Friday, January 07, 2022

1208 Commentaar op Israel Shahak's boek van blog 1207.

Ik heb zelf blog 1207 en 1208 nu niet gelezen, maar in een ver verleden heb ik het boek wel gelzen inhet Engels.  Nu is een redelijk leesbare vertaling in een handomdraai te maken, dus waarom niet.  

Ook de comments zijn soms heel interessant en bieden nieuwe zaken die tot nu toe onbekend waren. 


Jewish History, Jewish Religion: A Review

SPENCER J. QUINN • JANUARY 5, 2022

 • 2,900 WORDS • 53 COMMENTS 

 




Jewish History, Jewish Religion
Israel Shahak
Pluto Press, 1994

For a thorough airing of Jewish dirty laundry, one cannot do much better than Israel Shahak’s Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years (JHJR). First published in 1994, JHJR, represents a humanist critique of classical and modern Judaism which extends to the pervasive anti-gentile attitudes of Jews throughout history. Much of Shahak’s critique leads to his condemnation of Israel’s current treatment of the Palestinians, but he also offers the gentile’s perspective whenever discussing historical conflicts between Jews and gentiles. Most importantly, however, Shahak underscores the blatant hypocrisy, the niggling legalism, and the chauvinistic ethnocentrism behind classical Judaism, as expressed in the Talmud and other post-biblical writings. While he focuses his ire on the fanatical rabbis—mostly in Israel—who still adhere to these antiquated doctrines and exert influence in the Israeli military, modern dissidents can implement Shahak’s historical and Talmudic analysis whenever countering the historical complaints Jews continually levy against gentiles, especially the white ones.

Shahak begins by demonstrating how the Jewish state of Israel exists to serve the interests of Jews first and foremost. Jews are protected and encouraged by the law in ways that non-Jews are not, especially when it comes to residency and commercial discrimination. Shahak recognizes that many of these discriminatory laws go unenforced in Israel, but they remain on the books. And some are enforced, or at least were as of the book’s publication. Shahak offers the example of Jews—but not gentiles—being legally allowed to lease an orchard from a Jew for harvest. He also describes the financial incentives Israel provides for its Jewish citizens to return to Israel after they leave, while not making similar offers to its non-Jewish citizens in similar circumstances. Further, Kibbutzes exclude Arabs and require that all non-Jews convert before joining. Underlying these double standards is what Shahak calls “the ideology of redeemed land.” Israeli land is considered “redeemed” when it belongs or is sold to a Jew. The same land in gentile hands would be considered “unredeemed.” The logical extension of this, as Shahak points out, is the ultimate redemption of all Jewish land. As of the 1990s at least there was debate as to how far outside Israeli’s current borders unredeemed Jewish land actually stretches.

Shahak connects this double standard to the closed society many religiously zealous Jews want Israel to be. Despite having great knowledge of Judaism, Shahak laments this, and wishes Israel be an open society. But achieving this will require some painful decisions on the part of Jewish Israelis. The following passage, I think, sums up his intentions with JHJR:

A Jewish state, whether based on its present Jewish ideology or, if it becomes even more Jewish in character than it is now, on the principles of Jewish Orthodoxy, cannot even contain an open society. There are two choices which face Israeli-Jewish society. It can become a fully closed and warlike ghetto, a Jewish Sparta, supported by the labour of Arab helots, kept in existence by its influence on the US political establishment and by threats to use is nuclear power, or it can try to become an open society. The second choice is dependent on a honest examination of its Jewish past, on the admission that Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism exist, and on a honest examination of the attitudes of Judaism towards non-Jews.

And if there are any positive attitudes towards non-Jews in Judaism, Shahak studiously does not mention them.

One of Shahak’s main contentions regarding classical Judaism is its totalitarian nature. He mentions how eighteenth-century Jews burned books, persecuted dissidents, banned non-Jewish education, and were absorbed in mysticism. Tolerance was not part of the equation, and Shahak quite cheekily points out how at times even unfriendly gentile societies were kinder to the Jews than the Jews were to themselves. He states bluntly that when Jews were liberated or emancipated throughout the nineteenth century, they were in many case freed from “the tyranny of their own religion” rather than from any gentile oppression. He offers as an example the Metternich regime in Austria in the 1840s, which actually enforced laws protecting Jews from being murdered. Shahak makes a similar point regarding Tsar Nicholas I:

Nicholas I of Russia was a notorious anti-Semite and issued many laws against the Jews of his state. But he also strengthened the forces of ‘law and order’ in Russia—not only the secret police but also the regular police and the gendarmerie—with the consequence that it became difficult to murder Jews on the order of their rabbis, whereas in pre-1795 Poland it had been quite easy.

Shahak characterizes pre-emancipated Jewish societies as “sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism and ignorance” and describes how in the first Hebrew work on geography (published in 1803), the authors complained about how a great many rabbis were still denying the existence of America. He even cracks a joke about how these classical Jewish societies prohibited the study of secular material—except while on the privy:

One can imagine that those few Jews of that time who – no doubt tempted by Satan—developed an interest in the history of the French kings were constantly complaining to their neighbours about the constipation they were suffering from.

Shahak stresses how official Jewish histories of this period which ignore or deny any of this “bear the unmistakable marks of their origin: deception, apologetics or hostile polemics, indifference or even active hostility to the pursuit of truth.” As evidence of this duplicity, Shahak describes how before emancipation, rabbis continually subverted Christian censorship whenever Christians became aware of virulently anti-gentile passages in the Talmud and other writings. For example, terms such as “non-Jew” or “gentile” would be replaced with seemingly less offensive terms such as “idolator” or “Samaritan” which then served as euphemisms for the goyim. Shahak calls these efforts “a calculated lie” since once the rabbis felt secure enough in Israel centuries later, the original anti-gentile passages reappeared in modern editions of their holy books.

