| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Recently a couple of articles I have written in defense of Israel, and calling upon Christians to support it, have elicited what appeared to be substantive refutations of the idea that Israel is, as I termed it, the only Western-style democracy in the Middle East, and that it grants freedom of religion to its citizens.
The first was posted by "Provoslavni" on this thread. It read:
Praise be Jesus Christ! As usual, I agree with my friend Robert Spencer's understanding of the Islamic threat. However, I must take issue with his statement that "Israel is, of course, a Western-style secular republic that guarantees freedom of religion". In Israel, it is illegal for a Jew to convert to Christianity and a convert may be stripped of citizenship.Also, the Israeli government is anti-Christian to the core. Right now there are no Christian officers in the Israeli army and no Christian has ever served in an Israeli cabinet. In Alawite controlled Syria, the highest ranked general is an Orthodox Christian but the pro-Israeli neoCons want to destroy the Assad regime and deliver Syria to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Remember, it was the Israelis who first financed the rise of Hamas to counteract the PLO and more especially the Christian dominated PFLP, led by the late George Habash of blessed memory. Remember, it was not the PA but the Israelis who granted permission to buid a large mosque in Manger Square.
I have many Palestinian and Israeli Arab Christian friends who tell me about being spit on by Jews on buses and then threatened by Muslims when they see them wearing crosses.
We Catholics and Orthodox must never forget that the land of Palestine/Israel is itself a sacred relic made holy by the footsteps of Christ God. This means that the heart of every Christian should beat with the desire that the Holy Land again honor Christ in its laws, its government, and its culture. That any government on that sacred land discriminates against our Christian brothers and sisters, should be intolerable to all Christians.
At minimun, a correct policy would be to demand that Israel grant full equal rights to Christians, including the full right of return. This means that Israel must immediately end the special status of Jewish religion and guarantee Christians a minimum of one-third of the seats in the cabinet as well as promoting Christians to positions of authority in the IDF.
If the Jews expect us Christians to see them as allies in the war with Islam, then they must treat Christians with the same respect they expect us to give them. As a Catholic, I must support my Christian brothers and oppose Dhimmitude whether under Muslims or Jews. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
The second was posted by "unaha-closp" on this thread:
"some of the Arabic-speaking Christians with whom I am in daily contact -- believe fervently that Israel is the aggressor against an innocent and aggrieved Palestinian people"With very good reason.
Mr Robert Spencer refers to Arab Christians as if they are being unfair in calling for right of return to their homes in Israel, they're request to able to return to they're homes in the birth place of Christ is objectionable. Israel prevents them because Israel is for Jews and not Christians.
Mr Spencer infers that they call Israel an enemy out of fear If they support Israel, they risk being targeted by the jihadists, who surround them on all sides.
Mr Spencer reports that Israel has assisted Christians many, many times, but cites only an example of Israelis killing Hamas terrorists. Israel has not helped Christians "again and again".
Arab Christians had their lands confiscated, homes destroyed and were made refugees during the formation and expansion of Israel. A large number of these Christian people sought refuge in the USA. Strongly faithful they joined local churches and local communities becoming good and honest citizens of the United States.
20% of the Palestinian population was Christian, they were unwelcome in Israel because they were not Jews. They are treated as second class citizens in Israel (dhimmitude). Some Christian Arabs that remained and did not flee their homes live in villages that have existed since for hundreds of years, however the State of Israel refuses to recognise that these buildings are real. Permits are not issued for additions, because the building being added to is not real. New roads, water mains, powerlines are built to Jewish villages well before Christian. The Christians pay their taxes and are not provided equal treatment, they are dhimmi.
Israel confronts Christians, makes them second class citizens - but Christians are not enemies of the USA.
Mr Robert Spencer has toured this country that practices dhimmitude and Mr Robert Spencer approves.
It isn't often that we receive even what purport to be substantive factual refutations of material we have presented here, so I decided to seek out some help in providing substantive answers to these points. Now, David Meir-Levi, the brilliant author of Big Lies: Demolishing the Myths of the Propaganda War Against Israel, has kindly taken the time to give us those answers.
Here follow quotations from the above posts, followed by Meir-Levi's replies:
Mr Robert Spencer refers to Arab Christians as if they are being unfair in calling for right of return to their homes in Israel, they're request to able to return to they're homes in the birth place of Christ is objectionable Israel prevents them because Israel is for Jews and not Christians.
Meir-Levi: Here is the first history error. Israel has not prevented any Arabs, Jews, or Christians, from returning to Israel. See my article "The Big Arab Lie: The Political Abuse of the Refugee Issue" for details.
In short: In Israel, on the other hand, the Arabs who did not flee numbered about 170,000 in 1949; and now number more than 1,400,000. They 12 representatives in the Israel Parliament, judges sitting on the Israeli supreme court bench, and Ph.D’s and tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. They are a population that enjoys more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than do any comparable Arab populations anywhere in the Arab world. The Arab rulers caused the Arab refugee problem in 1948 by their war of aggression against the infant state of Israel, a legal creation of the United Nations; the Arab rulers have since maintained the Arab refugee population and and denied it any possibility of normal life in Arab countries in order to use the suffering they themselves have caused it as a weapon in their unending war against Israel.
The bottom line is that Israel did not cause the refugee problem. The Arab invasion did. After the war, Israel offered to return territory in exchange for peace. The Arabs refused. In September 1949 at the Lauzanne Conference, Israel offered to repatriate 100,000 refugees. The Arab League refused.
Had there been no war, there would not only have been no refugee problem, but also there could have been a State of Palestine since 1947.
Had the Arab leaders been willing to make peace, there could have been repatriation and a state for the Palestinians.
From 1949 until last year, Israel has offered repatriation to Arab refugees in the context of the "Family Reunification Plan." C. 170,OOO Arabs have taken advantage of this plan. Those who refused did so because the repatriation paperwork requires the returning refugee to disavow terrorism and become a productive citizen of Israel. Since the Intifada 2, (9/29/00), 50,000 Arabs have moved from the West Bank and Gaza Strip to Israel. Most of these are Christians who fear the Islamofascists of the PA and seek refuge in Israel where they can practise their religion in freedom.
It is not Israel that has refused resolution to the Arab refugee problem…It is the Arab leadership’s refusal to make peace.
Mr Spencer infers that they call Israel an enemy out of fear If they support Israel, they risk being targeted by the jihadists, who surround them on all sides.Mr Spencer reports that Israel has assisted Christians many, many
times, but cites only an example of Israelis killing Hamas terrorists. Israel has not helped Christians "again and again".
Meir-Levi: This is a false statement. Israel is the only country in the Middle East (with the possible exception of Turkey) where Christians can live in freedom and practise their faith in freedom, and have the government provide upkeep for churches and other religious holy sites. Even in Lebanon, which used to be c. 55% Christian, the Christians were constantly harassed and sometimes killed by their Muslim neighbors.
Arab Christians had their lands confiscated, homes destroyed and were made refugees during the formation and expansion of Israel. A large number of these Christian people sought refuge in the USA. Strongly faithful they joined local churches and local communities becoming good and honest citizens of the United States.
Meir-Levi: See my first comment.
20% of the Palestinian population was Christian, they were unwelcome in Israel because they were not Jews. They are treated as second class citizens in Israel (dhimmitude). Some Christian Arabs that remained and did not flee their homes live in villages that have existed since for hundreds of years, however the State of Israel refuses to recognise that these buildings are real. Permits are not issued for additions, because the building being added to is not real. New roads, water mains, powerlines are built to Jewish villages well before Christian. The Christians pay their taxes and are not provided equal treatment, they are dhimmi.
Meir-Levi: This is false and a nonsensical use of the concept "dhimmi." Per my first comments, Israeli Christians enjoy benefits in Israel that are not available to them in most of the Muslim world. They enjoy a personal and religious safety that is not extant for them in most of the Muslim world. Tax money is given by the government to churches etc. for repair and upkeep etc.
