According to Haaretz, “Lior was wanted for questioning after he endorsed the controversial book “Torat Hamelech,” which justifies the killing of non-Jews. ” There was no mention about the circumstances that would justify it. Does anyone have more info on what the book espouses? We must be able to distinguish the difference between this and expressions in the Koran or Christian Bible which many criticise. Rubin makes the case for the killing below and I entirely agree with him. This is a push back against the left who are trying to rewrite the rules of war. To advocate such killing is not incitement but common sense.
Two years ago this article, Rabbi Lior Says It’s OK to Kill Civilians …and other rabbis are silent, was published in an anti war blog. Lior alledgedly said,“The law of our Torah is to have mercy on our soldiers and to save them. This is the real moral behind Israel’s Torah and we must not feel guilty due to foreign morals.”
“When our forces come across civilians during a war or in hot pursuit or in a raid, so long as there is no certaintly that those civilians are incapable of harming our forces according to Halkah they may and even should be killed.”
I have no ojection to these principals. In fact I have argued that it is criminal negligence to put your own soldiers at risk to save the lives of your enemies. Our duty is to our own and not to mankind.
The article ends with this surprising statement,
”I should also note that Lior’s resoning is very similar to the logic that Madeleine Albright used when asked to respond to the charge [in 1995] that a half million Iraqi children has been killed by U.S. sanctions. It was “worth it” because it was her responsibility to make sure US soldiers would not have to“refight the Gulf War”
Totally aside from the validity of the charge that 500,000 children died, to my mind we should not allow the left to tie our hands in seeking victory. That is not to say that we should drop the Bomb at the drop of a hat. It is to say that there are times when you drop the bomb. Ted Belman
Rabbi Lior’s Arrest
by David Rubin, INN
Rabbi Lior’s arrest was much more than a travesty of free speech. The reason for the arrest made no sense at all.
There has been much commotion over the arrest of Rabbi Dov Lior by the police, with many rightly referring to it as an infringement of free speech.
His crime? He endorsed a book entitled Torat Hamelech, authored by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira and Rabbi Yosef Elitzur, which says that it is permissible to kill civilian non-Jews in certain situations during wartime.
If we are truly a democratic, free society, and a scholarly one at that, I think we need to seriously examine the issues at hand – not just the blatant curtailing of freedom of speech, which in and of itself is highly problematic – but to examine the specific content of this “controversial” work, which has so enraged some police commanders (and those who give them their marching orders).
Let us ask the seemingly forbidden question: Could it be that perhaps both the authors and the endorsers are correct in their analysis of the need for certain actions to defend freedom in wartime?
Is it possible that Israel is not the only nation with that particular need for self-preservation?
The authors were referring specifically to Israel’s defense, and therefore, they referred to “non-Jewish” civilians as a term for enemy civilians. Notable parallels can be drawn in major global conflicts for the cause of freedom, when civilians have been killed, and not accidentally.
There have been many instances throughout history in which righteous nations fought against tyranny and enemy civilians were killed in the process. The most glaring example was WWII, when the allied forces bombed the heavily populated German cities of Berlin and Dresden, knowing that many innocent civilians would be killed. Approximately 300,000 civilians were actually killed in these air raids.
Was this a crime? Was this perceived as a violation of German human rights? Certainly not! It was understood by the Allies that this was an effective tool in an overall strategy to defeat the enemy.
And I haven’t even mentioned Hiroshima and Nagasaki!
In a time of war, it is certainly permissible. There was not even massive dropping of leaflets as in Gaza, warning the “innocent civilians” that the American, French, Russian, or British pilots would soon be attacking, and thereby ruining the element of surprise, so vital in wartime.
It was clearly understood that in wartime, enemy civilians would be hurt, and not necessariy accidentally, thereby preserving the lives of the valiant soldiers who were fighting on the right side of this most moral battle.
We Jews need to put an end to our self-immolation, as our enemies cynically hide behind civilians, no doubt amused by our unwarranted guilt. Enemies deserve to be defeated, and defeated handily.
The “peaceful” Palestinian civilians, who elected the Hamas and Fatah terrorist organizations as their leadership, deserve no more sympathy than the German civilians of Berlin and Dresden. In our next war, we should act accordingly.
I applaud Rabbi Lior for standing firm for the right to express his opinion about such an important national issue. Let us learn from historical precedent and be no less vigilant in defending our nation against Islamic tyranny — and to boldly express our opinions without fear of the genie of “political correctness”.