And as for anti-gentile language, there is a lot of it, and not just in the Talmud. The Hebrew word shaqetz refers both to unclean animals and to gentile children. In a work known as The Book of Knowledge, Jews are instructed to exterminate gentiles with their own hands (a passage wholly expunged from the book’s English translations). In the Hasidic text known as Hatanya, gentiles are considered Satanic creatures. The Halakhah, which outlines the legal system of classical Judaism and springs from the Babylonian Talmud, openly approves of war crimes (i.e., the killing of ostensibly good gentile civilians during war). In Maimonides’ Guide to the Perplexed, Blacks and some other nomadic races are likened to “mute animals” and “are not on the level of human beings.” (In the 1925 American translation, editors obfuscated this embarrassing detail by replacing the Hebrew word Kushim, meaning Blacks, with the nonsensical “Kushites”). There is a morning prayer in which Jews thank God for not making them gentiles. In another prayer, the worshipper declares, “and may the apostates have no hope, and all the Christians perish instantly.” Devout Jews are enjoined to utter a curse whenever passing a gentile cemetery or upon seeing a large gentile population. The fourteenth-century work called The Book of Education reinterprets seemingly universalist verbiage from the Bible into chauvinistic, pro-Jewish exhortations. For example, according to The Book of Knowledge, the verse “Thou shalt love thy fellow as thyself,” really means “Thou shalt love thy fellow Jew as thyself.” Finally, according to the Talmudic Encyclopedia, the intricacy of the law regarding adultery with gentile women reveals that, to devout Jews, all gentile women, even the ones who convert to Judaism, are presumed to be whores.

Keep in mind that while devout Jews were praying for the death of gentiles and while Jewish leaders were fully aware of the hidebound aspects of their own religion, they pressured the Catholic Church during the mid-20th century to remove the line about God forgiving Jews in one its Good Friday prayers; because, of course, to say such a thing would be anti-Semitic.

Perhaps the most astonishing aspect of JHJR is how petty and legalistic Shahak reveals Judaism to be. It seems that Judaism, as interpreted and re-interpreted over the centuries in the Talmud and other texts—down to the most trivial details—has provided the evolutionary bottleneck through which the Jews have become the world’s heavyweight champions of lawyers. In some cases, it’s as if God laid down the law in the Torah, and it’s up to His chosen people to find ingenious loopholes around these very laws—as if the All-Powerful Creator of the Universe were too obtuse to notice.

On the proscription against milking cows on the Sabbath, Shahak writes—hilariously—that according to Zionist rabbis:

the forbidden milking becomes permitted provided the milk is not white but dyed blue. This blue Saturday milk is then used exclusively for making cheese, and the dye is washed off into the whey. Non-Zionist rabbis have devised a much subtler scheme (which I personally witnessed operating in a religious kibbutz in 1952). They discovered an old provision which allows the udders of a cow to be emptied on the Sabbath, purely for relieving the suffering caused to the animal by bloated udders, and on the strict condition that the milk runs to waste on the ground. Now, this is what is actually done: on Saturday morning, a pious kibbutznik goes to the cowshed and places pails under the cows. (There is no ban on such work in the whole of the Talmudic literature.) He then goes to the synagogue to pray. Then comes his colleague, whose ‘honest intention’ is to relieve the animal’s pain and let their milk run to the floor. But if, by chance, a pail happens to be standing there, is he under any obligation to remove it? Of course not. He simply ‘ignores’ the pails, fulfills his mission of mercy and goes to the synagogue. Finally a third pious colleague goes into the cowshed and discovers, to his great surprise, the pails full of milk. So he puts them in cold storage and follows his comrades to the synagogue. Now all is well, and there is no need to waste money on blue dye.

This is funny. But when rules are laid down and then interpreted to not only benefit Jews but also to necessarily harm gentiles, it’s not funny. In Chapter Five, “The Laws Against Non-Jews,” Israel Shahak wrote it all down.

According to Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, the Talmudic Encyclopedia, and R. Yo’el Sirkis’ Bayit Hadash, Jew-on-Jew murder is a capital sin, but Jew-on-gentile murder is not, and is therefore not punishable by any Jewish court. R. David Halevi declares in his seventeenth-century text Turey Zahav which comments on the Shulhan ‘Arukh that a Jew must not directly harm a gentile, but he allows for indirect harm of gentiles. Maimonides himself proscribes Jewish doctors treating gentiles. Basically, a gentile life must not be saved. For example, a Jew would not be allowed to shove a gentile down a crevice, but if the gentile is already in the crevice, the Jew is under no obligation to pull him out. Indeed, if there is a ladder which could facilitate the gentile’s rescue, the Jew may also remove the ladder.

Unless, of course, such indirect harm would then bring hostility upon the Jews as a whole. Then, and only then, would a Jew not be permitted to indirectly harm a gentile. This, I call “the hostility exception,” and Shahak brings it up a lot. Jews respect power, and this power more than any universal set of values informs their jurisprudence. When gentiles (or heretic Jews) are weak, they are afforded no mercy in the law. However, when gentiles are strong, then Jews are required to do the very minimum to not increase their hostility. One crass and recurring example of this was how Jewish doctors would be encouraged to treat wealthy gentiles, including kings, nobles, lords, and the like. But poor gentiles, never. Obviously, such self-serving codification defies any absolute sense of Right and Wrong—moral particularlism at its most egregious, and is one of the aspects of classical Judaism that Shahak finds so offensive.

This next one might be the worst of them all. According to the virulently anti-gentilic Maimonides in his “Prohibitions on Sexual Intercourse” (emphasis mine):

If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if she is a minor aged only nine years and one day—because he had willful coitus with her, she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got in trouble.

Get that? According to one of greatest Jewish scholars of all time, a Jew has license to murder, rape, and molest children as long as the victim is a gentile. And of course, the sanctity of gentile marriages amounts to nothing.

Here are a few more anti-gentilic laws, all of which adhere to the “hostility exception” described above:

1.      Gentiles are forbidden to bear testimony in rabbinical courts, since all gentiles are presumed liars.

2.      Jews must not offer gifts to gentiles.

3.      Jews must exact interest when lending money to gentiles.

4.      Jews must never return items lost by a gentile.

5.      Jews shall not deceive other Jews in business, but may practice “indirect deception” when doing business with a gentile.