There are issues with illegal construction; and where the government determines that a structure is built illegally, it takes actions as determined by law (such as denial of tax money to support illegal construction). This is no different from the way illegal construction is handled in most of the Western world. And note in this context that Israel is run by rule of law. A Christian Israeli who feels that the government is not treating him fairly has the option to go to court, including up to Israel’s version of the Supreme Court (the Israeli High Court of Justice) and challenge the government. A number of Muslim challenges to Israeli government decisions regarding land, buildings, the course of the defensive barrier, etc., have been decided in favor of the Muslim Arab plaintiffs. There is no reason to think that a Christian plaintiff would fare any worse.
The "second class citizen" issue is important. Arabs by law are first class citizens in all respects except two:
1. The Right of Return. Jews get special assistance from the government to resettle from their lands of origin. Christians and Muslims and indigenous Jews do not. This has nothing to do with Christianity. The discrimination that this law provides is for incoming Jews (often refugees) and against all local native-born citizens (Jews and Christians and Arabs). This "right of return" has been likened to the US law of affirmative action.
2. Army service. Arabs (Christian or Muslim or Druze) are not required to serve. But they are permitted to serve and many Arabs of all religions do serve. I personally had the honor of doing much of my own Army service under a Lieutenant Colonel who was a Muslim Arab.
In neither case is discrimination based on religion. However, not all Jewish Israeli citizens are as fair and unbiased as the law demands. There is discrimination against Arabs (both Muslim and Christian) on a personal level. Just as there is in the USA against African Americans.
Praise be Jesus Christ! As usual, I agree with my friend Robert Spencer's understanding of the Islamic threat. However, I must take issue with his statement that "Israel is, of course, a Western-style secular republic that guarantees freedom of religion". In Israel, it is illegal for a Jew to convert to Christianity and a convert may be stripped of citizenship.
Meir-Levi: This is a false statement. It has no basis in reality. It sounds as though this person has imbibed uncritically of the Arab propaganda that is literally a strategy of deceit with the tactics of serial lying.
There is government regulation of missionary activity, in that Church groups that seek to operate in Israel must agree to do no proselytizing. But religious choices are the right of the individual. Jews who converted to Christianity in the Disapora have enjoyed the Right of Return as Jews (in one case this was denied because the Jewish convert headed a proselytizing sect). And note too that in almost all Muslim countries today, conversion out of Islam is punishable by death.
Also, the Israeli government is anti-Christian to the core. Right now there are no Christian officers in the Israeli army and no Christian has ever served in an Israeli cabinet. In Alawite controlled Syria, the highest ranked general is an Orthodox Christian but the pro-Israeli neoCons want to destroy the Assad regime and deliver Syria to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Meir-Levi: More nonsense. There are indeed Christian and Muslim officers (per my comments above) in the Army. I don't know about the Cabinet; but it is noteworthy that there are 12 (out of 120) Knesset members who are Arab Muslim Israelis.
Regarding Syria, just ask any American Christian Arab of Syrian or Lebanese origin how life in Syria is for Christians. The Alawi minority (C. 12% of the population) holds the rest in a grip of terror and routinely intimidates and oppresses the Christian minority.
As to Neo-cons and Mulsim Brotherhood…The writer is either a fool, or an ignoramus, or is lying through his/her teeth.
Remember, it was the Israelis who first financed the rise of Hamas to counteract the PLO and more especially the Christian dominated PFLP, led by the late George Habash of blessed memory. Remember, it was not the PA but the Israelis who granted permission to build a large mosque in Manger Square.
Meir-Levi: These are almost true statements. Israel did not fund but did permit the growth of Hamas in the late 1980s in the belief that a Muslim religious movement would counter the secular/Marxist Arab terror groups that dominated the worldwide terror scene. There was nothing special about the PFLP, rather the main problem was Arafat and the PLO/Fatah.
The Israelis did grant permission to build a mosque in Manger Square and also in Nazareth. Same as it grants permission to build churches in various parts of Israel. Religious groups have the right to petition and get permits and build religious buildings. The same right applies to Christians as to Muslims.
I have many Palestinian and Israeli Arab Christian friends who tell me about being spit on by Jews on buses and then threatened by Muslims when they see them wearing crosses.
Meir-Levi: This could be true. It is regrettable that many Jews in Israel harbor great resentment to Christians due to the Holocaust and to 2000 years of Christian brutal and lethal persecution. But these are individual actions taken by bigoted people. The same is true re some American whites and the African-Americans whom they consider inferior.
We Catholics and Orthodox must never forget that the land of Palestine/Israel is itself a sacred relic made holy by the footsteps of Christ God. This means that the heart of every Christian should beat with the desire that the Holy Land again honor Christ in its laws, its government, and its culture. That any government on that sacred land discriminates against our Christian brothers and sisters, should be intolerable to all Christians.
Meir-Levi: This is a good idea. I wish that every Christian in the world would read and take to heart these words. If they did so, then the horrific illegal discrimination against Christians that is practised by the Muslims of the Palestinian Authority would be targeted; as would the lethal threats and intimidation of Christians in Gaza and the West Bank by the PA. And the Israeli government would be recognized as the most protective and supportive of Christians in the entire Middle East.
Needless to say, the Israeli government does indeed honor Christ in its laws since, although it is a secular state, it uses as guidelines for its humanitarian and liberal and humanistic legislation the same Jewish Scriptures from which Jesus quoted and taught. The very existence of the Jewish State, secular though it is, is an honor to Jesus the Jew who lived out his life in the last Jewish state prior to 1948.
At minimun, a correct policy would be to demand that Israel grant full equal rights to Christians, including the full right of return. This means that Israel must immediately end the special status of Jewish religion and guarantee Christians a minimum of one-third of the seats in the cabinet as well as promoting Christians to positions of authority in the IDF.
Meir-Levi: See my comments above about "Right of Return." I wonder if this writer is as upset about the special status of Muslims in the Islamic Republic of Iran or the Islamic democracy of Pakistan, or the Islamic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as he is about the special status of Jews in the Jewish State of Israel.
The other comments re special treatment of Christians re seats in the Cabinet and authority in the IDF are beyond stupid. They actually demand discrimination -- in favor of Christians. Israel as a government and body politic seeks to end all discrimination (including the Right of Return sometime in the distant future when Jews are no longer in danger anywhere in the world and international affirmative action is no longer needed). To implement discriminatory policies (instead of merit-based selection) is the antithesis of what Israel wants to do; and is the same as what the writer complains about regarding the discrimination he perceives (incorrectly) in Israel now.
If the Jews expect us Christians to see them as allies in the war with Islam, then they must treat Christians with the same respect they expect us to give them. As a Catholic, I must support my Christian brothers and oppose Dhimmitude whether under Muslims or Jews. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
Meir-Levi: This is benighted or mendacious. I don't know which. Christianity oppressed in the Muslim world for centuries vs Christianity free and unfettered in Israel -- and he puts them on the same level.
Posted by Robert at December 2, 2005 3:08 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Fascinating (if a little hard to follow). Elias Chacour in his book Blood Brothers recounts also how his Christian village was evacuated by Israelis and how the Israeli Supreme Court eventually decided against the Israeli Government and in the village's favor. (Ultimately, the soldiers on the ground went around the court order, but that the court would hand down such a decision struck me as remarkable).
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 2, 2005 4:31 PM
I've actually spent some time in Israel, and as a Christian I must say I call Israel my second home. Funny enough, I was never even asked about my religion there. I was treated with as much warmth and respect as I get here in the southern US. I absolutely loved the Israeli people (that should be taken as ALL of them; Jews & Arabs, I didn't ask their religions either), they only seemed to be concerned with living a good and peaceful life.
I regard Israel, as a nation and a people, as the sovereign chosen of God. I find it very commendable that although the land of Israel was handed directly to Jews by God, they still are willing to share it with all peoples. They only seem to want to do so in peace. I'm frankly tired of all the whining by everyone about Israel. They have the right to exist and they have the right to do so in peace.
