not backward.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users