6.      Jews shall not steal without violence from anyone, gentiles included. However, there are certain circumstances under which they may steal with violence from gentiles under their control.

7.      Jews are forbidden to sell unmovable property (i.e., structure and land) to gentiles in Israel.

Towards the end of JHJR, Shahak bluntly states something that most counter-Semites know as fact:

It must be emphasized that the explanations quoted above do represent correctly the teaching of the Halakhah. The rabbis and, even worse, the apologetic ‘scholars of Judaism’ know this very well and for this reason they do not try to argue against such views inside the Jewish community; and of course they never mention them outside it. Instead, they vilify any Jew who raises these matters within earshot of Gentiles, and they issue deceitful denials in which the art of equivocation reaches its summit.

Shahak states further that Judaism is imbued with both hatred and ignorance of Christianity, and that this is largely independent of any Christian persecution of the Jews. Thus, he often takes the gentile perspective when reviewing Jewish history in JHJR. He makes it clear that even the poorest Jews were better off than serfs. He also points out that Jews, as agents of kings or nobility, often exploited the peasantry, especially in Poland. He doesn’t deny that European peasants triggered anti-Jewish uprisings throughout history, but he also lists historical peasant uprisings that had nothing to do with Jews. Clearly then, what Jews call “anti-Semitism” is not inherent to European peasants. Shahak says the quiet part out loud when concluding that Jewish influence declines when gentile nations assume a more nationalistic (read: ethno-nationalistic) attitude and have a greater political connection between the rulers and the people—what it now termed populism in American political culture. There is a long history going back at least to the 1930s of Jewish anti-populist writing (Chapter 5 of The Culture of Critique)—writing that eventually penetrated American academic and media culture with the rise of Jewish power.

Most damningly, Shahak states:

Before the advent of the modern state the position of the Jews was socially most important, and their internal autonomy greatest, under a regime which was completely retarded to the point of utter degeneracy.

In other words, Jews readily made alliances with oppressive, degenerate non-Jewish elites and participated with these elites in exploiting the non-Jewish population.

Certainly, viewing the Jewish Question through the lens Israel Shahak provides us in JHJR makes things much clearer. He provides cogent reasons why gentiles oppressed Jews in the past or evicted them from their nations. Still, we should remember that Shahak was no fellow traveler of the Dissident Right. Like any good liberal humanist, he opposed all race-based policies, laws, and nations. He opposed ethno-nationalism in toto and often chided Jews (for example, Rabbi Schneurssohn of New York city) for having anti-Black attitudes—the same anti-Black attitudes that many race-realist White dissidents have today. White people founding pro-White nations would have been just as odious to him as the Zionists who had founded Israel. Most questionably, Shahak on multiple occasions in JHJR expresses a high regard for the ideas behind the French Revolution without mentioning any of its concurrent chaos and atrocities. This should give a clear indication of where he stands as a pollical thinker.

Most importantly, we should keep in mind that Jewish History, Jewish Religion does not condemn modern Jews for the overt racism of their classical religion (excluding those instances when classical Judaism informs their treatment of the Palestinians). Nor should it—since no people is without historical sin. However, the best take from this important and fascinating book is the underscoring of the present sin being committed by most Jews today; that is, blaming gentiles, especially the white ones, for bad things in their past, while astutely ignoring similar bad things in the Jewish past.

A critical mass of Jews who stop doing this will do much to lift the burden of three thousand years.

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)

← Don’t Call It the Holocaust  

 

• Category: Culture/SocietyHistoryIdeology • Tags: Anti-SemitismIsraelJewsJudaismTalmud 

Recently from Author

·    Don’t Call It the Holocaust

·    Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together

·    Michael Kellogg’s The Russian Roots of Nazism

·    A Dissident’s Guide to Blacks & Africa: A Review

·    In Defense of Kyle Rittenhouse

 

Related Pieces by Author

·    Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together

·    Don’t Call It the Holocaust

·    Michael Kellogg’s The Russian Roots of Nazism

·    In Defense of Kyle Rittenhouse

·    Melting Pot or Civil War, a Scathing Review

 

Of Related Interest

American Pravda: Oddities of the Jewish Religion

The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism

RON UNZ

No Country for White Children

ANDREW JOYCE

An Antidote to the Jewpill (Part 2: Antichristianity)

JAMES LAWRENCE

← Don’t Call It the Holocaust  

Hide 53 CommentsLeave a Comment

"Jewish History, Jewish Religion: A Review"
• 53 Comments • 53 Comments

Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only

Trim Comments? 

1.    Priss Factor says: • Website

Cuckeroo Pompeo

What about plotting against assange and sucking off defense contractors?

Those should at least be priorities 2 and 3 https://t.co/9Ql2evFxK7

— Darren J. Beattie  (@DarrenJBeattie) January 5, 2022

• Replies: @El Dato@annamaria

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

2.    anyone with a brain says:

Ethno-nationalism will not solve the Jewish question.
Socialism and state atheism will.
Any other course of action will permit the existence of large private wealth and that of course will attract the Jews, furthermore Abrahamic religions in order to exist must tolerate Judaism, but not necessarily Judaism tolerate nor respect its religious sects(Christianity and Islam).
It may be possible to not be a socialist state that is hostile to Jews, but the elites and people would have to be anti-abrahamic with no respect for the texts or god of the Jews.

Israel Shahak is a great person for what he has written as is Gilad Atzmon, Shahak’s book with Norton Mezvinsky Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel is also good.

• Replies: @Franz@Chris Moore

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

3.    Wyatt says:

A pack of dirty sand people wormed their way into Europe, got a hold of actual good genes, but are inbred as fuck and now their inbreeding-induced paranoia and schizophrenia are the guideposts of western foreign policy because they feel threatened by anyone they don’t outright control.

I don’t think I missed much.