As for the idiot's statement: "We Catholics and Orthodox must never forget that the land of Palestine/Israel is itself a sacred relic made holy by the footsteps of Christ God." The land of ISRAEL was made holy by God LOOONG before Jesus ever came to earth. And if this "Christian" knew his religion, he'd know that Christ IS the incarnation of the Lord. Ever hear the word Truine? And if the "Christian" read his bible, he'd know that the Jews were prophecied by God to sacrifice Jesus and that it was REQUIRED for his salvation. There is not (at least with the Christians I know) any animosity towards the Jews for the death of Christ. They know it had to happen and we believe that one day the people of Israel will cry out to God for the Massiah's return.
Posted by: Constantinople at December 2, 2005 5:30 PM
From Constantinople's post:
I find it very commendable that although the land of Israel was handed directly to Jews by God, they still are willing to share it with all peoples. They only seem to want to do so in peace.
Verily, Israel is abiding by the commadments (all two hundered and something of them) handed down from God. Leviticus 19:33-34 (KJV):
And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself;
Oh, how that differs from the the text of a certain other ideology that compels its adherents not to befriend Jews and Christians and to fight them until they feel subdued.
Posted by: Lisa at December 2, 2005 6:47 PM
Lisa, 613 commandments. :)
Posted by: pastor_matt023 at December 2, 2005 6:52 PM
I defer to the superior wisdom of the good pastor for I am just one sheep among his flock.
Posted by: Lisa at December 2, 2005 6:55 PM
Lisa & Pastor_matt023: I so love being able to debate and express ideas in a forum like this. I really appreciate your inputs and I love it when people can come together and analyze a subject as sensitive as this with mutual respect for one another's views. Hhmm...makes me really glad I'm not part of that "other" side that would have all 3 of us killed for voiceing our opinions and beliefs.
Posted by: Constantinople at December 2, 2005 7:08 PM
It's technically true that Christians are under alot of persecution in Israel. Let me start off by saying that generally speaking Arab Christians are completely free, primarily because they do not engage in evangelism. They are usually Greek Orthodox/Catholic and are generally nominal (culturally christian) in terms of their faith. They also do not view the current Israeli state as a continuation of God's promises.
Evangelical Jews aka Messianic Jews, on the other hand, are under constant persecution. Not only are they denied rights to Aliyah, but are also subject to harassment from semi-governmental orthodox organizations such as "Yad L'Chaim". They have been physically abused and socially and politically persecuted by religious as political ogranizations.
For more information on this, I would suggest going to http:www.maozisrael.com
To end things on a more positive note, even Evangelically Christian Jews have more rights than Evangelicals living in Muslim countries. With the only possible exception being the denial of citizenship based upon their beliefs.
Posted by: robinusmaximus at December 2, 2005 7:29 PM
the response from Meir-Levi was quite educational.. so much so that l need to copy it...the will of the Israeli people is even more inspiring considering all they have to cope with. l pray they for their success!
Posted by: Lulu at December 2, 2005 8:12 PM
Constantinople: Amen. Thank God for our freedoms, at least while we have them.
Posted by: pastor_matt023 at December 2, 2005 9:27 PM
Interestingly enough, while this is a bit off topic, this points to the respect that Jews, at least in America, have for Christians. I found this article at the AFA's (American Family Association) website, which was a link to AgapePress. It deals with the way liberals in the US are taking Christmas out of Christmas, and a Jewish groups response to it.
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/12/afa/22005a.asp
I wanted to post a quote from Don Feder, president of the organization "Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation": "Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation is here today to say, 'Enough already. If you're offended by a municipal Christmas tree or Santa Claus in a holiday parade or a manger in a park, get over it."
Posted by: pastor_matt023 at December 2, 2005 10:59 PM
Lol. Nice try, Meir-Levi.
I can completely understand that most people reading this site desperately want to believe Israel is the angel her supporters portray her as, but there are some others, like me, who prefer to look at facts.
And the facts are simply that Israel shares culpability in the '48 war, that Israel most certainly did forcefully expel hundreds of thousands of Arabs and thus very much created the "refugee problem" - which we'd all wish so much would just go away - and is certainly, at a minimum, equally culpible (if not more) for the '67 war and the ongoing occupation of Arab land.
Now, there's no denying the Arabs there pose one tremendously complex problem and I don't actually blame Israel for not rushing with open arms to "make peace" with this crowd - hell, I sure wouldn't trust them. But that doesn't change the fact that Israel - in Arab and fact-seeking eyes - is the one who "started it".
Nevertheless, I'm willing to keep my mouth shut about it. I'm willing to support them, only because I despise the Muslim world much more than I care about the "Palestinian Problem". But I'm only human, and I do get tired of hearing about the glories of Israel when the facts so glaringly contradict it all.
Posted by: spect8or at December 2, 2005 11:06 PM
pastor_matt, I'm glad to hear of some Jews supporting the western (not to mention Christian) tradition of Christmas. However, let's not blind ourselves: there are PLENTY of other Jews who - as Jews - have been, and continue to be, some of the prime movers behind the War on Christmas.
Posted by: spect8or at December 2, 2005 11:10 PM
God help the Christians in the holy land for nobody else well!
Posted by: have_mercy at December 3, 2005 12:06 AM
Spech8or
2 weeks ago, several posters challenged you to put up or shut up on your ahistorical antisemitic tripe. I noticed you disappeared rather than face the music. Since you've now magically reappeared with the same rubbish, let's see you support your arguments with some evidence. And please, don't bother quoting that metaphysical postmodernist Ilan Pappe.
Posted by: Charles Martel at December 3, 2005 12:07 AM
You just couldn't resist, could you spect8or? You and your fellow "True Slav" (who shouldn't be calling himself that since "True Slavs" belong to the so-called "True Church", the Orthodox church) are really quite the bunch. So not only are the Israelis the main aggressors, but the Jews are trying to steal Christmas from you now too? I suppose you think, much like Serge Trifkovic (who despite his paleocon credentials, will always be a Serb first and an American a distant second), that the Jews are trying to draw the West into a war against the Arabs? Maybe instead of relying on the New Historians and Finkelstein for your "fact seeking", you would do a little more balanced reading. And before you invoke her, no, I do not mean Joan Peters - a woman who gets a few good reviews from a mostly unscholarly MSM, who is assumed by the anti-Zionists to be the queen bee of Zionist history, when she in fact is not. But that would be too much to ask, wouldn't it? It would be too much to ask for you to consider that the reason there is a need for Israel is because of people like you. It would be too much for you to consider that Israelis are in a fight for their lives. It would be too much to consider that there is no Palestinian people and no Palestinian culture and that the only discussion about Palestinian rights should take place in Jordan and Egypt. No that doesn't quite fit in with your narrative which is so common among you people. "The Israelis are snobs! They don't treat Christians very well!" Those are the arguments I hear from most Israel-haters and although they may be true they are exaggerated to the nth degree. Israel must be a utopia before you grant it the right to exist! Any Jewish aspiration cannot be noble in your eyes, they always want something that undermines the Gentiles and it follows that you must side with their enemies and demand "justice" from the Jews. You claim to be against jihad but you are not. You clearly hold the dhimmis (in this case, the Jews) to be responsible for aggression because of some policy/military decisions you do not agree with. Yet, I have a hard time believing that you would hold other infidels to the same scrutiny such as the Russians vs the Chechens, the Thais vs the Malays, the Indians vs the Pakistanis, etc. They have all broken international law and violated human rights in their Muslim conflicts, and some more seriously than the Israelis have, yet you are more suspicious of the motives of the Israelis. That in itself is very telling.
Posted by: igor at December 3, 2005 12:27 AM
spect8or,
Why stop there? Islam broke out of the Arabian Peninsula in the Seventh Century. They violently conquered half the known world. Seems fair to limit Islam back to the Arabian Peninsula while we're digging up old grievances. Indonesia, Pakistan, and Turkey could be real problems, but why let logistics get in the way of historical complaints about land ownership?
