A body politic barred from determining who may dwell within its boundaries is not a free, democratic society.
Following last Tuesday’s jihadist massacre of four rabbis and a police officer at the Bnei Torah Kehillat Yaakov synagogue in Jerusalem, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu ordered law enforcement bodies to act immediately to destroy the homes of the two terrorist murderers who carried out that attack. He also directed them to destroy the homes of the terrorists who carried out the three other recent attacks in Jerusalem.
The following day, police destroyed the home of one terrorist murderer. Two more homes were supposed to be destroyed in short order.
But then the EU-funded radical leftist NGO Hamoked – Center for the Defense of the Individual petitioned the Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, opposing the orders.
Wednesday the court issued an injunction prohibiting state authorities from carrying out the house demolition orders.
In directing law enforcement officials to carry out the home demolitions, Netanyahu argued that the move serves as a deterrent to future would-be terrorists. Whether or not he is correct is a matter of debate. But certainly the Supreme Court can’t determine the effectiveness of the move better than the IDF can. And the IDF’s official position is that destroying the homes of terrorists deters potential terrorists from attacking.
And yet, rather than recognize the limitations of their own wisdom, Supreme Court justices acted on the behalf of an EU-funded radical organization that represents no significant constituency in Israel, and overruled the democratically elected government, curtailing its power to take the measures it deems necessary to protect the public.
This of course was just the latest move by the court to arrogate to itself the powers duly conferred on the public’s elected representatives in the government and the Knesset.
In September, the court ruled on another petition brought before it by radical left-wing NGOs funded by the EU and other foreign actors.
In its jaw dropping decision to strike down the “Infiltrators Law” amendment to the 1954 Prevention of Infiltration Law, and order the closure of the state’s holding facilities for illegal aliens from Africa, the court effectively denied the people’s elected representatives the power to determine Israel’s immigration policies. In so doing, the court hollowed out the public’s right to self-determination.
It also diminished Israel’s democratic system of government.
A body politic barred from determining who may dwell within its boundaries is not a free, democratic society.
The court also weakened Israel’s long-term viability as the Jewish state. A Jewish state unable to prevent the dilution of its Jewish majority through the illegal mass immigration of predominantly Muslim Africans is a Jewish state with a dubious future.
This of course brings us to the current hullabaloo about the draft legislation of the Nation-State Law.
Supporters of the draft legislation that seeks to give a constitutional anchor to Israel’s identity as the nation-state of the Jewish people argue that the law will weaken the court’s power to undermine Israel’s Jewish identity.
Extolling the bill, Economy Minister and head of the Bayit Yehudi party Naftali Bennett said Sunday, “The Nation-State Law… will save residents of south Tel Aviv from the infiltrators [from Africa, who have become a dominant force in the area].
When the law to block infiltrators is brought before the Supreme Court next time, the court will have to consider the fact that Israel is the national home of the Jewish people… This is an important development for residents of south Tel Aviv and for the State of Israel as a whole.”
MK Yariv Levin, one of the drafters of the legislation, said, “Today we took an historic step in restoring Israel to its Zionist roots, after years of constant erosion of Zionist norms on which the state was founded by the legal system.”
The problem with assessments like these, which inform the political Right’s dedication to the bill, is that they have no basis in reality. The proposed law changes nothing about the legal status of Israel or its Jewish character. All of the substantive determinations made in the bill are already anchored in existing laws, including in some cases, laws with constitutional standing.
In its judgments over the past 20 years, the court’s justices have had no qualms whatsoever about ignoring laws, including laws with constitutional standing, in order to advance their post-Zionist political agenda.
For instance, as Sefi Keller explained this week in Mida online magazine, both justices Aharon Barak and Mishael Cheshin disregarded the plain language of Basic Law: Knesset in their rulings.
That law prohibits anti-Zionist parties from running for Knesset. Both justices ruled in separate instances that the openly anti-Zionist Balad party could run.
There is no reason to assume that a new basic law insisting that the justices respect Israel’s Jewish character will have any impact on them. Indeed, their partners at the State Prosecution have already told the media that if the law is passed, the Supreme Court will overturn it (when asked to do so by EU-funded NGOs).
Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein announced his opposition to the bill ahead of the government’s vote Sunday. Weinstein has a track record of refusing to defend the government to the court when he doesn’t like the government’s position.
The unavoidable fact is that the only way to curb the power of the court is to take direct action against the sources of its arrogated powers. The Knesset must amend Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, the basis for the Supreme Court’s post-Zionist actions.
It must change the selection process for justices.
It must end the anomalous and anti-democratic situation in which the state prosecutors and attorney- general are above elected leaders.
It must end the devastating trend in which every senior government appointment, and many Knesset decisions, must receive prior approval from a judge or from a committee led by judges.
For many on the Right the Nation State bill was supposed to be the first step on this road. The bill itself was first presented as a consensus measure whose purpose was to fight the international movement to delegitimize Israel’s right to exist.
Four years ago, the bill was drafted jointly by Likud MK Ze’ev Elkin and Kadima MK Avi Dichter. Dichter was acting with authority from then-opposition leader and Kadima leader Tzipi Livni. More than a dozen other members of her party co-sponsored it.
The coalition agreement for the current government, which both Livni, as the head of Hatnua party, and Yair Lapid, as head of Yesh Atid party, agreed to, stipulates that the government would pass the bill. Passing the bill was not considered controversial.
And yet, once the bill was scheduled to be debated last week by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation which Livni chairs as justice minister, she turned rejecting the bill she had previously sponsored and agreed to pass into the be-all and end-all of her tenure in office.
In multiple statements, Livni called the bill she committed her party to supporting just last year, “anti-Zionist,” “anti-Jewish” and “anti-democratic.”
Livni’s partner in the grandstanding, Lapid, has similarly attacked the legislation.
It is worth recalling that just a week before they became impassioned champions of democracy, both Lapid and Livni voted in favor of a bill that seeks to close the largest-circulation paper in the country. Their support of the bill owed entirely to their opposition to Yisrael Hayom’s political line.
In other words, these two valiant defenders of democracy support censorship.
But far worse than their hypocrisy and their cheap opportunism is the fact that in opposing this bill – that will change nothing in the way Israel is governed – the two ministers and coalition partners are doing massive damage to the country.
By attacking a bill that does nothing but re-state the fact that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people as “anti-democratic,” Lapid and Livni are joining the chorus of Israel-bashers worldwide who claim that there is something inherently evil about Jewish self-determination.
Livni and Lapid are advancing the growing campaign by Jew-haters to demonize Israel as illegitimate, and Zionism is racist. By castigating this anodyne, redundant law they previously supported as anti-democratic, they are saying that there is a contradiction between being a Jewish state and being a democracy.
In all likelihood, their support for the bill owes to the growing herd mentality of the Israeli Left.
Earlier this month Haaretz, the trumpet of the post-Zionism, initiated a campaign to demonize the Nation State bill. The paper’s writers said the legislation will destroy Zionism, lead to Nazism, lead to apartheid, and lead to apartheid and Nazism.
Rather than dismiss these idiotic claims, Livni, Lapid, their backbenchers and large swathes of the media followed Haaretz over the cliff, vapidly parroting its slanderous and anti-Semitic claims.
For Livni, whose party faces electoral destruction in the coming election, embracing the anti-Zionist Left may make political sense. She may pass the electoral threshold by running to the left of Meretz.
Lapid is a different matter. His party’s public support has also collapsed. But as the leader of a party that ran as a middle class centrist party, it is hard to see how embracing the position of Students for Justice in Palestine will help Yesh Atid recapture the center.
Most Israelis are Zionists and don’t understand what all the excitement is about.
Whatever Lapid’s considerations may be, what is clear enough is that his behavior, like that of Livni, and indeed like the behavior of the politicians on the Right who insist that support for the unnecessary bill is a new litmus test for Zionism, is a clear demonstration of the pathologies of Israeli politics.
The Right, like the majority of the public that supports it and votes for it, recognizes that the greatest danger to Israel’s democratic system and status as a Jewish state is the radicalized legal system. But today the Right lacks the power to pass the legislation required to curb the power of Israel’s unelected legal rulers.