Well, I’ll post it without the link then – Strangelove, Go to the article in Israpundit titled “Obama legitimizes the Muslim Brotherhood”. Post your feelings about the main point of this article and lets see what you have.
Ted, your spam catcher refuses a link back to another Israpundit article?
Maybe I’m being too harsh on you strangelove. Why don’t you comment on the main thrust of this article: Obama legitimizes the Muslim Brotherhood. Lets see what you have…
What a stupid statement. First of all, you have no idea what I read on the internet or whether they are lies. You’re not challenging ANYTHING that I have written, just throwing around crap because you feel I’m not aligned politically with the same “team” you are. Get over yourself and grow up.
Why should anyone move her phrases around? She said what she said and was not quoted out of context. That’s what you have done here.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a turd is still a turd even with lipstick and deodorant.
Oh! Then I suppose you trust the lies you get on the web.
Strangelove, I would venture to guess that none of the Israelis that post here, me included, watch any of that trash you post about. I personally get zero news from the MSM and get it by seeking it out on the web. You just can’t trust any of them.
Yonatan,
I understand your point, but I’m not so sure that you understand mine. Yes, that tidbit was trivial to the overall context of the discussion here. I wasn’t interested in getting involved in the current discussion, but that point jumped out at me because I’ve seen many posts on Israpundit that are based on easily refutable lies. Most of the people here get many of their beliefs from right-wing media, Faux News, Rush Lamebrain, etc., and they all spew the same talking point propaganda. Tell a lie repeatedly and people begin to believe it. I would like to believe that people here are intelligent enough that they would do some research and find out how they are being duped. I don’t have enough time to dedicate myself to this site so I can refudiate every lie that I find here. Generally, when I do, I end up being hated here. I’m a strong supporter of Israel, but I vehemetly oppose many of the positions that I find in Israpundit.
Strangelove- you dedicate a page and a half of comment over a non important tidbit in her post? Obsess much?
I am not here to debate the theme of this post. Rather, to point out that you are are, on a regular basis, the victems of the falsehoods and lies typically presented to you by America’s reich-wing media, particularly, your media hero, Glenn Beck.
Adina claimed that Mao is Anita Dunn’s “idol”, a total distortion of the truth, but typical of a lot of the crap most of you believe and spew on Israpundit. I can easily refute many of the lies that I find on Israpundit, but I don’t have the time to waste here. So I’ll focus on Anita Dunn. Read on.
Dunn actually called Mao and Mother Teresa “the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point”
From the full video Beck aired on October 15:
DUNN: A lot of you have a great deal of ability. A lot of you work hard. Put them together, and that answers the “Why not?” question. There’s usually not a good reason.
And then the third lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa — not often coupled with each together, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you’re going to make choices. You’re going to challenge. You’re going to say, “Why not?” You’re going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here’s the deal: These are your choices. They are no one else’s.
In 1947, when Mao Zedong was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side. And people said, “How can you win? How can you do this? How can you do this against all of the odds against you?” And Mao Zedong said, you know, “You fight your war, and I’ll fight mine.” And think about that for a second.
You know, you don’t have to accept the definition of how to do things, and you don’t have to follow other people’s choices and paths, OK? It is about your choices and your path. You fight your own war. You lay out your own path. You figure out what’s right for you. You don’t let external definition define how good you are internally. You fight your war. You let them fight theirs. Everybody has their own path.
And then Mother Teresa, who, upon receiving a letter from a fairly affluent young person who asked her whether she could come over and help with that orphanage in Calcutta, responded very simply: “Go find your own Calcutta.” OK? Go find your own Calcutta. Fight your own path. Go find the thing that is unique to you, the challenge that is actually yours, not somebody else’s challenge. [Glenn Beck, 10/15/09]
Dunn is latest target of Fox News’ Beck-led witch hunt against Obama administration officials
Beck previously falsely claimed Dunn “worships” Mao Zedong, “her hero.” Throughout most of his October 15 Fox News program, Beck falsely claimed that Dunn “worships” and “idolizes” “her hero” Mao Zedong. In fact, in the video that Beck aired as evidence to support his claims, Dunn offered no endorsement of Mao’s ideology or atrocities — rather, she commented that Mao and Mother Teresa were two of her “favorite political philosophers,” and based on short quotes from them, she offered the advice that “you don’t have to follow other people’s choices and paths” or “let external definition define how good you are internally.”