There is a reason English Common Law has adverse possession (counter-intuitive), to end long-standing disputes over land.
Posted by: Beagle at December 3, 2005 12:33 AM
David Meir-Levi says: "There are indeed Christian and Muslim officers (per my comments above) in the Army. I don't know about the Cabinet; but it is noteworthy that there are 12 (out of 120) Knesset members who are Arab Muslim Israelis."
At least one member of the current Knesset is a Christian Arab: Azmi Bishara.
Further: I have the honor of helping Said Abu Shakra promote his Art Gallery Umm el-Fahem in the Israeli Arab city of that name and his ambitious plan for a 10,000 sq m (100,000 sq ft) art museum there. That facility, to be designed by Pritzker Prize Laureate Zaha Hadid -- Baghdad born and practicing in London -- will be one of very few such institutions in the Arab world and the only one in Israel. Said, a Muslim, is a retired Superintendent of the Israel Police (25 years service), in which position he held national responsibility for youth at risk.
at December 3, 2005 5:47 AM
spect8or;
I would like you to go to this site and, even if you can't be bothered with reading the majority of it, at least find the quotes taken from a number of Arab newspapers where Arabs who would know, Arab military men and diplomats and such, gloat over how they caused the Palestinian refugee problem, in fact invented the "Palestinian", then prevented it from being solved while admitting they made their "brothers" suffer, and then lied and continue to lie about it, all as a ploy to keep the war going so that they didn't have to worry about their people seeing how royally these immoral, dishonest, and uncaring Arab elites were screwing their own.
You are free to discount the text by the "Zionist", or whatever you'ld like to call him. But read the documented, searchable, archived quotes that gleefully come straight from the Arabs themselves.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/media/pdf/BigLies.pdf
Posted by: t-ham at December 3, 2005 7:08 AM
It is amazing that Christians such as spect8or blindly ignore the massacre of Christians by Arafat and Saika in Lebanon in 1976.
Israel for its part opened the border fence to take in and treat wounded Lebanese Christians as Brigitte Gabriel has spoken and written about.
It was noticeable back then what value many in the Christian world had for their brothers in Lebanon as they ignored the horrors of the PLO and Syrian Occupation and left them for dead, maimed or destitute.
From spect8or's post above it seems that he is one of the 'discriminating' Christians or perhaps a disguised Muslim?
As for Israeli - Jewish behaviour, well what about British behaviour towards East Timorese Christians under the yoke of Indonesian Muslims:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1897195,00.html
THE British Government knowingly lied about Indonesian atrocities in East Timor, including the killing of British journalists in 1975, according to newly released diplomatic documents.
I suppose the next we will hear is that it was the neocons in Britain who were to blame.
In a startling insight into foreign complicity in Indonesia’s invasion of the former Portuguese colony, the documents show that Britain used its position as chair of the United Nations Security Council to “keep the heat out of the Timor business” in discussions in the UN.
The documents have been obtained after a long-running campaign by relatives and supporters of Brian Peters and Malcolm Rennie, two British journalists who were working for Australian television.
Let us stop with all these red herrings that have been used for so long now to disparage a people while the accusers are the one's to watch; Just look at what Saudi Arabia has pumped into the West, in dollar terms and incitement, in its attempt to take over control of the world!
Posted by: Cynic at December 3, 2005 8:51 AM
Charlie: "2 weeks ago, several posters challenged you to put up or shut up on your ahistorical antisemitic tripe. I noticed you disappeared rather than face the music."
Sorry about that, I find it hard to keep track of what/where/when I said on this site.
But anyway, look, one man's tripe is another man's truth, at least with this issue. I've already said I don't mind keeping my mouth shut about Israel, so I think I'll just leave it at that rather than go through the rigmarole of "convincing" people against their will.
Posted by: spect8or at December 3, 2005 10:37 AM
igor:"So not only are the Israelis the main aggressors, but the Jews are trying to steal Christmas from you now too?"
Well, some are, yes.
But I certainly don't blame it "The Jews", simply on those responsible: the ACLU-types, like our "kj". Thankfully they're balanced (and seem to be ever more so) by "Judeo-Christian values" types.
igor: "I suppose you think, much like Serge Trifkovic (who despite his paleocon credentials, will always be a Serb first and an American a distant second), that the Jews are trying to draw the West into a war against the Arabs?"
You're referring to the "NeoCon is a Jewish movement, so NeoCon foreign policy is Israeli foreign policy" theory? The honest truth is it isn't something I've ever spent much time thinking about. I don't knee-jerk deny it, though. (You're probably right about Trifkovic - but umm, geez, it's not hard to play a game of right-back-at-ya regarding you-know-who with that line of thinking, is it?)
igor:"Maybe instead of relying on the New Historians and Finkelstein for your "fact seeking", you would do a little more balanced reading."
Oh, rest assured I have. I didn't just become interested in the Mid East on 9.11. And I didn't start with The New Historians, either - they *are* my more balanced reading.
igor: "It would be too much to consider that there is no Palestinian people and no Palestinian culture"
I could just as well ask you why it's so much to grant them the identity? Not that I particularly give a damn about Palestinians (certainly not the Muslims), but it hardly takes any great moral courage to allow that a people are can invent new identities for themselves, especially under the pressures of political realities.
igor:" Israel must be a utopia before you grant it the right to exist!"
Oh baloney. Just because I find Israel's founding narrative to be full of plot holes doesn't mean I want the country vanquished.
At the end of the day, Israel is way down my list of priorities. My interests are safeguarding my country, religion and civilization. Some people think full support of Israel is essential to such a defence; I think it's at best of minor value and at worst a hindrance.
As for the rest of your post, you're assuming far too much for me to even bother responding.
Posted by: spect8or at December 3, 2005 11:10 AM
Beagle: "Why stop there?"
Why stop where?
What have I suggested be returned?
Posted by: spect8or at December 3, 2005 11:12 AM
Cynic: "From spect8or's post above it seems that he is one of the 'discriminating' Christians or perhaps a disguised Muslim?"
Good one!
Posted by: spect8or at December 3, 2005 11:16 AM
spect8or:
In my experience (and realize, like anyone else,
that my sample is not statistically valid) those
Jews who are aghast at Christmas displays are
really atheists who identify as Jewish for
"ethnic" purposes. The religious (members of
Conservative or Orthodox branches of Judaism)
Jews I know either don't care or are actually
disgusted by the behavior of their nonreligious
(usually called "Reform" in the USA) brethren.
As far as Israel goes, I'm not a Zionist (I don't
want all American Jews to move to Israel) but the
fact is that Israel is a civilized country by Western standards in a region where there is no
civilization. I don't need to spend a month in a
library reading BS when anyone can see that. It's
not perfect, no angel (is the USA, which I love, perfect? No!), but I definitely see it as "on our side" in the struggle, probably more than France,
which I'd also not like to see fall.
Certainly, some Jews are at the forefront of
the war against your values. That's because,
for whatever reason (I think Cochran/Harpending & Hardy are correct) Ashkenazi Jews are almost always at the front in any intellectual pursuit.
at December 3, 2005 1:34 PM
Igor I am a bit offended by your anti Serb and anti orthodox statements. I do feel that there is a bias against orthodox Christians in the west. It seems that they are christian enough to sell out to the muslims to show that we are pro muslim, but different enough from us westerners so that no one here will really care.
I for one am pro Israel but spect8or has a point this current round of political correctness was created by Jewish intellectuals in the sixties. And now its back fired and PCness is being used against them. Just like our countries have a past that at times was not so glorious so does theres. This does not mean we have to support the muslims who are definately wrong in this conflict. But denying any wrong doing by Israel or Jews in 3000 years of history does not help our cause. but then again bringing up any past wrongs all the time trying to justify the millions of muslim wrongs doesnt either. In a nut shell Israel isnt perfect but its better than the alternative.
at December 3, 2005 3:28 PM
Meir-Levi wrote above:
"I wonder if this writer is as upset about the special status of Muslims in the Islamic Republic of Iran or the Islamic democracy of Pakistan, or the Islamic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as he is about the special status of Jews in the Jewish State of Israel."
