Tag Archives: Israel Lobby

“Christians must understand that for Jews the cross is a symbol of oppression”

Jesus wasn’t a Christian – that word exists for his followers and came later. He was Jewish. His mother was Jewish. He was circumcised as a Jew. He pretty much followed the Jewish law, departing from it only in the name of what he saw as its deeper meaning. “For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished,” he insisted at the end of the Sermon on the Mount. Sure, he debated furiously with the Pharisees and Sadducees, especially about the significance of the temple. And, in time, this argument came to be restyled by Jesus’ gentile followers as an attack upon Jews per se. But originally it was an internal debate within Judaism, not an attack upon Jews from the outside. In was an internal debate in the same way that the prophets of the Hebrew scriptures, such as Jeremiah, often attacked the priests of the temple for missing the point.

It is a horrible irony, then, that Christianity bears primary responsibility for historic antisemitism. Few ideas can have been as poisonous as, and inspired more murderousness than, the idea that Jews were the Christ-killers.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/jews-cross-symbol-of-oppression-christians

Sarah Silverman Feels Scared By Sight Of American Flag

“I had a boyfriend many years ago, he was my first boyfriend who had his own house, and one day I went outside to see what he was doing, and he was hoisting an American flag up the flagpole in his front yard. And I instantly felt very weird. It didn’t make sense, but I felt this feeling of like, um, I felt scared – yeah, I felt scared. So I was like, ‘Uh, what are you doing?’ and he said, ‘Raising the flag,’ and I was like, ‘Why?’ and he’s like, ‘Um, because I love America?’ and I was like, ‘Right, right, of course.’ But inside I was shaken,” started Silverman.

But wait, it gets worse when she is able to identify the source of her disturbing feelings:

“I called my sister Susie to tell her what happened. Now, maybe you’re thinking, ‘What do you mean what happened? Nothing happened, your boyfriend put an American flag up at his own house.’ No, you’re totally right, I had no idea why I was freaking out. I just – I had this very visceral reaction and my sister, who knows shit because she’s a rabbi in Israel, explained to me, she was like, ‘Dude, nationalism is innately terrifying for Jews. Think about it: flags, marching, blind allegiance? These things tend to ring a bell for us.’ Right. Of course. Duh. It made sense,” said Silverman.

Does she get triggered by an Israeli flag or nationalism in Israel? I’m guessing not, the same way that this American flag thing was never a problem for her until a democrat was no longer in the White House.

This story is almost certainly bullshit. She’s saying she had a boyfriend who she had no idea was a patriotic American and then was shocked when he out of the blue raised an American flag. What did she think he had a flag pole in front of his house for? Why was the flagpole without any kind of flag until one day this boyfriend suddenly decided to raise the American flag?

On top of that, she’s suggesting that this boyfriend was an anti-Semite because of his American pride. I’m guessing the boyfriend didn’t have much of a problem with Jews since he was dating one.

downtrend.com/71superb/sarah-silverman-feels-scared-by-sight-of-american-flag

David Cole’s Auschwitz research

He supports the idea of mass murders of Jews (as do I), but has some doubts about gas chambers.

David Cole, the Jew who dared to investigate the claims. Here is his breathrough film from 1992, in which he disputed Auschwitz claims (by actually visiting the camp):

And here are his articles on where he thinks mass murder of Jews truly occurred:

takimag.com/article/denial_is_dead_david_cole/print#axzz4txkmifMb

takimag.com/article/hate_speech_derby_mohammed_vs_auschwitz_david_cole/print#axzz4txkmifMb

lecture by Rabbi David Bar-Hayim whose biography, and gently smiling face, you can find on Wikipedia

www.myvi.ru/watch/Why-are-the-Rabbis-Silent-about-Gaza_RMl1JJ_ftUy7fjzY7Ehgug2

Analysis here: www.unz.com/tsaker/a-crash-course-on-the-true-causes-of-anti-semitism/

Next, here are key statements from the beginning of this lecture posted along their time-stamp so you can check for their authenticity:

09:20 The Torah teaches that the life of a Jew is more precious than the life of a non-Jew.
10:00 God (HaShem) prefers Jews to non-Jews and gives them a special status.
11:00 The notion that Jews and non-Jews are equally precious to God contradicts the spirit of the Torah from beginning to end.
16:40 According to Shimon bar Yochia (aka Rashbi) “the best of non-Jews should be killed in warfare” because just as Jews cannot know if a snake approaching you is venomous or not, Jews cannot know which non-Jew is a danger to then.
25:16 Jews must assume that it is likely that any non-Jew they meet does not live by the Noahide Laws.

am sure that there are those who are absolutely convinced that was I wrote above is a gross misrepresentation of fact, that there is no way “Judaism” would really teach any such horrors. Think again, and listen to the Rabbi himself:

25:33 Those who do not keep the Seven Noahide Laws are all therefore guilty of a capital offense
25:49 “Avoda Zara”, i.e. idolary meaning Christianity was the most common offense.

Of course, for those who know anything about Pharisaic Talmudism none of the above will come as any surprise. After all, did the Rabbi not also clearly state that:

16:40 According to Shimon bar Yochia (aka Rashbi) “the best of non-Jews should be killed in warfare” because just as Jews cannot know if a snake approaching you is venomous or not, Jews cannot know which non-Jew is a danger to then.

Non-Jews are explicitly compared to snakes! He also says something similar later in the lecture:

26:15 since you cannot bring a perishing non-Jew to court to establish his guilt, you take a neutral position by neither helping him nor killing him.