Rather than doing the hard work of running a continuous, relentless campaign to accrue the requisite power to reform the system, politicians on the Right have embraced an unnecessary bill that will do nothing as the guarantor of Israel’s future.
On the other hand, their counterparts on the Left have shown that the Israeli Left is today largely indistinguishable from the international Left which rejects Israel’s right to exist and rejects the Jewish people’s right to sovereignty and freedom in its homeland. With Haaretz acting as the conduit between the BDS movement and government ministers, politicians on the Left have become unmoored from the basic requirements of national life.
In other words, the current maelstrom over the draft Nation State bill shows that Israel’s political Right is far weaker than it needs to be and that Israel’s political Left is far more destructive than it ought to be.
www.CarolineGlick.com
@ bernard ross:
”
What’s that got to do with the price of onions?
Only ONE of them leaves the assertor liable to slander for not proving his case.
For the other, you can take it or leave it.
Sounds that way to me too.
Then you haven’t been paying attention. I have NEVER denied that — and never would. Show me the post where I ‘denied’ haNitzri.
I’ve said I’m not a “Christian,” because to be a “Christian” requires subscribing to the Nicene Creed (and subsequent ones) which holds that Christ was ‘God’ — that’s the touchstone of that faith.
— But to deny being a follower of CHRIST, never.
Oh? when have I pretended to THAT? Show me the post please.
All I’ve ever said is that you won’t die without sexual releases (it’s true; you won’t).
— The rest is nothing but your own rampant imaginings.
@ yamit82:
You need to believe that, because you know you COULDN’T get support for what you’ve got in mind without pushing Israel into war.
Your intentions become clearer all the time.
Who in blazes is suggesting anything like THAT???
You are making MY point — not your own.
You don’t know that either. Yes, I know about the contingency plans that were considered; have seen the articles. ALL defense establishments do “war gaming.” Helps to give them a working familiarity with conditions, materials & forces. 45-50 yrs ago, I used to live at a university co-op that had some guys in it who did that stuff for DoD. It was more a work-out for them than anything else.
LOTS of the contingencies they explore would curl your hair to hear about them. Doesn’t mean they plan to use them.
In any case, all this is all non-germane because, other than superficially, June ’67 was not a war of conquest, but a preemptive operation to beat the enemy to the draw.
Even Lebanon ’82 wasn’t a war of conquest — and that suffered from lack of support because in the end sufficient numbers of Israelis had doubts (justly or otherwise) about the rightness of the operation. . . .
@ yamit82:
That’d be nice. But I’m not holding my breath.
I know you’ve TRIED in the past. But more often than not, what you claimed about the scripture turned out to be more about YOU than the scripture. . . .
What ‘lie’?
It was already true; that’s not why I bolded it. I did that to place the emphasis in a different place, more appropriate to that part of the exchange. I stand by what I wrote. If you don’t agree with it, fine — ignore it.
Ass backwards again; I don’t need to. Forensically, if PROOF is required, then it’s for you to do the ‘proving’ — for you to prove ME ‘wrong.’
The only time the ASSERTOR (the one making the assertion) has to prove anything is when his assertion is in the nature of an allegation of improper or reprehensible conduct on somebody else’s part — because under THOSE circumstances, he’d be liable to a charge of slander (as YOU were when you [and the rest of the posse], w/o probative evidence, accused CuriousAmerican of ‘antisemitism’).
@ dweller:
Single exception to the rule.
I do not intrude on other threads w/o specific authorization from a leading member of the thread.
And I even bypass your insinuendo. (New word I created for the occasion).
We have a permanent injunction to destroy anyone preparing to or already harming us. It is in the Bible.
We know who those beasts are. They will be destroyed.
We also know where from the Islamic “hamulas” inserted here come from. They have a choice to either get back there or as mortal, declared enemies face the same fate above.
So it is clear. We owe NO ONE except the Lord an accounting.
As to the “nations” reaction. We remember their reaction to the Holocaust, Pogroms, Crusades, Inquisition, etc.
End of thread.
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
Who was worried?