• Agree: PolistraZ-manJustramblingTrinity

• LOL: Realist

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

4.    Polistra says:

In one short book, Israel Shahak taught me more useful information about the Ruling Tribe than I ever learned in a lifetime of being saturated by their endless and ubiquitous mass-media propaganda. Not to mention that what Israel Shahak shared is actually accurate.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

5.    Priss Factor says: • Website

On the proscription against milking cows on the Sabbath, Shahak writes—hilariously—that according to Zionist rabbis

It not only explains why Jews became good at law but at comedy.

Some of this stuff is totally hilarious.

• Replies: @milosevic

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

6.    Zachary Smith says:

https://mediateca.directory/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Shahak-Jewish-History-Jewish-Religion-2.pdf

Sometime in the late 1950s, that world-class gossip and occasional historian, John F. Kennedy, told me how, in 1948, Harry S. Truman had been pretty much abandoned by everyone when he came to run for president. Then an American Zionist brought him two million dollars in cash, in a suitcase, aboard his whistle-stop campaign train. ‘That’s why our recognition of Israel was rushed through so fast.’ As neither Jack nor I was an antisemite (unlike his father and my grandfather) we took this to be just another funny story about Truman and the serene corruption of American politics.

From the first edition Gore Vidal preface.

• Agree: Jim Christian

• Thanks: GomezAdddamsannamaria

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

7.    Franz says:

Ethno-nationalism will not solve the Jewish question.

It’s the only thing that ever has.

There is no great feat to mix ethno-nationalism with socialism. It’s been done.

But I agree with you that prying the European soul from an Asiatic volcano god would do more than any political system. Likely it’s the only way any European political system can work.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

8.    Altai says:

Shahak connects this double standard to the closed society many religiously zealous Jews want Israel to be. Despite having great knowledge of Judaism, Shahak laments this, and wishes Israel be an open society. But achieving this will require some painful decisions on the part of Jewish Israelis.

One can see the conflicting context of diaspora Jew (Shahak being born in Poland) who internalises an ‘open society’ as something to instinctually press for and encountering a different context in the ethnostate. He uses absurd absolutist visions to depict this ‘fortress Israel’ despite achieving this objective requiring a few simple laws (It would not come to require an authoritarian regime that might threaten Israeli Jews anymore than it would harm native gentiles in their societies but he pretends otherwise because he knows this) just like he was inclined to use histrionic language against the host population in Poland and greater Christendom.

Shahak wants Israel to remain a Jewish state but having grown up internalising as pure morality the idea of an ‘open society’ among his former host nation, it’d salve his moral and political aesthetics if it could be achieved with an open society. IE, if other demographics could theoretically come and go as they please but don’t.

A very similar situation is seen in the older Jewish head of the ACLU, Ira Glasser bemoaning the way the new ACLU is so severely politically biased and comfortable in banning books and blocking speech or directly endorsing specific politicians.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-disintegration-of-the-aclu-james-kirchick

Glasser and his friends rarely encountered anybody who wasn’t Jewish, much less Black, within the 12-block neighborhood of East Flatbush that comprised the world of their childhood (New York City, he says in the film, was less the fabled “melting pot” of popular American sentiment than “a collection of insular segregated tribes”).

No American minority had reaped more from its faith in the country’s professed commitment to pluralism and tolerance than the Jews, a gift they repaid many times over by supporting the institutions—the universities, the Democratic Party, the ACLU—which upheld them. In the same way Lenny Bruce classified Ray Charles and fruit salad as Jewish (while claiming that “Evaporated milk is goyish even if the Jews invented it”), so the ACLU was seen as scrappy, authentic, and emblematic of an underdog quality. As Bruce might have put it: the ACLU, Jewish; the McCarthyite American Jewish League Against Communism, goyish.

Not that they ever pulled punches. Debating the constitutionality of flag burning on Firing Line, Buckley told Glasser something to the effect that the “average American” has a visceral reaction to the desecration of the Stars and Stripes

Though he fully agrees with the politics and views of the new ACLU he still feels like what it is doing is wrong despite the current political orthodoxy being ascendant being what he was working towards all those decades previously. He even admits this, that his motivation was ethnic. Back then speech they liked benefited from unrestricted freedom of speech. (And if their point was mad all the clearer by defending a KKK march so be it, they knew the KKK wasn’t making a comeback) Today speech they don’t like is the kind which benefits from unrestricted freedom of speech and the who/whom underneath shows it’s true nature as they become advocates for speech and knowledge restriction.

But to Glasser we see he has internalised the moral superiority of ‘freedom of speech’ and so is incapable of truly letting it go or understanding this new context or his true motivations. He was never a supporting of freedom of speech anymore than Shahak was of an ‘open society’.

Or perhaps more interestingly, both Glasser and Shahak fear that this period of Jewish ascendancy is not on solid ground, the history of the Jews was never one of permanent ascendancy anywhere. Perhaps they fear pulling the sinews back too far, lest the arrow be pointed in their face next time. Shahak probably fears Israel’s floating of all Western morality, a morality which treats racism as the greatest sin chiefly authored by diaspora Jews, will make Israel’s fall from untouchable status that much harder when it comes. Better to have a country with lots of Jews among others (Or the potential for that to end up happening) than perhaps to lose it all. See also Bari Weiss giving up a very nice job at the NYT to protest wokeness despite being a liberal lesbian Jew but a turbo Zionist liberal lesbian Jew. This context, of course, was not reported, making the whole incident a very subtle insider signal.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

9.    Dumbo says:

Socialism and state atheism will.

LOL. Yeah, just like they did in the Soviet Union, right?

furthermore Abrahamic religions in order to exist must tolerate Judaism,

The only reason why Jews were excluded in ghettos (and in many cases expelled) from European countries from centuries was because of traditional Christianity (Catholic) being very wary of them. They returned with a vengeance with increased secularism.

Most Jews are atheists, by the way. Despite their weird traditional religion that only the Haredim follow.

• Replies: @anyone with a brain

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

10.  Anon[233] • Disclaimer says:

Not that I am siding with the Jews but doesn’t everyone do this to some extent? The Indian(of india) ethnnocentrism shown by every state and culture there makes the Jews look like the greatest individualist and to some extent so do the Chinese of China. The reason the Jews act this way is because they were always discriminated and just adopted this method far earlier in time. Everyone will act this way with the history they’ve had combined with the progression of time and society.