Beck ignored numerous conservatives who previously spoke similarly of Mao. In airing footage of Dunn calling Mao and Mother Teresa two of her “favorite political philosophers” and using those comments to falsely link Dunn to the murder of tens of millions of Chinese under Mao’s reign, Beck ignored numerous conservatives — including Barry Goldwater’s “alter ego” Stephen C. Shadegg, Cato Institute president Edward H. Crane, and GOP strategist Ralph Reed — who have approvingly cited the tactics of Mao, Vladimir Lenin, and the Viet Cong, stating that they had used those tactics in their political work or have otherwise highlighted their philosophies. Moreover, in a 2008 presidential campaign speech, Sen. John McCain stated that “there was a lot of people who said that my political career was not going to succeed. In fact, in the words of Chairman Mao, it’s always darkest before it’s totally black” [emphasis added], as The Washington Independent noted.
Beck-led Fox News “czar” witch hunt moves to ridiculous smear of Anita Dunn. In attacking Dunn, claiming that she “worships” her “hero” Mao, Beck has targeted yet another Obama administration official in his Fox News-assisted witch hunt of President Obama’s so-called “czars.” Beck and Fox News have previously attacked with falsehoods and spurious claims White House officials Kevin Jennings, Cass Sunstein, Harold Koh, and Van Jones.
by Realclear (October 20, 2009 12:21 am ET)
1 13 If Fox News cropped Anita Dunn’s quote, then where is the real, supposed un-cropped quote? Why hasn’t that been posted?
Reply Report Abuse
by wzwriter (October 20, 2009 9:16 am ET)
6 You can find the real quote at any legitimate news organization. That excludes Faux News.
Reply Report Abuse
by cb50 (October 20, 2009 12:31 pm ET)
5 If you go back to Thursday when Beck first showed the video then you will see that he shows the wole clip, even more than what was wrote above.
Reply Report Abuse
by DellDolly (October 20, 2009 2:17 pm ET)
5 1 Yes, and once he discovered that when one uses the whole quote, the false belief that he is pushing can be easily disproven, he started using the cropped quote.
What part of the fact that he cropped the quote doesn’t compute with you? Do you think that it’d be okay for him to misleadingly provide the cropped quote if he provided the full quote one time? If so, why? How does doing the right thing one time excuse him doing the wrong thing another time? Are you immune from prosecution if you steal from a store one time, but not every time you visit that store? Of course not.
The problem with the cropped quote is that it distorts what she was saying.
Let’s move the phrases around.
She said that when she is “basically deliver(ing) a simple point, which is, you’re going to make choices”, “the two people I turn to most are Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa.”
So, ONLY when she is trying to make a point about making choices, she likes to turn to comments made by Mother Teresa and Mao. They are her favorite resources when making that point. And so, when you crop off that qualifier about delivering a simple point, you distort what she was saying. She never said he was her favorite philosopher. She said that for making that one point, she used him and Mother Teresa. Vastly different.
And she was being facetious when she said that he was one of her favorite philosophers.
And then the third lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa — not often coupled with each together, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you’re going to make choices.
So go ahead and keep listening to Faux News. Keep hearing the lies that you just love to believe.
A constitution is needed in Israel. Even thinking to bring in someone whether an important Rabbai or a minor author for questioning by the poice in my opinion is an abuse of the freedom of speech, which is vital to all free people and democratic countries.
“Jewish” Israel: the “law” applies equally to everyone.
In “Jewish” Israel, a Torah-true rabbi was just arrested for writing a Torah-true book. Torah-true Judaism is very conservative, with little radical innovation. The rabbi in question wrote a compilation of the laws of warfare according to the traditional rabbinic interpretation of the Holy, Divine Torah.
He was arrested by a secular Israeli government, which (amazingly) currently demands from the gentiles that it be recognized as a “Jewish” State. The government arrested the rabbi for pointing out that Torah-true Jewish Law is politically incorrect with respect to secular israeli law.
The secular israeli government makes up its “law which applies to everyone,” as it goes along. It has never created an Israeli constitution. Its legal system is based on the laws of the gentile british empire in 1948, tempered by the ultra-liberal, Jew-hating opinions of the Israeli Supreme Court, which picks its own members, and which feels free to overturn any act of the Knesset it chooses, without any possible appeal.