Yes, but you ALSO you refrain also from challenging those who DON’T refrain from them.
So, in effect, they are permitted to speak for you.
Kind of, like, the way Abbas makes ‘use’ of Hamas (plays “good cop-bad cop” with them in re Israel) when he finds it convenient — while keeping his own hands clean.
Actually, I doubt that even Dr Habbash was descended from the P’lishtim. Nor am I suggesting any connection between the non-semitic Sea Peoples of the Aegean who acquired the name (epithet, actually) of P’lishtim — and the self-styled “Palestinians” of our day. But this is all beside-the-point.
My point was simply that not all the existing peoples of Cana’an were under the proscription given to Moses & Joshua, only the Seven Nations — and that it would be a serious mistake to draw the conclusion that they were proscribed purely because they were where Am Yisrael was intended to be.
Quite the contrary, the Nations were also under direct CONDEMNATION by the Almighty for personal & societal degeneracy — and the Israelite tribes were merely the INSTRUMENTALITY of God’s justice.
I think it would be a mistake, therefore, to assume that anybody of alien character who’s presently in Eretz Yisrael is necessarily under the same Divine sentence of extermination or expulsion. Absent a fresh COMMAND similar to the one you mentioned earlier, that simply does not follow as a matter of course.
@ yamit82:
I’d stand by my ‘hipshots’ before I’d ever trust any bead YOU’ve ever drawn from a prone position looking down on a stationary target (even one that can’t shoot back).
Whether a treaty ever brought a country OR a border into existence has no bearing on the Jew’s need to know that he has a right to what he takes .
No. I injected the matter of the JEW’S NEED TO KNOW OF (need to be confident of) his entitlement — not ‘entitlement’ per se.
— THAT is what’s fair game. (Assuming that “fair game” is a proposition you can GET behind.)
Hard to say. I only recently started thinking about it. American Revolution, e.g., was won with 30% of the colonists in favor, 30% opposed (in varying kinds & degrees of activism). But then, a lesser-known reality is that possibly 30% of the British population ALSO sympathized with the colonists.
GOD makes those kinds of judgments; we have to be open to taking note of the signs.
“Euphemisms” for what???
@ yamit82:
Same way we all knew that YOU would be.
That’s right.
No; why should I? They may not be entitled “in the real world.” But that’s not where it MATTERS to the Jew. He needs to know within himself that he’s right.
At ROOT, and by origin, GOD’s law.
But most Jews do not relate to that law (any more than OTHER peoples do). Yet this does not keep the Jew, in particular, from needing to know himself lawful; it’s as if his hard wiring were designed that way. Under the circumstances, then, he will defer (perhaps even in spite of himself) to whatever law DOES appear to pertain to him.
Dunno how you define “support,” but in 1948 election, e.g., Jews overwhelmingly went for Truman because of his recognition of the new Jewish state (as well as his long-perceived sympathies for a Jewish state) — and those Jews who didn’t go for HST went instead 3rd party (progressive), for Henry Wallace, whose sympathies were perceived as even more pro-Israel than HST’s. And they CONTINUED to support Demo nominees, as they were (perceived to be) more pro-Zionist than the Repubs.
Hogwash. A lot of Jews were active during the War. They were split, however, among themselves, over how to proceed. And the State Dept made things quite difficult for Jewish activism during the War.
That’s an interesting claim — which may or may not be factual. I’d like to see the detail if you have it.
If it’s SPANISH Jews specifically that you’re talking about, that’s easily enough explained by the fact that the country where they & their families had lived for centuries was in flames. “First things first” would’ve been uppermost in their minds.
We can talk about those phenomena sometime if you want. However, it would only take us further into the weeds, and we’ve already wandered far afield. For now, I think it’s enough to say that those things — Jews in Black Civil Rights, Migrant Farm Worker Movement, etc, aren’t in contradiction to what I said above in re Jews needing to know that what they do is LAWFUL.
Yeah, I do. But how they ‘think’ about this stuff is not so much a conscious process as a constant, underlying — and perhaps largely un-conscious — ethos.
No response necessary. Your remark was a dumb-assed non-sequitur, and an utter distraction.