• LOL: Trinity

• Replies: @EuroNat@anyone with a brain@annamaria

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

11.  milosevic says:

Israel Shahak — Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years

https://archive.org/details/11ShahakJewishHistoryJewishReligion/

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

12.  Justrambling says:

With my scanty knowledge of Jewish history, I am in no position to challenge Quinn’s take on Shahak’s JHJR. The piece is so replete with scriptural quotes, of which I have been equally ignorant. Still, the information provided is at once instructive and revealing, on the evolution of Jewish scriptures and their massaging through the ages to sanitize them of their evil content. Scriptures are being doctored, not to present a more humane Jewishness but to ameliorate the intrinsic evil that has informed the devout followers of Judaism over millennia and still does – behind the scenes.

The extreme Jewish venom that Quinn shows must make the Muslim Koran seem like a children’s story book. One is left wondering about the evil of the American and European Christian goyim with the reins of power to be so easily taken in by the layers of lies fed them over a century or so (or more?). It simply beggars belief.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

13.  JessicaR says:

Of course, Shahak is right that such anti-Gentile provisions exist in Judaism. But as Baruch Kimmerling pointed out in his review of Shahak’s book, the proviso in Jewish law that one can be kind to non-Jews to avoid “hurt feelings” in fact offered a legal loophole to Jews who were predisposed to treat non-Jews well.

There are also modern groups of observant Jews like “Rabbis for Human Rights” that completely reject the kind of discrimination discussed in Shahak’s book.

The take-home message: Judaism is a large system with varying views, even among the Orthodox. While the existence of what the author describes should not be denied, one should also recognize the many interpretations of Judaism–even within Orthodoxy–that do not adhere to these racist formulations.

• Replies: @annamaria

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

14.  Ludwig Watzal says: • Website

According to one of the most outstanding Jewish scholars, a Jew has a license to murder, rape, and molest children as long as the victim is a gentile, writes Spencer J. Quincy, reviewing Israel Shahak’s book “Jewish History, Jewish Religion. The Weight of Three Thousand Years.” Could that explain Jeffrey Epstein’s perversities mistreating under-aged girls and his mistress Ghislaine Maxwell’s helping hand in it because of their Jewishness? All jokes aside!

Israel Shahak’s writings are more important than the iniquities of these two Jewish sex offenders. “Open Secrets” explains Israel’s obsession with Iran, which challenges the Zionist’s quest for hegemony from Morocco to Iran. https://between-the-lines-ludwig-watzal.blogspot.com/2010/05/open-secrets-israel-shahak-revisited.html “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel,” co-authored by Nerton Mezvinsky, shows how orthodox greed creeps into all walks of Israel society. http://www.watzal.com/Jewish_Fundamentalism_in_Israel.pdf

Israel Shahak was an outstanding scholar and an incorruptible personality.

Another renowned author is Professor Yakov M. Rabkin, who brought up a painful subject in his groundbreaking book “What is Modern Israel?” UNZ review should review also Shahak’s other books.

Below are more links to promote a better understanding of Shahak’s thinking.

https://between-the-lines-ludwig-watzal.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-memoriam-israel-shahak.html
http://www.watzal.com/Gedanken_ueber_Israel.pdf
https://taz.de/!1477487/
http://www.watzal.com/Israel_Entzionisierung.pdf
https://between-the-lines-ludwig-watzal.blogspot.com/2010/08/israels-zukunft-entzionisierung-und-die.html

• Thanks: RedpilledAF

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

15.  El Dato says:

Pompeo should be aerodropped into an arena of starved ISIS fanatics.

• Replies: @Kolya Krassotkin

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

16.  El Dato says:

Ouch time:

Aussie man banned from leaving Israel until year 9999

An Australian father says he’s forbidden from leaving Israel for any reason until December 31, 9999 unless he pays his Israeli ex-wife $2.4 million in future child support under a local divorce law.

Huppert told News.com.au that he’s been effectively “locked” in Israel since 2013, a year after he arrived in the Jewish state to reconnect with the two children he had with his former wife – an Israeli citizen. The kids were three months and five years old at the time.

Shortly after Huppert moved to Israel, the woman brought a case against him at a local religious court, which oversees issues such as marriage, divorce, child custody and child support payments. Ruling on the basis of Israeli divorce law, the court banned the Australian from leaving the country until he pays out a “future debt” in alimony payments for the entire duration of his two kids’ childhood.

Under the so-called “stay-of-exit order,” the man was ordered to pay 5,000 Israeli shekels (around $1,600) per month in child support for each of his children until they turn 18.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

17.  Proud_Srbin says:

Rabi Manis Friedman has turned my (FAKE/BIZARRE) opinion about Hebrew and Judaism 180 degrees, making it crystal CLEAR to ME(Human), disconnect of Zionism from Judaism.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/392729/jewish/About-Rabbi-Friedman.htm
His videos(YT) are mind openers.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

18.  EuroNat says:

Not that I am siding with the Jews but doesn’t everyone do this to some extent?

This is pure sophistry, yes you are shilling for Judea clearly. Good shilling, when the reason of antisemitism is clearly exposed (a mostly legitimate host reaction to a hostile culture based on Judaism, a chauvinistic antigentile and anti Christian religion) and the sources cannot be dismissed as antisemitic the spin of the PR experts and useful idiots is “but everyone does it to some extent!”

A bunch of American whites also assault, rob, kill and rape to some extent, yet blacks do it disproportionately.

Could this be the reason why people here complain often about blacks? understand now how moronic your sorry excuse of an apology is?

Classic “nothing to see here” defense. It is all relative, 2 Jews 3 opinions, there are bad apples in every bunch yada yada yada.

Everyone does it but few complain against the Hindu and Chinese stranglehold on the USG.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

19.  anyone with a brain says:

LOL. Yeah, just like they did in the Soviet Union, right?