The present secular Israeli government forms a type of “enlightened police state”. It suffers from “cognitive dissonance” (holding two mutually contradictory views simultaneously, rather than choosing one or the other). So we end up with the absurdity of a “Jewish and Democratic” state; and a Torah-true Jewish Law which does not apply to Jews in the “Jewish” State of Israel.
In “Jewish” Israel, this status quo is becomingly less and less sustainable.
To paraphrase Machiavelli: If you’re going to hurt someone, hurt him so severely that you will never have to fear his vengeance.
The garbage that is the Israeli justice and legal system
Tzipi Livni: “Dinna d’malchuta dinna!”
That is not what I heard Livni say on a Reshet Bet radio interview yesterday morning. She was all for the arrest.
And as for killing civilians, including women and children, when the other side intends to commit genocide against you, you are entitled to repay such an enemy in kind, so they can never carry out such evil against you in the future. What Israel’s leftist fools don’t understand is that showing mercy to the wicked will lead to more suffering and death in the future. To put it crudely, war is not about demonstrating you have a more refined sense of chivalry than a bloodthirsty enemy bent on your destruction. In a word, the IDF’s pagan “tohar hanashek” (purity of arms) rules simply make winning a war decisively impossible and they have nothing in common with true Torah values and perhaps is this is why Israel’s Left is so afraid of what is contained in Torah Hamelech.
Bill, total war under the right circumstances is both moral and legitimate. When the Soviets occupied Germany, they dismantled every economic asset to ship home. Maybe confiscating enemy property was a form of “victor’s justice,” but it was also redistributive as well retributive justice. It made the Soviet people whole for their suffering and losses and served as a deterrent to the Germans from committing future aggression because of the extent of their material capacity exacted from them to compensate for their crimes.
Ex-High Court Justice Says Police Arrest of Rabbi Lior ‘Unwise’
In my opinion, Israel’s racism law is undemocratic. Who judges what thoughts are forbidden what thoughts are allowed?
They tried banning Hitler from speaking in the Weimar Republic but it was a futile exercise and it ended up discrediting the Weimar institutions.
The Nazis came to power due to other reasons than having unfettered free speech rights. The corrective to harmful ideas is more not less free speech. If someone doesn’t make the case against anti-Semitism and bigotry, that’s not the fault of the opponent. If good people fail to exercise their rights in a word, it doesn’t give them the right to deprive people with whom they disagree of their rights.
Like Lord Acton used to say, “absolute power corrupts and corrupts absolutely.”
Most of Israels rabbis especially those associated with the national religious are prisoners of the government of Israel. They are all salaried paid out of public funds and their institutions and settlements depend as well on government funding. Most or no better than the European Judenräte.
When any rabbi or settler leader acts assertively, the government lets them know who’s boss.
Whenever the government plans a major act of transferring part of the land of Israel to our enemies the government besides overt harassment of legit leaders and blame settler right wing extremists. They also use administrative detentions and Shabak agent provocateurs in order to blame the settler right thereby turning public opinion against them.
Watch out for Jews killing Arabs. Jews killing Jews. That’s how the security services manipulate public opinion.
The book discusses Jewish self-defense from a Halachic point of view. Nothing unethical or illegal about such a debate. But to Shai Nitzan and the Israeli Left, there is no free speech for non-leftists in Israel. You can be dragged into Israeli court for little more than the act of praising Meir Kahane. Not for doing anything violent or endangering the lives of others. Nitzan’s greatest contribution though is not his foolish arrest of Rabbi Lior but giving a little known book considerable publicity. Israel’s leftist censor is very clumsy in imposing official thought control on the rest of the country!
A mean spirited hassling of a citizen by the security forces.
What is there for police to question this Rabbi about?
The book is written black on white, the police may read it, it is no secret Samizdat. I assume the endorsement was issued in writing as well. In which case there is nothing to investigage. All the facts are known, nothing is there that needs any investigation.
The attorney general should simply read the material and then decide whether the Rabbi must be brought before court. If yes, they should do it. Otherwise, just leave this man alone. I suspect he cannot be sued before court, it would be a travesty of justice, and they know it and they simply want to push him around. There is absolutely no point dragging the Rabbi through Kafkaesque interrogtion process. Everything is already known, the book is in-print, so is the endorsement.
This case if it has any merit must be adjudicated before a court of law. Certainly, even if the text transgresses any laws (which it does not), in this case, with all facts knwon, there is no justification for police to intimidate and humiliate a citizen. Only judges may pass punishments. Dragging citizens before the inquisition at police headquarters is not one of the punishments defined in law. And since when do cops engage in philosohical discussions on religous discourse. How absurd, a real shame for the police.