When somebody doesn’t know something, they ALSO don’t know what it IS that they don’t know.
I seriously doubt that you will find many Jews (even among active Zionists) who would know the Mandate Charter from a mandrill baboon.
I am no such thing. But let’s be quite clear about something :
Irrespective of what I do or say, we BOTH know that you will do whatever you can to marginalize me, because you’re threatened by me. But you won’t succeed, no matter how many goofy-assed epithets you concoct.
So have at it, shlemiel; take your best shot. You don’t move me, and you don’t scare me; you can’t lay a GLOVE on anything about me. (And at your core you know it.)
@ yamit82:
Nothing to apologize for my friend. It was funny. Sleep well. 🙂
dweller Said:
and Ted thought you were miss goody two shoes
dweller Said:
rubbish, both claim to be assertions of fact.
yamit82 Said:
he calls it “marketing”, like Paul
dweller Said:
HMMMM? sounds like a follower of Yeshu to me. I thought he always denied that and pretended to be a celibate, Pauline “Jew”?
dweller Said:
psychobabble
@ yamit82:
Sorry!!! you know who I meant. At this time in the morning I can hardly see. Going to sleep now.
@ yamit82:
VUS? 🙂
When did I say that?
@ yamit82:
Why? — are you a snitch?
Everybody does. Even shmendricks like PresentCompany.
@ yamit82:
You don’t see your contradictions, do you?
If Jesus defeated Satan, then there is no need for anybody else to do so. ONE ENTITY. ONE DEFEAT. Everything else devolves from that.
Not so. I reject your attempts to recast Torah in your own image.
How is this a ‘lie’? — IS it so written or is it NOT? Ps 14:3
You’ve never shown anything of the sort — not successfully.
Not specific to Judaism. ANYBODY who subscribes to the Genesis narrative accepts that.
But that does not follow. “Cursed is the GROUND for thy sake…”
Got any bad habits? — viz., any habits that you’d rather you didn’t have?
So much for your ‘free will.’
Yes; i.e., if you remain as you were, that’s the evidence of sin in your life. It will cling to you. That’s compulsiveness.
Of course. But not until FIRST you are free of the compulsiveness — which has a life of its own. Get free of compulsiveness and all that other stuff is easy to take care of quite rationally. Not until.
YOUR brand of ‘Judaism’ may reject Original Sin. But the concept was held by Jews BEFORE it was held by anybody else.
bernard ross Said:
I would add Unqualified fact and truth!! That’s the crux!!!!
dweller Said:
Twinkie first!!!!!
SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said:
Did not you liar!!!
dweller Said:
Are you challenging me to prove I am correct? You know I can and have, so why force the issue again?
dweller Said:
You can repeat till your what’s his name comes back but you are wrong now and wrong in the past and wrong in the future if you still hold to your lie or unsubstantiated contention as fact. 😛
)
Making it Bold does not make it true and it ain’t unless you can prove me wrong which you can’t. Take your best shot though I love to see you squirm and grovel. 😉
Wrong support will come or not based on results of the military operation and how it’s perceived in the aftermath.
There is always sufficient provocation to justify any action and operation. Any Jew who would rather see Jews die than an enemy can go to hell your Xiant Hell not ours.
Begin held no post it was symbolic and he and the Herut party would have supported the Government from the opposition.
Israelis to near a man and women supported the war and were pissed at Eshkol for delaying the war even to the point the Sharon and other Generals were ready and had advanced plans for taking over the government by military coup.
Eshkol was afraid of LBJ and the Russians. He didn’t know the Americans were about to invade the Sinai to protect the Egyptians and Jordanians from Israeli conquest. The Unity of the country was solid with or with the inclusion of Begin and having dug 30,000 graves in anticipation of the high casualties expected there was never a problem of unity or belief. Only weak cowards as leaders inhibited an earlier victory.
Personally I really don’t care because I don’t believe we here in Israel either need or are dependent on American Jewish support for anything…. But your contention is total bull crap and if you can demonstrate you are right and I am wrong I’m all ears.
@ dweller:
Nothing to worry about. I, by nature, refrain from personal attacks. It is not my way even if at times… :).