Yes, the USSR had quotas on Jews in academia, and there was a large Jewish dissident movement trying to flee to Israel due to anti-semitism. After the fall of the USSR the Jewish oligarchs/vultures came in and dispossessed the people, Putin is way more friendly to Israel and Jewish power than any USSR leader. Compare Ukrainian SSR with Ukraine of today that has a Jewish media personality as president and a Jewish oligarch patron.

Socialism and state atheism is the only solution.

The only reason why Jews were excluded in ghettos (and in many cases expelled) from European countries from centuries was because of traditional Christianity (Catholic) being very wary of them.

Lies, had you read Shahak’s book you would know Jews were self-ghettoizing people, with accounts of ancient Romans complaining how Jews wouldn’t even eat with non-Jews.

By choosing to adopt semitic religion, you reject the true European(what Gilad Atzmon calls ‘Athenian’) way of critical thought and science. Jews believe what they believe because their religious leaders tells them to. Reject semitic ways of thought and believe what you believe because of first hand experience and reason.

No true European minded man can believe in semitic religions.

• Replies: @RockaBoatus

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

20.  HT says:

Because of their intelligence, they are clearly the most deadly form of parasite to a society. They have literally sucked the blood and the culture out of America and replaced it with the sewage they profit from.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

21.  anyone with a brain says:

but doesn’t everyone do this to some extent?

No, they are noble high minded people out there. And nepotism and such is terrible. It is even worse when ethnocentrist practice ethnocentrism while exhorting everyone else not to, and chastising people who aren’t.

A noble high-minded (but plagued with guilt and semitic religious nonsense that promotes guilt on the innocent, such as original sin, you don’t have to be a Christian believer to still have the Christian guilt complex in which the victims are pure saints while everyone is guilty of ‘original sin’) people are being taken advantage by ethnocentric chauvinist.

The atheist Soviets(and pre-1920’s American elites) had no qualms about putting quotas on Jewish admissions to elite universities and degree programs, and especially sensitive state secrets related positions. Some may find that abhorrent, but being denied those jobs and opportunities is not a violation of human rights, those Jews could find work in other fields, it is a much better alternative than doing nothing and then Jewish power developing to such a point that there will be backlash leading to concentration camps.

here is an interesting anecdote on why Jews were kept from diplomatic positions in the USSR

[MORE]

• Thanks: Sarah

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

22.  Kolya Krassotkin says:

Wrt to dropping Pompeo into an area of starved ISIS fanatics, it should have been done before he lost all that weight.

Dude had begun to look like he was trying to beat Chris Christie in The US’s Fattest Republican Contest.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

23.  Happy Tapir says:

I read this book a while back and found it very interesting. I like it’s literary and philosophical explication. For example at one point Shahak asks, how is it that Judaism is so racist when the Old Testament is so humanistic in its message? He answers rhetorically that rabbinical Judaism is not in fact based on the Old Testament but rather the Talmud, which was written during the Greek occupation and is influenced by Plato’s Republic which idealizes Sparta as the perfect state, with all other groups as helots serving the better of Sparta. Shahak also quotes Asimov and discusses literary.

• Replies: @saggy@mulga mumblebrain@Francis Miville

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

24.  Jon Chance says: • Website

What’s the difference between Judaism and any other mental illness?

Under the worst circumstances, perhaps even the best men and women behave like Jews.

The most practical and humane solution to Judaism is probably to neuter everyone who consistently behaves like a Jew and deport them to Birobidzhan.

If someone establishes a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization called United Against Judaism, will the IRS respect its tax-exempt status?

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

25.  Bardon Kaldian says:

Shahak is generally correct, but he exposes Jewish shadow, in Jungian parlance- not the entire edifice of Judaism.

My chief objection to Judaist religious culture is that is is, basically- boring. This is a religion without afterlife, I mean normative Judaism, not various heretics. And this is boring & dull.

For anyone who wants a deeper analysis of historical Judaism & its antagonistic nature, I’d recommend Laqueur and Lindemann.



https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/bafykbzacecd42tp2k6odmlxpc6q7xdgumdjxlxs5qd3la6im52o35xmnepd5y?filename=Walter%20Laqueur%20-%20The%20Changing%20Face%20of%20Anti-Semitism_%20From%20Ancient%20Times%20to%20the%20Present%20Day-Oxford%20University%20Press%20%282008%29.pdf

[MORE]

• Replies: @Jon Chance

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

26.  annamaria says:Next New Comment

Treason. They are gleefully committing treason for getting personal comforts.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

Subscribe to New Columns

27.  Iva says:Next New Comment

The problem with Jews is that they are much more anti-gentile , and this is normal and justified to them , then gentile are anti-semites. However, they constantly screaming about antisemitism.

• Disagree: Trinity

• Replies: @Trinity@mulga mumblebrain

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

28.  annamaria says:Next New Comment

“they were always discriminated…”
— Is this why “they” have comprised a law demanding to kill a raped child?

What other religions are so viciously subhuman in their relations to the host nations? How many nations had it enough – 109? http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/expelled.htm
https://enigmachannel.wordpress.com/2015/06/10/the-worlds-most-evil-woman/

The problem was, and is, that “they” have been always barbaric. The whole Jewish civilization is condensed into the codex of hate and arrogance. This is an internal problem. Don’t even try to put the blame on others, whether the people in the Middle East, Central Asia, Europe, or the US.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

29.  Jon Chance says: • WebsiteNext New Comment

Thank you for providing yet more examples of the most extreme and obvious Jewish hatred of Gentiles.

But Jewish hatred of Gentiles is only one example of the numerous fundamental problems with Judaism.

Extreme Judaism is less dangerous than moderate Judaism because extremities are easier to identify and isolate.

When Judaism morphs into “secular” ideologies such as socialism, it becomes far more dangerous than a handful of blatant religious fanatics residing in ghettos.

Why do the academic resources you’re recommending confuse the issues with misleading commentary about “Judeo-Christian” ethics, false assumptions about “The Holocaust”, and fraudulent terminology such as “antisemitism”?

The most damaging aspect of Judaism and other ideologies derived from “The Old Testament” is not the Terrorist Theocracy of Israel, but the way British Jews have hijacked the English language and dumbed-down the world with their fraudulent terminology based on fake “history”.