Yes, I'm sure that the Catholic "writer" does object strongly to Iran and Saudi Arabia being theocracies since the "writer" says, "I agree with my friend Robert Spencer's understanding of the Islamic threat." Christians generally do not respect and accept the spiritual arrangements current in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and this disrespect has cost many Christians their lives already. Chrisians would do even more to subvert these theocracies if their money and attention were not too valuable in other places around the globe. However, as other places are evangelized, it becomes harder to ignore the status quo of Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, etc.
The "writer" would not have written in to Robert Spencer about this topic, except for the fact that he or she felt he did not qualify his statements about Israel enough for his or her tastes. The "writer" thought it was wrong to characterize Israel as being "a Western-style secular republic that guarantees freedom of religion."
I don't agree with the "writer" on several points, such as his/her statement about the "Christian-dominated PFLP". I think the PFLP is a communist terrorist group, if I recall correctly.
Many Jews think that Israel ought to be given some slack due to the persecution they suffered for 1650 years at the hands of Christians and Muslims, however, they should be advised that while many people "understand" why Israel is sort of theocracy, and marvel that it is now more so, they should not thinking this is the same as excusing it altogether, or justifying it. These arguments just receive the shrug of the shoulders since people figured that if the situation had been reversed and Jews were the majority and Christians the minority through medieval times, Christians would not have fared any better than the Jews did under Christianity or Islam. One just needs to look at the sacred texts to gather why this would have been the case. Hint: Christians are a bit embarrassed about how violent the OT is, and a lot of what the Rabbis wrote about gentiles is just the flipside of anti-semitism. Somone famously said that if a Martian read the sacred texts of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, the Martian would naturally assume that the Jews won and were in charge of earth.
Many Jews think they have iron-clad arguments when it comes to assigning blame to Christianity about the Holocaust. However, many people do not accept PC arguments and PC-verities. For instance, Christians blame the Holocaust on the ideas of evolution and eugenics, for example:
Answers in Genesis
"The horrors of Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps might never have been, were it not for an insidious idea of Charles Darwin’s cousin Sir Francis Galton: eugenics. Millions have been murdered on the “scientific” evolutionary justification that the strong should dominate the weak. Galton’s understanding of evolution’s implications was accurate—and deadly. Find out how this amazing historical drama played out in devastating ways."
Yes, the Nazis used Christian anti-Semitism as propaganda, but the Nazis were neo-pagans who didn't believe a word of Christianity. Christian anti-Semitism was theological in scope, while Nazi anti-Semiticism was genetic, i.e., some races had evolved more than others over time. It was the height of hypocrisy for race-based Nazis to use theological literature against the Jews. It would be like a creationist using evolutionists' arguments.
The Nazis sent many pastors and priest to the Dachau concentration camp, and they planned to get rid of Christians after they got rid of the Jews, the homosexuals, the Gypsies, the mentally retarded, etc.
Some have said that Christian popular anti-Semitism was more virulent than Islamic anti-Semitism, based on counts of how many Jews fled Islamdom to Christendom and the reverse, e.g., Anti-Semitism Evolves, by Daniel Pipes
"Jews regularly fled Christendom for Islamdom. In 1945, this pattern abruptly changed."
This "fleeing" stats argument is suspect for a number of reasons. First, the nature of anti-Semitism was different in Christendom than it was in Islamdom. There was a recognition in France and Germany and elsewhere that Jews were late arrivals from Mediterranean parts, since they had immigrated there only in the seventh century AD. So the message in Europe, but not in Islamdom, was that the Jews did not belong there, and ought to go back to where they came from. Thus, more Jews fled to Islamdom than out of Islamdom where they had more of a sense of belonging. After all, the Jewish homeland was in the heart of Islamdom, and Islam had many Jewish characteristics, to boot.
The same argument could be used to say that negro slavery in the US was worse than negro slavery in Islamdom, even though Christians did not castrate negros as occurred in Islamdom. After slavery was ended in the US, many blacks moved back to Africa, especially to Liberia. Since there’s no record of blacks moving back to Africa from Islamdom, does this mean slavery was better in Islamdom? Not necessarily. All this means is blacks in the US had a better education and more means on average than a black slave in Islamdom.
However, it has long been noted that the Dhimmis of Islamdom kept fewer records of their suffering, while Ashkinazis were prolific. Perhaps more fled Islamdom but there is no record of it. Many doubt these statistics for other reasons, for instance, even after the Holocaust, the Ashkinazis still greatly outnumbered the Sephardim. So, if the Ashkinazis were more persecuted than the Sephardim, how did their numbers grow so great? If the Sephardim were in an Islamic paradise, why did their numbers shrink or stay the same (or whatever the case is exactly)? Also, if there were many more Ashkinazis than Sephardim, one would naturally expect more Ashkinazis fleeing south of the border than Sephardim fleeing north of the border even if the rate of persecution were the same (say, one out of twenty Jews being persecuted into fleeing). Another reason the "fleeing stats" are suspect is since Napolean's time, much of the Mideast was colonized and the Dhimmis were treated better. Thus, many of the fond recollections of life in Islamdom were from the time when enlightened Christians and secularists held sway in Islamdom! The really bad times under Islamdom were largely forgotten, especially since they were so poorly documented by the victims. The victims were so traumatized and subjugated, they did not have the will or education or the means to keep records from generation to generation. Just as slaves have no history, the Dhimmis of Islamdom had very little history.
Just because Christians were the majority in Germany before and during WWII does not mean they had a lot of power after the power of taxation and the machinery of the state were in the hands of the Nazis. Not many people owned handguns and rifles back then, partly because of anti-gun laws, and nowadays it is only in 20/20 retrospect that people hold tightly to their weapons. People want guns to make sure no fascist power can rise again--at least not as easily as during WWII.
Christians had lost a lot of political and persuasive power before WWII due to the rise of skepticism and evolution and philosophy and you-name-it, and Christians have long noted that some of the evolutionists and eugenicists and thinkers in other disciplines were Jewish. Not all Jews specialized in hard sciences, after all. Yet, the Christians are the ones who get the blame for the Holocaust even though it was the secularists and evolutionists who carried it out, and even though many Christians met their end resisting the fascists!
Take the situation today. What power do Christians have today to hold back anti-Semitic fascists even in America? For instance, 48 percent of Americans are creationists, forty percent believe in intelligent design, and only 12 percent or so believe in evolution, yet only evolution can be taught in public schools. Evolution, however, is dangerous because it can easily lead to racism and fascism and materialistic communism, and these virulent ideologies have killed millions. Interesting, Al Gore was an evolutionist, and he almost became US President in 2000:
AiG
"Human evolution, of course, is responsible for our very long period of childhood..." (Al Gore, Earth in the Balance, p. 229).
Also, another example of Christian powerlessness is many Christians want to privatize schooling using vouchers, but that's a no go due to the courts saying, "No." No one can deny that Jews had a part in creating this situation through the ACLU, etc. Yet, even though Christians don't get their way in American, we receive much of the blame for whatever goes wrong in America culturally and socially, and for American foreign policy.
Another example of Christians lacking power is 80 percent of Mosques in America are known to be extremist and no doubt virulently anti-Semitic, yet Christians cannot keep a Mosque from being built in their own backyard. Christians cannot even keep anti-Semitic Islamists from immigrating into the US and carrying out evangelism here. Christians are powerless to resist the rise of Islamism in the US.
In the US and Eurabia, it may be only a matter of time (half century? century? two centuries?) before Islamists are numerous enough to perform a coupe (like the Nazis did), and then Christians and Jews alike will suffer greatly. Then after it is all over, the Christians will probably once again be blamed for the massacres just as Christians were blamed for the crimes of the Nazis--if history is any guide.