Philistines were not “palestines”. The command was clearly about the nations. The former were Greek Islands posted merchants and raiders who vanished back home. There are very few remnants of that. George Habbash was arguably the only specimen from that folk among the pretend “palestines”.
The name palestine was a Roman idea to harm Jews. So what else is new…
The Islamic infestation of our land are members of known HAMULAS, (huge extended families), from Arabia, Syria, Sudan, Iraq, etc. We know precisely each HAMULA’s origin and the areas they usurped.
To them the original Command apply.
That command does not need to be re issued. It has to be complied with.
I do not deserve to be be called on that. I am sure He has His own choosing ideas. 🙂
I will not, as it is my norm continue on this.
@ dweller:
Right on Cue!!!! How did I know he would be????
Entitled??? Here you said entitled.
Care to change your wording???
Whose Law are you speaking about????
How much support did Israel receive from Diaspora Jews in 1948 and the years up to 1967? Was the lack of support because we were behaving illegally? Was support or the lack of contingent upon Jews believing in our uprightness or it’s lack? I think not the same Jews most were passive and inactive during the Years their co-coreligionists were literally burning up in smoke.
More Jews were Active and supported the commies in the Spanish civil war than supported jews in our war of independence…. The Spanish had more Jews fighting Franco than fighting in Palestine against the Arabs….
Those stinking Jews marched for Blacks but never Jews. Fought with Chavez over lettuce and rights for migrant farm workers and a thousand other non Jewish causes but never for a Jewish one and legalisms re: Palestine never enteted any debate in fact in those days there wasn’t much debate because American Jews never saw themselves as Jews except as JINO’S. It even took a kahane and his activism to get the mainstream of Jewish organizations involved with Russian Jewry. That was probably the last time a majority of American Jews did anything as a mostly unified collective.
You say you know how Jews think??? Don’t think so as you are as divorced from anything Jewish as a Dodo.
Not the best but it will do as you have no response. You made a definitive unqualified statement as fact not as your opinion. I challenged you to back it up and prove what you stated… I don’t have to prove you are wrong and you are but you have to back up your statement or I will label you a fabricator.
You injected the point of entitlement not me so any comment related to entitlement is fair game.
No you never mentioned majority so how many would be worth your effort to convince 5 10-100-1000???? what’s yourtarget and where does the principle of diminishing returns kick in??
You haven’t a clue because you just throw nice sounding Euphemisms around with no basis in reality or fact made out of whole cloth in what you call a mind.
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
Depends on WHICH ‘occupants’ you’re talking about.
He didn’t issue the command against, e.g., the P’lishtim [“Philistines”] — only the Seven Nations.
If He agrees with your assessment, then no doubt He will renew the Command.
— Who knows, He might even entrust it specifically to YOU (because of the clarity of your perception).
@ bernard ross:
A direct accusation of a specific act requires proof from the accuser. THAT’s common sense (to say nothing of honorable behavior).
But then, we already established, some time ago, that you have all the common sense of a dime-store dildo
— and LESS of the utility.
@ bernard ross:
When I make a direct accusation of a specific act of moral turpitude, I do offer evidence.
She made an accusation in re a specific act — and did not.
There is no comparison between that and saying that ‘pity’ is a bogus cover for hate. There’s an observation of human nature there, but no accusation of a specific ACT. Apples & Oranges.
@ bernard ross:
A much better call than YOURS, it would appear.
She didn’t call me a pompous disingenuous hypocrite. YAMIT did.
And I’d already disposed of THAT horseshit multiple times before.
Bible records say that the Children of Israel have been commanded by G.d, directly to Moses initially, to do what with the Land of Israel occupants?
Maybe someone in the comment list can tell us again… I have forgotten that detail.
I do recall though that the majority of those sent in on a military mission to evaluate the prospects came back trying to overturn the command.
What happened to them and their followers? My memory ain’t what it used to was…
I do not for a moment doubt we face today the same condition.
yamit82 Said:
but his common sense told you it was “marketing” 😛
@ yamit82:
And whom have I snitched off?
When and how?