Neither the Jewish problem nor any other serious issue of public policy can be meaningfully addressed without fully exposing the Holy Hoax and other foundational myths perpetuated by Jews and their useful idiots.

Perhaps the most relevant work on this subject is 1984 by George Orwell.

What’s the difference between Judaism and Oligarchical Collectivism?

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

30.  conatus says:Next New Comment

Almost nine years ago a commenter on another cite , Astraea Shaw said this:

“Imagine being born from a tense aggressive woman and then, throughout your childhood being kept tense and nervous and aggressive yourself because you are told a hundred times a day that the whole World hates you – that is, all of the rest of Humanity hates you, roughly seven or eight billion Human Beings hate you1 First of all with the hormones which cause aggressive behavior flooding you in utero and then the brainwashing, what chance do you have to be a normal human person? Not much. You are sick. On top of all that you are told that you are superior. How confusing! Then you understand that normal human beings are just cattle actually, and that they are created entirely for your use and they have no other purpose1 Obviously you are very sick indeed. Compassion is bred out of you and you have no conscience nor any shame. You cover the actual feelings of inferiority by being arrogant and you have no capacity or the ability to REASON. How can you? You are living in a World of Human Beings – so many of them, and you are not allowed to like them even. You are basically psychopathic or sociopathic. How could you be anything else. Dignity and honour are completely outside of the experience of these benighted people.”

• Thanks: RedpilledAF

• Replies: @Mefobills

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

31.  annamaria says:Next New Comment

Yet you teach your children the virtue of mass murder of non-Jews.
Every year the barbaric stories of Purim, complete with cookies in the form of a human ear, are celebrated in the kindergartens, schools, and homes of the allegedly “moral” and “most victimized” followers of Judaic traditions.

Literally translated as “Haman’s ears” … the pastries celebrate the cutting off of the wicked man’s ears before he was hanged.

The “wicked man” was Persian, and the murderers were Jews weaseled into his native Persia. Disgusting.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

32.  Desert Fox says:Next New Comment

Recommend this book, The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, it can be had on amazon and also recommend googling and reading the Protocols of Zion.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

33.  Rev. Spooner says:Next New Comment

The second choice is dependent on a honest examination of its Jewish past, on the admission that Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism exist, and on a honest examination of the attitudes of Judaism towards non-Jews.

Now that’s a known to all.
What has rung a bell for me is radical Sunni Islam, more the Saudi version. They have the same hatred of the other, and call for who should be killed.
But there’s a difference. The murderous impulse that’s evident in Wahabbism will die out shortly with the demise of the Saudis. And that’s a given.
The Jews meanwhile will carry on a more subtle monetary warfare that’s beyond most people’s comprehension.
I think they have won in the West as well as in India, Australia and New Zealand.
China will be tough for them.
To infiltrate China they have some chinese looking so called “lost tribe” from north east that they have imported from india.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

34.  Sick of Orcs says:Next New Comment

With apologies to G. Carlin.

It’s a BIG club, goyim, and you ain’t in it.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

35.  saggy says: • WebsiteNext New Comment

For example at one point Shahak asks, how is it that Judaism is so racist when the Old Testament is so humanistic in its message?

I think you’ve remembered wrong, if I’m wrong I’d like to see the quote. The Torah, or Old Testament, makes the Talmud look tame and humoristic by comparison, it is matter-of-factly genocidal and blood-thirsty throughout, as the book ‘God, the Most Unpleasant Character in All Fiction’ points out … some highlights are given  here



Video Link

While  Shahak’s book is revelatory, the bad news is that Shahak was a full supporter of the holohoax.

• Replies: @Happy Tapir

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

36.  RockaBoatus says:Next New Comment

“No true European minded man can believe in semitic religions” – Oh yeah, for sure. Yep, all those Europeans throughout the centuries who adhered to Christianity were not “true European minded” people. Thanks for clarifying the matter.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

37.  job says:Next New Comment

but where is Gilad Atzmon?

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

38.  Mevashir says:Next New Comment

Yet you teach your children the virtue of mass murder of non-Jews.
Every year the barbaric stories of Purim, complete with cookies in the form of a human ear, are celebrated in the kindergartens, schools, and homes of the allegedly “moral” and “most victimized” followers of Judaic traditions.

Literally translated as “Haman’s ears” … the pastries celebrate the cutting off of the wicked man’s ears before he was hanged.

The “wicked man” was Persian, and the murderers were Jews weaseled into his native Persia. Disgusting.

Your comment is one big lie after another:

1. The Jews were in Persia courtesy of the Babylonian conquest and destruction of their homeland, and their subsequent captivity, not due to being “weaseled” anywhere.

2. The war depicted in the Book of Esther was a war of self-defense against a genocidal plan hatched by the Persian Prime Minister with the unwitting complicity of the Emperor. The Jews were exercising their 2nd amendment rights. They didn’t attack you so why are you so offended?

3. The key to the story is that the Emperor could not rescind an earlier decree, in this cause permitting the genocide. All he could do was to authorize the Jews to defend themselves, thus setting the stage for a winner take all battle that the Jews won.

4. An excellent movie about this story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4saPofrlbA

Gary Demar is a bible teacher who argues that the war of Gog and Magog prophesied in the Book of Ezekiel actually took place in the Book of Esther during the struggle between the Jews of Persia and the followers of Haman. It’s a most ingenious idea that negates the worst forms of contemporary Christian-Zionist apocalypticism:

[MORE]

• Replies: @anonymous

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

39.  Trinity says:Next New Comment

Damn, meant to hit agree instead of disagree to your post. I couldn’t agree more with your post.

Jews, along with their pet negroes are the most hateful and racist people on the planet. Of course the Jew is the heavyweight champion when it comes to hate and racism, the Jew has no equal when it comes to hate, racism, and crimes against humanity. For the most part it appears the so called religion of Judaism is nothing more than a farce.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

40.  Happy Tapir says:Next New Comment

I thought that myself actually. But I’m pretty sure that’s what Shahak wrote. Maybe you could say relatively humanistic compared to the Talmud. The Hebrew prophets are very universal in their message.