Posted by: markjames at December 3, 2005 6:07 PM
Meir-Levi wrote above:
"I wonder if this writer is as upset about the special status of Muslims in the Islamic Republic of Iran or the Islamic democracy of Pakistan, or the Islamic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as he is about the special status of Jews in the Jewish State of Israel."
Yes, I'm sure that the Catholic "writer" does object strongly to Iran and Saudi Arabia being theocracies since the "writer" says, "I agree with my friend Robert Spencer's understanding of the Islamic threat." Christians generally do not respect and accept the spiritual arrangements current in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and this disrespect has cost many Christians their lives already. Chrisians would do even more to subvert these theocracies if their money and attention were not too valuable in other places around the globe. However, as other places are evangelized, it becomes harder to ignore the status quo of Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, etc.
The "writer" would not have written in to Robert Spencer about this topic, except for the fact that he or she felt he did not qualify his statements about Israel enough for his or her tastes. The "writer" thought it was wrong to characterize Israel as being "a Western-style secular republic that guarantees freedom of religion."
I don't agree with the "writer" on several points, such as his/her statement about the "Christian-dominated PFLP". I think the PFLP is a communist terrorist group, if I recall correctly.
Many Jews think that Israel ought to be given some slack due to the persecution they suffered for 1650 years at the hands of Christians and Muslims, however, they should be advised that while many people "understand" why Israel is sort of theocracy, and marvel that it is now more so, they should not thinking this is the same as excusing it altogether, or justifying it. These arguments just receive the shrug of the shoulders since people figured that if the situation had been reversed and Jews were the majority and Christians the minority through medieval times, Christians would not have fared any better than the Jews did under Christianity or Islam. One just needs to look at the sacred texts to gather why this would have been the case. Hint: Christians are a bit embarrassed about how violent the OT is, and a lot of what the Rabbis wrote about gentiles is just the flipside of anti-semitism. Somone famously said that if a Martian read the sacred texts of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, the Martian would naturally assume that the Jews won and were in charge of earth.
Many Jews think they have iron-clad arguments when it comes to assigning blame to Christianity about the Holocaust. However, many people do not accept PC arguments and PC-verities. For instance, Christians blame the Holocaust on the ideas of evolution and eugenics, for example:
Answers in Genesis
"The horrors of Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps might never have been, were it not for an insidious idea of Charles Darwin’s cousin Sir Francis Galton: eugenics. Millions have been murdered on the “scientific” evolutionary justification that the strong should dominate the weak. Galton’s understanding of evolution’s implications was accurate—and deadly. Find out how this amazing historical drama played out in devastating ways."
Yes, the Nazis used Christian anti-Semitism as propaganda, but the Nazis were neo-pagans who didn't believe a word of Christianity. Christian anti-Semitism was theological in scope, while Nazi anti-Semiticism was genetic, i.e., some races had evolved more than others over time. It was the height of hypocrisy for race-based Nazis to use theological literature against the Jews. It would be like a creationist using evolutionists' arguments.
The Nazis sent many pastors and priest to the Dachau concentration camp, and they planned to get rid of Christians after they got rid of the Jews, the homosexuals, the Gypsies, the mentally retarded, etc.
Some have said that Christian popular anti-Semitism was more virulent than Islamic anti-Semitism, based on counts of how many Jews fled Islamdom to Christendom and the reverse, e.g., Anti-Semitism Evolves, by Daniel Pipes
"Jews regularly fled Christendom for Islamdom. In 1945, this pattern abruptly changed."
This "fleeing" stats argument is suspect for a number of reasons. First, the nature of anti-Semitism was different in Christendom than it was in Islamdom. There was a recognition in France and Germany and elsewhere that Jews were late arrivals from Mediterranean parts, since they had immigrated there only in the seventh century AD. So the message in Europe, but not in Islamdom, was that the Jews did not belong there, and ought to go back to where they came from. Thus, more Jews fled to Islamdom than out of Islamdom where they had more of a sense of belonging. After all, the Jewish homeland was in the heart of Islamdom, and Islam had many Jewish characteristics, to boot.
The same argument could be used to say that negro slavery in the US was worse than negro slavery in Islamdom, even though Christians did not castrate negros as occurred in Islamdom. After slavery was ended in the US, many blacks moved back to Africa, especially to Liberia. Since there’s no record of blacks moving back to Africa from Islamdom, does this mean slavery was better in Islamdom? Not necessarily. All this means is blacks in the US had a better education and more means on average than a black slave in Islamdom.
However, it has long been noted that the Dhimmis of Islamdom kept fewer records of their suffering, while Ashkinazis were prolific. Perhaps more fled Islamdom but there is no record of it. Many doubt these statistics for other reasons, for instance, even after the Holocaust, the Ashkinazis still greatly outnumbered the Sephardim. So, if the Ashkinazis were more persecuted than the Sephardim, how did their numbers grow so great? If the Sephardim were in an Islamic paradise, why did their numbers shrink or stay the same (or whatever the case is exactly)? Also, if there were many more Ashkinazis than Sephardim, one would naturally expect more Ashkinazis fleeing south of the border than Sephardim fleeing north of the border even if the rate of persecution were the same (say, one out of twenty Jews being persecuted into fleeing). Another reason the "fleeing stats" are suspect is since Napolean's time, much of the Mideast was colonized and the Dhimmis were treated better. Thus, many of the fond recollections of life in Islamdom were from the time when enlightened Christians and secularists held sway in Islamdom! The really bad times under Islamdom were largely forgotten, especially since they were so poorly documented by the victims. The victims were so traumatized and subjugated, they did not have the will or education or the means to keep records from generation to generation. Just as slaves have no history, the Dhimmis of Islamdom had very little history.
Just because Christians were the majority in Germany before and during WWII does not mean they had a lot of power after the power of taxation and the machinery of the state were in the hands of the Nazis. Not many people owned handguns and rifles back then, partly because of anti-gun laws, and nowadays it is only in 20/20 retrospect that people hold tightly to their weapons. People want guns to make sure no fascist power can rise again--at least not as easily as during WWII.
Christians had lost a lot of political and persuasive power before WWII due to the rise of skepticism and evolution and philosophy and you-name-it, and Christians have long noted that some of the evolutionists and eugenicists and thinkers in other disciplines were Jewish. Not all Jews specialized in hard sciences, after all. Yet, the Christians are the ones who get the blame for the Holocaust even though it was the secularists and evolutionists who carried it out, and even though many Christians met their end resisting the fascists!
Take the situation today. What power do Christians have today to hold back anti-Semitic fascists even in America? For instance, 48 percent of Americans are creationists, forty percent believe in intelligent design, and only 12 percent or so believe in evolution, yet only evolution can be taught in public schools. Evolution, however, is dangerous because it can easily lead to racism and fascism and materialistic communism, and these virulent ideologies have killed millions. Interesting, Al Gore was an evolutionist, and he almost became US President in 2000:
AiG
"Human evolution, of course, is responsible for our very long period of childhood..." (Al Gore, Earth in the Balance, p. 229).
Also, another example of Christian powerlessness is many Christians want to privatize schooling using vouchers, but that's a no go due to the courts saying, "No." No one can deny that Jews had a part in creating this situation through the ACLU, etc. Yet, even though Christians don't get their way in American, we receive much of the blame for whatever goes wrong in America culturally and socially, and for American foreign policy.
Another example of Christians lacking power is 80 percent of Mosques in America are known to be extremist and no doubt virulently anti-Semitic, yet Christians cannot keep a Mosque from being built in their own backyard. Christians cannot even keep anti-Semitic Islamists from immigrating into the US and carrying out evangelism here. Christians are powerless to resist the rise of Islamism in the US.
In the US and Eurabia, it may be only a matter of time (half century? century? two centuries?) before Islamists are numerous enough to perform a coupe (like the Nazis did), and then Christians and Jews alike will suffer greatly. Then after it is all over, the Christians will probably once again be blamed for the massacres just as Christians were blamed for the crimes of the Nazis--if history is any guide.