@ yamit82:
Anything you want to impose on other Jews you ALWAYS reference as a “basic Torah commandment.”
Frankly your idea of worth leaves a lot to be desired. In any case, WORTH is, in its nature, a subjective proposition. And whatever ELSE it may be, Jewish reliance on Law & Right is also a practical consideration, and an unavoidable one. I repeat what I said above:
B. … this is especially important where JEWS are concerned, because, among all peoples, we do seem to have a peculiar need to know that we are lawfully entitled to what we do (a need which very likely preceeds even Sinai) — without satisfaction of that need, our actions can often be halting or half-hearted (which can only give strength to an opposition)…
No, that doesn’t follow; however, an act of conquest on a scale that we are talking about WOULD need a high degree of support. That’s why whenever the State knew it was heading for war it often sought the broadest measure of support. That’s why Eshcol took Begin into the cabinet IN ’67. (Other countries do that too. Lloyd-George’s war cabinet was broad-based as well.)
And the idea that you could get critical levels of JEWISH support for a war of conquest — in the absence of substantial, prior, Jewish conviction as to the rightness of the action — is simply a pipedream. Jews aren’t made that way.
@ yamit82:
Prove that they don’t “want to know.” This the best you can do?
Can you prove that YOU aren’t? and that you don’t do so routinely?
Off-point, like the rest of your questions. I said JEWS have a need to know that what they do is lawful and right; uncertainty over that acts like a braking action on their wheels.
So?
Who’s asking?
No idea. But what’s that got to do with what I said?
Again, what’s your point?
Who brought up the matter of “majority” support? I never used the word majority in ANY part of my comment above. Critical numbers needn’t be actual majorities.
@ bernard ross:
His life’s mission is to defeat Satan just like he believes his yeshu guy did. I told him he is off center and that the torah already explains it but he rejects Torah….
His Christian Bible declares:
“As it is written, there is none righteous; no, not one.” (Romans 3:10) Paul was a Liar as I have shown numerous times.
“Wherefore, as Sin came into the World through one man [Adam], and Death through Sin; and so Death spread to all men because all men sinned [through Adam].” (Romans 5:12);
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:22)
In contrast, one of the most fundamental doctrines of Judaism is that G-d has created all human beings in His Image; and, consequently, all human beings are born innocent of Sin, including Humanity’s first Sin. Postpartum, G-d has bestowed upon every human being the Gift of Free Will to enable each human being to prospectively choose between doing Good and doing Evil, which Gift is the negation of the concept of the “Curse of Original Sin”.
The Torah says:
Consequently, Judaism rejects the concept of the “Curse of Original Sin”
No christian will deny These postulates.
yamit82 Said:
thats the crux
bernard ross Said:
“but yours truly” always stands four square behind his common sense nonfactual totally subjective, fallacious and with out merit opinions he tries to palm off as fact and truth. Never supplied any credible evidence or support. He believes he don’t need any.
Remember he will always remind us that he told us, so it must be so. Ugggg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
yamit82 Said:
from past posts I suspect that “yeshu” is the source of his “common sense” which he derives from “intuition”…..his common sense that no other posters here have agreed with wrt his psychobabble…… apparently his “common sense” is not so common.
bernard ross Said:
And besides my intuition told me , that little voice called conscience or whatever crap he’s selling at the moment.
thinks he is a guru mystic: ask him!!!! 🙂
Has that famous 3rd eye the Cyclopes one…..
Ask him who he killed unemotionally before during and after?
Expect 50 dissing comments in retort 🙁
dweller Said:
LOL… this from he who always psycho babbles with NO evidence ever given…. his only support is his own “common sense” ( 😛 😛 😛 ). So why should HB provide evidence when you dont?
dweller Said:
What about her calling you a pompous, disingenuous hypocrite? you appear not to be challenging that….. good call.
dweller Said:
let’s see your evidence she is a Twinkie
You are a snitch, snitch!!!!!!
@ honeybee:
You didn’t seem to think that your calling me a ‘snitch’ was a subject for chit chat. You made the charge HERE.