Our biggest problems are often our Jewish enemies, who are working in the background to bring Israel down.
What do the Rabbis have to say about them?
At the end of the day the discussion really boils down to this-do Jews have ANY ‘right’ to survive?While surely the braying left understands that this Jewish text has NOTHING to do with wanton killing of non-Jews, but EVERYTHING to do with the laws of war, (which by the way EVERY people have not only a right, but a duty to defend themselves)it is through their shrill cries against Rabbi Lior and his supporters that they expose their hypocrisy and self contempt.
Consider:the left worships at the altar of ‘social justice’, a concept which has been embraced and is emblematic of MASS killers.In fact, Mao, Stalin, Che and assorted MASS killers are their idols!In fact, Obama’s ENTIRE administration is replete with ‘social justice’ worshipers.Anita Dunn, one of his close advisers, enthused about Mao being her idol,(yes, she did) and Obama’s ‘holiday tree’ had a trinket of Mao dangling from it.And the list goes on and on…..
Why is this relevant?Because it reveals the hand of the hysterical left, of which Israel’s media, academics, judiciary and cultural icons hail from.They ‘pray’ to the same God.
So, here comes one of Israel’s foremost Torah scholars explaining through a text the ‘laws of war relating to non-Jews’ and they become insane.Insane with the notion that yes, Jews too have rights, NOT the right to kill indiscriminately, but the ABSOLUTE right and obligation to survive.And this is what they cannot abide.
Memo to the deluded left-democracy is NOT a suicide pact!!
To wit, HONENU Legal Defense Association comes to the rescue-of Jewish nationalists, from the national religious, secular right, soldiers and citizens alike.
Leftists, deal with it….
What a grotesque farce.
Failing left is farting his last blows
Should we fellow their (im)morality,certain tractates of the Talmus should be burned because they deal harshly when a ennemy city is besieged …….
Shy, I agree with you. However, have you noticed the names of Rabbis who not only do not come in defense of Rav Lior but even are critisizing him in public, as for example Rav Aviner. The same was when Rav Shmuel Eliyahu, Rav Melamed and others signed the Rabbis’ Letter which ruled that selling of even renting appartments in Israel to non-jews is forbidden, then Rav Yaakov Ariel published a letter in which he provided the police with arguments against the aforementioned Rabbis, and — to make things even more scandalous — the letter which he issued on the last day of Hanukka concluded that “the State of Israel cannot stand up against the nations of the world”, i.e. he implemented the position of BB and the Hilonim in general. So, I am asking: why does he say “Al HaNisim” and why does he comemorate Hanukka at all? Unfortunately, those Rabbis who pretend that Unity at any cost is the obligation of the Tora, they themselves bring strife among the Rabbis.
The Shai Nitzans of Israel want to extinguish free speech for non-leftists.
Rabbi Dov Lior’s sole “crime” in the eyes of Israel’s Left is he holds an opinion of which they do not approve. Reasonable people can differ about the use of force in wartime. That would not be a crime in any civilized country. Lior did NOT advocate racism or violence.
Nitzan has abused not only Israel’s criminal procedure but also Israel’s police. It is none of the Israeli police’s business to question someone for views which the deputy state prosecutor doesn’t like. Lior was detained not for doing any wrong but for having a politically incorrect opinion. It was an unconscionable abuse of state power to order his arrest in the first place.
But with Israel’s dual justice system, such conduct is perfectly predictable these days.
In the media, this is being presented or should I say misrepresented as ”incitement” but, of course, no one has seriously discussed the actual content.
In a war, who should we kill if not our non-Jewish enemy? Perhaps the Left believes we should kill ourselves instead? That way, we would save the Arabs the trouble of committing genocide.
It is my opinion that a massive protest should be made about this, with every particpant holding a large placard each one with a different quote from the Tanach, Talmud, Rishonim, Acharonim, on this subject, plus siting the source.
Let the Stasi arrest us all.
There is a huge difference between espousing a Torah view of war and random killing of civilians. Most opinions in the book are built around the Rambam. The approbation of Rav Lior does not make the opinions in the book identical to his own, but only says that he agrees that the author is deemed reliable in such matters. If one is to ban books like this, they would need to burn the Rambam. That being said, this is all being discussed about in terms actually fighting a war, not random killing of civilians.