Posted by: markjames at December 3, 2005 6:10 PM
great post markjames
Posted by: pissedoffcanadian at December 3, 2005 6:16 PM
markjames,
I think you are being a little pessemistic and most people on this site don't blame Christians for everything that went wrong in Western history. Some points:
1. Judaism hasn't been a missionary religion since the time of Jesus and the lands that they conquered in the name of their religion have been pretty small if you compare them to other religious conquests. Most of the missionary work (during the Second Temple period) was similar to the missionary work of the early Christians, it was peaceful.
2. For most of Jewish history, they did not interpret the Hebrew Bible literally. They used allegories for some of the more alarming passages and some of the passages that had become void due to political circumstances became modernized (i.e. animal sacrifice was replaced with prayer).
3. European anti-Semitism is very complex. It has many dimensions. It cannot be solely blamed on Christianity for the same reasons it cannot be blamed solely on evolution. Russia committed some of the worst acts of anti-Semitism outside of Nazi Germany yet they were not motivated by evolution, but it was actually a combination of conspiracy mongering, nativism, and religious nationalism.
4. I don't buy your argument that evolution inevitably leads to fascism and racism. How many leading evolutionary scientists are propoenents of eugenics and racialist theories today? Outside the fringe, not many I assume. Social Darwinism has been discredited a long time ago.
5. Daniel Pipes is wrong. He, much like Bernard Lewis, believes in the Andalusian fantasy and the myth of Muslim tolerance towards Jews. Bat Ye'or and Andrew Bostom are more realistic regarding historic Muslim anti-Semitism. The anti-Semitism in Europe was horrible and I don't want to minimize it, but being a Jew in a Muslim land was very harsh. To the Yemenites and Kurds, the Jews were actually slaves. I haven't found a parallel of that in Europe. The hostility towards Jews in Europe had to be aroused either through the mass media with libellous stories (i.e. the blood libel) or during Easter time. In the lands of Islam, it was CONSTANT. That is the difference. That is why the book, "Under the Crescent and Cross", is so flawed because it compares the absolute worst times for anti-Semitism in Europe to the more tolerant times in the Muslim world. It fails to take into consideration that entire Jewish communities were wiped out in the Middle East.
6. I would avoid from saying Jews had a part in X because of their disproportionate numbers. Jews are disproportionate in every intellectual movement ranging from Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Environmentalism, Feminism, you name it. Their cultural history has made them proficient in intellectual fields and that is why as an ethnic group, their average IQ is very high. I never hear any complaints that there are too many Scottish or too many Catholics in this or that movement so why point the fingers at the Jews?
7. Lastly, I have no problems with criticism Israeli policy or Israeli culture. They are both lacking in many respects. I have a problem with assclowns like spect8or who are suspicious of Israel's motives or the hysterics of "True Slav" who thinks Israel is persecuting Christians. Yes, there are inequalities and yes there is a restricition of evangelism, but the Jews aren't actively converting Christians to Judaism or Noahidic Gentilism, so maybe out of respect it would be best for the Christians to focus on another target group. If a Jew is interested in Christianity and comes to them, then that is another story, but I'm tired of seeing these outfits like "Jews for Jesus" that act like a half-way house between Judaism and Christianity. It's unnecessary.
Posted by: igor at December 3, 2005 7:17 PM
Markjames and Igor:
Interesting interchange. Re the comment about how Ashkenazim were in the forefront of many intellectual movements, it's worth noting that a rabbi in old Russia once said "Trotsky makes a revolution, and Bronshtain [Trotsky's original family name] gets it in the neck." (i.e., there was a strong disconnect between the handful of leading intellectuals and the Jewish mass; and that the great movements which the intellectuals led could easily turn on them).
Further, one dynamic behind the idea that the Shoah was a "Christian" thing (something which angers me as well as Markjames) is the same cultural/sociological identity which identifies many Arab "Christians", even though they may be Communists or utterly secularized. For many 20th century people, "Jewish", "Christian", and "Muslim" were sociological markers rather than evidence of a profoundly held theistic doctrine. Hence, Marx and Trotsky could be "Jewish" because they were circumcized on the eighth day despite growing up to call hucksterism the true religion of the Jews; while Hitler, baptized a Catholic, is seen as a "Christian", even though he called CHristianity a "Jewish poison". This being said, my sympathies are still with Markjames' exasperation.
Yet, much as I support Israel against the barbarians seeking its demise, I concurr with those who have raised the issue of Messianic Jews and proselytism laws in Israel. The Messianic Jews have done no more than say that they, as Jews, have a claim on the greatest of their ethnic kinsmen who ever lived--Yehoshua ha-M'shiach. As for proselytism, persuading others to accept Christ as Messiah is one of the core values of New Testament Christianity.
Finally, Markjames, I, as a Christian, am not a bit embarrassed by the violence of Numbers 34, Ps. 137, and similar chapters. No Christian has a right to be embarrassed by the words of God the Holy Spirit. God has every right to treat His enemies and faithless children as He will; and it is up to us to be thankful that He has chosen to deal with us graciously rather than as our many sins deserve. Further, if any read the "exterminate the Canaanite" texts of the Torah in the context of a flow of Biblical history and prophetic comment (by men like Hosea, Jeremiah, and Isaiah, not the rabbis), it is clear that God's covenanted community (since Pentecost of 30 AD, this means CHristians) can also be beaten abd driven from its homws if it goes corrupt and breaks faith. Perhaps our times, when a post-CHristian liberalism comes up against post-Christian Islam in terrible warfare is a reminder that the warnings which God gave to Bronze Age Israel still stand.
Posted by: Kepha at December 3, 2005 8:57 PM
igor, just because I don't regard the Israeli-Arab problem as foreign policy issue Number 1 makes me an "assclown", eh? LOL.
(Hey, did you catch the recent DhimWatch post about Muzzies hating Christmas? It also had this to say: "And a Queensland Jewish leader has called for an end to the "automatic imposition" of Christmas on the community". :P)
Posted by: spect8or at December 3, 2005 9:48 PM
"European anti-Semitism is very complex. It has many dimensions. It cannot be solely blamed on Christianity"
The great, but greatly underrated, philosopher Eric Voegelin made the interesting remark that European anti-Semitism has more to do with the currents of heterodox Gnosticism that survived throughout the Middle Ages and into the Modern era, than it did with orthodox (small "o") Christianity.
Note: I said "more to do" -- I'm not discounting Christian anti-Semitism. It's a matter of degree.
The Gnostic currents identified Yahweh as the evil demiurge of this evil Cosmos, and Jesus as an emissary sent by the True God beyond the Cosmos to save those few cultic Gnostics who had the key of knowledge about this Answer to the Mystery of Life.
Gnosticism, in all its complex, myriad forms as it survived, incubated and flared up in various heterodox movements and cults in European history, kept alive this notion that Yahweh and His Israel were perpetuators of the evil structures of the Cosmos. Hitler, it should be noted, was far more influenced by those Gnostic heterodox currents (Jacob Boehme, et al., and which included the syncretistic fetish for pagan and non-Western mythologies, including Islam itself) than he was by orthodox Christianity itself.
Posted by: Dr. Pepper at December 4, 2005 1:39 AM
I'm offering nothing more to this post than this:
Spect8or, would you please provide me a shipping address so I can send you the needed plunger to pull your head out of your ass?
Your endless nonsensical diatribes remind me of the low frequency hum emitted by a failing flourescent light, that at first seems harmless but eventually builds to the roar of a train pounding in one's head. Unfortunately, we can't just "flip the switch" and rid ourselves of your annoyance so easily. Go blow Mo some more and give us a break for a while. K?
Posted by: Constantinople at December 4, 2005 2:29 PM
Wow! I see that stirred the beehive and now am enjoying the honey of an intelligent debate.