Let’s see your ‘evidence.’
dweller Said:
this is a subject for the chit-chat.
dweller Said:
its just common sense, why cant you see that? 😛
dweller Said:
which definition of twinkie are you using?
sissi was mubaraks intelligence chief……LOL
From: HWSNBN
First provide evidence that she is a Twinkie!!!!
dweller Said:
Prove that a majority of the Jews you speak of want to know or already don’t know. Can you prove you are not injecting your own beliefs and misunderstanding here? IMO it’s more of your Jargon without merit or substance unless you cans substantiate your stated claim above. Pure projection without merit and provable substance. You fallacious opinion only.
Is any ethnicity or group entitled to anything?
How many national sovereignty’s were established in History by virtue of agreements and treaties only? Agreements and treaties defining borders were always a consequence of conquest first and imposed agreements forcing recognition after the fact never before.
In the real world nobody is entitled to anything.
Israel has never had the majority support of any consequence by American Jews. At best most have remained passive many opposed and some pro.
A Jew should have and give his first loyalty to other Jews, this is a basic Torah commandment. A Jew who needs to be convinced of the legality of the only Jewish State before offering even passive support are Jews not worth any effort.
According to You then every act by the government of Israel would have to meet you standard before support could be expected. Stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@ honeybee:
What are you talking about?
Got some evidence for this new little charge, Twinkie?
@ Felix Quigley:
You obviously assume that there is no ‘doing’ in talking.
But that’s not necessarily so. Sometimes talking IS ‘doing.’ It depends on the nature of the talking, as well as the speaker and the audience. (What’s more, there IS such a thing as going off half-cocked. The mere urge to “do something” has more than once in the past been responsible for foreclosing on future rational action.)
My earlier point was that
A. a serious effort at hasbara is needed to inform the world’s Jews (including those of Israel) that by law the Jewish people are entitled to all the land from River to Sea; and that
B. this is especially important where JEWS are concerned, because, among all peoples, we do seem to have a peculiar need to know that we are lawfully entitled to what we do (a need which very likely preceeds even Sinai) — without satisfaction of that need, our actions can often be halting or half-hearted (which can only give strength to an opposition); and that
C. with that kind and degree of certainty, the prospects for Jewish support for any necessary act of conquest will be greatly augmented — a significant matter, since most of us seem to be agreed that JEWISH support, in particular, will be essential for any such move.
an old story but still emotional
http://www.israelvideonetwork.com/he-saved-669-children-during-the-holocaust-and-he-doesnt-know-theyre-sitting-next-to-him/?omhide=true&utm_source=MadMimi&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breaking+News+Video%3A+Gush+Etzion+Stabbing+Attack%2C+IDF+Takes+Terrorist+Down&utm_campaign=20141201_m123351278_12%2F01+Breaking+News+Video%3A+Gush+Etzion+Stabbing+Attack%2C+IDF+Takes+Terrorist+Down&utm_term=saved-holocaust-children_jpg_3F1417429027
@ honeybee:
honeybee, do not paddle anyone. We are not forum’s DA. The justice department will distribute the justice.
So long. Have to go to the hairdresser. Hair cut badly needed.
honeybee Said:
Hmmmmmm????? An interesting proposition.
I don’t think I would mind being paddled by you even welcome the experience. 😉
bernard ross Said:
here is an idea: if the GOI is so intent on giving away land, at least utter these few words before giving the gift so as not to make it look like the Jews stole the land from the pals.
Mealy mouth BS such as saying: it would be kept anyway in any agreement; its building within an existing jewish neighborhood; etc etc; these statements encourage the libels of land theft.
mar55 Said:
I should like to paddle yamit82 also !!!!!!!!!!
@ honeybee:
dweller of course.
Felix Quigley Said:
Israel cannot even issue a clear statement on itself such as these simple words:
bernard ross Said:
Just a statement regularly repeated. It could be repeated like BB’s announcements of new building: it need not even be followed by any action. Just repeating these words by gov ministers and religious leaders would change the narrative. jews and others might actually come to consider and research the lies of Jewish illegitimacy and illegality. It takes nothing but a movement of the mouth on a regular basis.
mar55 Said:
Dweller or yamit82 ???????????