You got that? Since, like with snakes, it is impossible to tell a dangerous non-Jews apart from a safe one, you cannot just kill him. For that you need a ruling by a rabbinical court. But saving him is no option either, because he most likely deserves the death penalty (say, for being a Christian). So you do nothing when you see a non-Jew in danger or even perishing. Interestingly enough, the Rabbi is also asked if that kind of non-assistance to a person in danger could not negatively impact the reputation of Jews and he immediately replies:

1:22:00 if not saving a non-Jew makes Jews look bad, then the Jew ought to lie about his motives

So it is okay to let a non-Jew die and, if challenged, just lie about it!

The key concept here is simple: Jews are more important to God and, therefore, to themselves than non-Jews. This is why

1:00:30 there is no requirement to return a lost object to a non-Jew
1:17:40 Jews can brake the sabbath to save a Jew but not a non-Jew because Jews do not consider all lives to be equal

I will stop the examples here. The Rabbi clearly says that the humanistic notion that all humans are equal is contrary to the entire spirit of the Torah. If after that you don’t get it….

What about the so-called Golden Rule about “do unto others”?

What about these:

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your kinsfolk. Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19:18 )
What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn. (Shabbath folio:31a, Babylonian Talmud)

Did you notice the key caveats “your kindsfolk” and “your fellow”. Pharisaic Talmudism interprets these passages are referring only to fellow Jews and not to the semi-bestial goyim! It is laughable to a Rabbi when he hears a non-Jew saying that all humans were created in the image and likeness of God. Pharisaic Talmudism explicitly contradicts that (and the Kabbalah even more so!). Still don’t agree? Which part of “ the humanistic notion that all humans are equal is contrary to the entire spirit of the Torah” don’t you get?!

Tablet mag tackles the controversial subject of Weinstein

I actually thought this was a touching piece, and maybe it was. Though the news of the day for me is extreme hypocrisy — and there’s nothing about that. Also, the author found it necessary to issue an apology.

But what does it mean to suggest that Jews didn’t have access to power? Does that square with the reality of 20th century European history?

. . . .

Harvey did something unique—no less odious, but different. Harvey performed. As we now are hearing (whether we want to or not), he allegedly made a woman watch as he masturbated into a potted plant. And if you want to understand this bizarre behavior, don’t look to Roger Ailes, or David Vitter, or Paul Crouch—look to Philip Roth.

Better than perhaps any other author, Roth captured the particular anxiety of the Jewish American man in the twentieth century, finally coming into power but, having not grown up with it, unsure of what he’s supposed to do now. All those years craving unattainable Gentiles, but never before the means to entice them. The result is Alexander Portnoy of Portnoy’s Complaint, a grown man whose emotional and sexual life is still all one big performance piece, just as it had been when he was a teenager and pleasured himself with a piece of liver.

As a boy, Portnoy fantasized about attaining a mythical shiksa goddess whom he nicknamed Thereal McCoy (get it?), who ice-skates “in her blue parka and her red earmuffs and her big white mittens—Miss America, on blades! With her mistletoe and her plum pudding (whatever that may be),” but as a grown-up he graduates to the real woman he nicknames The Monkey. And what does he do to abase her? He has her perform with an Italian whore. Yes, he eventually joins in, but not before they enact a bad movie—not Hollywood, but San Fernando Valley triple-X. And his nickname for her, The Monkey? That comes from an episode in her life, from before Portnoy met her, when a couple swingers picked her up and wanted her to eat a banana while she watched them copulate. For having a past that gets him hot, she gets degraded with an animalistic nickname. Her history as an actor is what he wants her for.

Harvey is cut from the same cloth. Growing up in Queens, he fantasized of fame and fortune, and, once he got them, he struggled to maintain them by building himself into a larger-than-life figure. He yelled at employees like he was a studio boss from the 1920s—the only thing missing was a riding crop. He ran Oscars campaigns like they used to in Old Hollywood. And he harassed women not necessarily to use them as instruments of his pleasure, but to use them as instruments of his power.

It goes without saying that nearly every one of these women—Rose McGowan, Ambra Batillana, Laura Madden, Ashley Judd, etc.—was a Gentile, all the better to feed Weinstein’s revenge-tinged fantasy of having risen above his outer-borough, bridge-and-tunnel Semitic origins. But it turns out there was a Jew(ess) in the bunch, none other than Lauren Sivan, of the potted-plant episode. In that small way, he inadvertently broke out of the Portnoy mold, performing his inadequacies not for the great all-American odeon but for a woman who could be his cousin. Harvey can run from who he is, but he can’t hide.

The apology:

Yesterday I published a piece on Harvey Weinstein that many found offensive. The analysis I offered was hasty and ill-considered, especially in light of the even graver accusations that were published by the New Yorker this morning. I take this as a lesson in the importance of knowing as much as one can about a given story, and in taking the time to think and feel things completely through before opining. I apologize for not doing so in this case.

Editor’s Note: As a matter of policy, Tablet Magazine adheres to the widely-held journalistic policy of never deleting posts—even those for which apologies have been tendered or substantial corrections applied. Here is the New York Times description of the standard—even when a post is wrong, “we still do not believe that we should unpublish it and pretend it never existed”—which is doubly important for online-only sites, which don’t have paper or microfilm archives.

Jewish Groups Join Call To Mayors To Denounce ‘Anti-Sharia’ Marches

An array of liberal Jewish groups has signed on to letters to 29 mayors urging them to denounce planned “anti-sharia” marches this weekend.

“Timed during the Islamic month of Ramadan, when Muslims around the world fast during the daylight hours, these protests have been disingenuously branded ‘March Against Sharia’ and explicitly target Muslims at a time when hatred and bigotry has swept the nation,” said the letters, which went out Thursday to the mayors of cities including Atlanta, Boston, Houston, Indianapolis, New York and Orlando.

Sharia refers to Muslim religious law.

Read more: forward.com/fast-forward/374295/jewish-groups-join-call-to-mayors-to-denounce-anti-sharia-marches/