To Mr. Meir-Levi: If you read my subsequent postings, you will see that my beef with the State of Israel is that she missed an opportunity to forge an alliance against Islam by reaching out to the oppressed Christians under the control of the Islamic Umma. Instead, they simply saw all non-Jews as Arabs and the enemy forcing the Christians into the arms of the Muslims. This was worse than a crime, it was a mistake.
Even today, Israel is supporting the Iraqi Kurds who are oppressing the Christian Assyrians. Although this ancient Christian nation was promised its own territory at the end of WWI they have neen betrayed over an over. Now under the new neo-Con created Iraq, they probably face thier final destruction.
Mier-Levi's assertion "Israel is the only country in the Middle East (with the possible exception of Turkey) where Christians can live in freedom and practise their faith in freedom" I will challenge that one without hesitation. There has NEVER been freedom for Christians under the Turks. Look at the status of the Phanar (the Patriarchate of Constantinople) which is subject to contant harrassment. Look at the destruction of Orthodox Christianity in Occupied Northern Cyprus or ask any older Greek what happened to the Christian population of Smyrna under the so-called secular regime of Ataturk. If Irael wants to be like its ally Turkey then it would deserve our undying opposition.
As for the other postings. Provoslavni means "true worshipper" i.e. an Orthodox or Byzantine Catholic Christian and has nothing to do with ethnicity. My mother is Jewish and I could become an Israeli tommorow, except that I'm Christian. Remember the Franciscan friar (his name escapes me)who although both his parents were Jewish was denied Israeli citizenship because of his status as a convert to Catholicism.
As for the PFLP, it is true that it flirted with Marxism but that was a political necesity and Habash and company never really believed it since thier support was from Palestinian small shopkeepers i.e the Capitalist class. Communism and Nazism are ideologies in the same anti-human strain as Islam.
As for Srbva Trifkovic. what's wrong with a Serb being pro-Serb. I'm not Serbian but I supported Yugoslavia against the KLA and Clinton's aggression.
I also reject the false blood-libel that Jews have been persecuted by Christians for 2000 years. It is true that there have been pogroms and crimes against Jews but these were always against the teachings of the Church. One could point to cases of Jewish persecution of Christians in the same strain (Saul of Tarsus or Najran in the time of Dhu Nuwas (sixth century). This king was so alarmed by the advance of Christanity that he ordered a general massacre of the Christians if they refused to embrace Judaism, to which he and his whole dynasty belonged) Of course, this kind of persecution is as out of character for Judaism as it is for Christianity.
Throughout history, we see that Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists can co-exist. Unfortunately that is not true for Islam, Communism or Nazism and we should all stand together against these oppressive ideologies.
at December 4, 2005 4:11 PM
Just a point, as an historian, there were Jews in the country which we now know as France from around (as far as we know) 100BCE. The Jews did not arrive in the seventh century. The fact that there were Jews in this area, and Rome for that matter, prior to there being CHristians was not a pleasant thought for a CHurch eager to portray the Jews as child-killing, blood drinking, outsiders. yay for history theses actually coming in handy!
To spect8or, if you believe that Jews were actually the agitators in all the arab-israeli wars, it might be worth getting out, oh i don;t know, maybe a history book? and looking really carefully to see who struck first each time? Unless, of course you take the Arab view that Israel's mere existance counts as striking first. Seems a tad unlikely to me that Israel would launch a war on the holiest day of the Jewish year.
For those interested in a christian view of the state of israel, there is a wonderful web site called anglicans for israel:
http://www.anglicansforisrael.com/
at December 5, 2005 1:01 AM
As far as I know there is only thing that is forbidden by the Israeli law: competitor-faiths of Judaism are not allowed to proselyte in Israel. Don’t ask me why do we have that law. I was explained that on some stage orthodox parties had quite a weigh in Knesset, so that they were able to pass quite a few of THEIR laws - Sabbath prohibitions etc.
This is how it is done in Israel.
And my country is no saint. She is what happens to a country after 60 years of constant wars. We have what is the most favorite (and usually phony) excuse all bad states and governments like to use. We really have external and internal enemies that want to kill us. When they are gone, Israel will change. All those stupid psychological complexes our nation accumulated during those two millennia of Exile will pass. And there will be place for everyone in Israel – and for our Christian brothers first of all.
at December 5, 2005 7:18 AM
Spect8or throws out too many accusations to answer all. But let's answer one crucial one. The Arabs started their war against Israel within hours of the UN General Assembly Partition recommendation for settling disputes in the Land of Israel ["Palestine"]. The first people killed in that war were Jews, several passengers driving through Nablus after the UNGA partition recommendation resolution. The first people driven out of their homes in that war were Jews, in south Tel Aviv which was under fire from neighboring Yaffo [Jaffa], including sniping from the Hassan Bek mosque in the Manshiyah neighborhood of Yaffo. [not sure on the name of the mosque]. A mosque minaret can be a convenient shooting post. The first place where people were driven out of their homes in that war and DID NOT return after the war was the Shimon haTsadiq quarter in Jerusalem which is northeast of the Orient House and American Colony Hotel, and close to them. [I believe there is an article in Midstream magazine, Aug-September 2005 issue, dealing with this episode, inter alia]. These refugees were Jews.
Now, Pravoslavni complains that Israel did not form an alliance with Middle East Christians. Yet there were efforts in that direction. Even as early as David Ben Gurion before 1948. In the early 1970s there were talks about annexing Bethlehem, and the two then Christian villages adjacent to it [Beit Sahur and Beit Jala] and also south of Jerusalem, to the Jerusalem municipality, thus to Israel. By the way, these three places were all within the Jerusalem "corpus separatum" recommended by the UN partition resolution on 29 Nov 1947.
Now, all these three efforts to bring about Jewish-Middle Eastern Christian partnership were shot down. And guess by whom? First, Britain urged all the Arabic-speaking countries to unite in the Arab League. When Lebanon, then with a clear Christian predominance, balked at joining the Arab League, Britain [and maybe the USA too] put pressure on the Lebanese leadership to join. Once Lebanon was in the Arab League, they were compelled to take part in the 1947-48 war against Israel with the rest of the League, although their contribution to the general Arab war effort was small. Second, in regard to Bethlehem being annexed to the Jerusalem municipality and thus to Israel, talks between Israeli officials and local Bethlehem Christian leaders were going on, but the project was shot down by the State Department. Now look at the status of the Bethlehem Christians. Third, the Western powers plus the USSR allowed or encouraged the PLO to act as if Lebanon belonged to them [arafat used to say that PLO participation in the Lebanese civil war was an Arab national duty for the PLO, in order to prevent Lebanon from separating from the Arab world]. Syria was encouraged by various powers to control Lebanon. The US State Dept was among those favoring Syrian control. Since they favored Syrian control [up till 2005, or maybe still; and maybe the anger against Assad and Syria was just because the Syrians had murdered a billionaire, Rafik Hariri; such things are just not done]. Therefore, these powers had to oppose the Israeli attack on the Syrian and PLO forces in Lebanon and work to get Israel out of Lebanon. So it was Western powers mainly that prevented cooperation between Middle Eastern Christians and the Zionists, and later the State of Israel.
Posted by: Eliyahu at December 5, 2005 8:42 AM
Constantinople wrote: "The land of ISRAEL was made holy by God LOOONG before Jesus ever came to earth. And if this "Christian" knew his religion, he'd know that Christ IS the incarnation of the Lord. Ever hear the word Truine?"
Absolutely Christ is the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity. So why do you object to me calling him "Christ-God" (an expression from the Council of Nicea)?
And what did my statement have to do with Christ's sacrifice. There is certainly no animosity since it was me (and you and everyone else) who sacrificed Him.
The land is sacred as a holy relic but NO government Jewish or Christian can ever be sacred (only consecrated). So I can't see how a modern political entity has anything to do with theology.
Your affectionatly,
The Idiot
at December 7, 2005 12:18 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)