• Replies: @saggy

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

41.  Mefobills says:Next New Comment

Sociopaths are made:

You are living in a World of Human Beings – so many of them, and you are not allowed to like them even. You are basically psychopathic or sociopathic. How could you be anything else. Dignity and honour are completely outside of the experience of these benighted people.”

Sociopath:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/sociopathy

Sociopathy refers to a pattern of antisocial behaviors and attitudes, including manipulation, deceit, aggression, and a lack of empathy for others. Sociopathy is a non-diagnostic term, and it is not synonymous with “psychopathy,” though the overlap leads to frequent confusion. Sociopaths may or may not break the law, but by exploiting and manipulating others, they violate the trust that the human enterprise runs on.

Being fed Jewish narrative from birth creates sociopaths. Freedom of religion was a profound mistake by the founders. Maybe they thought the cults could not withstand first amendment scrutiny?

All religions can be analyzed for trigger words and sociopathic conditioning.

• Replies: @mulga mumblebrain

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

42.  Chris Moore says: • WebsiteNext New Comment

Ethno-nationalism will not solve the Jewish question. Socialism and state atheism will. Any other course of action will permit the existence of large private wealth and that of course will attract the Jews, furthermore Abrahamic religions in order to exist must tolerate Judaism, but not necessarily Judaism tolerate nor respect its religious sects(Christianity and Islam).

You Marxist-Zionists are hilarious. Christianity solved the “Jewish question” for 2000 years, including the Zionist slave trade problem in the US. It’s only when you Marxist-Zionists fully infiltrated America and started World Wars that the Jewish question came up again. (In the US, it really should have come up again after the Civil War, which would have spared Western Civ WW1 and WW2, and might have if Lincoln wasn’t shot by a deranged, mentally ill, pro-slavery thespian who loved the Hebrew Bible.)

What you Marxist-Zionists call “anti-Semitic Christianity” solved it once, and it will again.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

43.  anon[376] • Disclaimer says:Next New Comment

Shahak is full of shit and i’m a nazi.

1. all jews were orthodox until 1800.

2. orthodox judaism is most akin to john calvin’s geneva “precisianism”. it’s like if obsessive compulsive disorder was a religion.

3. the jealous God became the christian and muslim God, and thus judaism has become more a family than a religion as some haredi jews say themselves. and “judaizers” were still a thing in the dark ages.

recall: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

judaism went from universal in the time of jesus to particular today. there was one proselyte frequently quoted in the mishnah, onkelos.

but the idea that whoever has a jewish mother is jewish, the mother the nation, the father the tribe, etc. is a conflation of religion and blood ala nazism. the chosen people idea is evil. and so said soros’s hero popper. and this evil idea has evil consequences.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

44.  mulga mumblebrain says:Next New Comment

Instead the cult of sociopaths has triumphed, through straight bribery, blackmail and ruthless propaganda, and it is the First Amendment that went, instead. Surely one can see the Divine Hand at work here.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

45.  mulga mumblebrain says:Next New Comment

As an elderly survivor of the Nazi Judeocide once observed, ‘Once ‘antisemites’ were people who hated Jews, but now they are people who Jews hate’.

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

46.  mulga mumblebrain says:Next New Comment

The Old Testament/Torah, the oldest extant description of genocide, its ways and means, and numerous exhortations to commit it and two great ‘religious’ celebrations, Passover and Purim, both celebrating genocide of the Israelites ‘enemies’ (definitely innocents in the Passover case, probably in the case of Purim, although both are, of course, mythical wish-fulfillment), ‘humanistic’?

• Thanks: Sarah

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

47.  Anonymous[339] • Disclaimer says:Next New Comment

Can’t live them and can’t live without them. What are we to do?

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

48.  anonymous[214] • Disclaimer says:Next New Comment

Your comment is one big lie pile of bovine feces after another:

In the time of Esther and her uncle Mordecai, the pimp-spy-snitch-murderer, the Persian leadership and people had aided the Hebrews to return to their land and rebuild it. Persians even gave them money to do so.

Esther & Mordechai chose to remain where the livin’ was easier.

Jews murdered innocent Persians — people who had aided and sheltered Jews — out of Jewish desire to take the good stuff that other people had.

Spots, leopards,
so it goes

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

49.  Steve Naidamast says:Next New Comment

Though I did not read the book under review here, I have read Shahak’s, “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel”, which literally makes Christian Fundamentalists in the United States look like the bastions of pure logic.

“Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel” is a searing inside look at how the present-day right in Israel along with its ultra-orthodox allies have fomented and promoted the categorically absurd belief system that even modern Judaism has become over so many years.

However, to get to the current point in time took more than the earlier fringe Israeli Right-Wing as it was primarily prior to the Netanyahu years. What it took was the Israeli Left, which has historically been the bulk of Jewish political thinking. And it was the Jewish Left that were the founders of the Israeli state.

For such an understanding, one has to read Tikva Honig-Parnass’ book, “False Prophets of Peace”, in which she describes a Left leaning political ideology that literally designed a legal system, first predicated on classic Judaic hatred for gentiles and Arabs, but second, twisted to such an extent in order to make the development of modern law a study in convoluted irrationality.

For example, everyone here knows how often Israeli promoters have stated that Israel is the only democracy in the Mid East. Well like Shahak’s studies in the Jewish Religion, Parnass demonstrates the same zeal in demonstrating how limited such a statement in reality really is.

The idea that Israel is the only democracy in the Mid East is founded on a very basic construct, that the Israeli state has elections. The fact that Palestinians have no real voice in such elections and nor do many Gentiles living in Israel is completely ignored by the Israeli politicians and intelligentsia of the state, along with an overwhelming number of Israeli citizens.

Thus Parnass demonstrates that first the religion forced subordination to the community leaders but the political elite have now fashioned a political system predicated on sheer fantastical political thinking.

In short, most Israelis are simply bat-shit crazy who have enabled the development of a totally sociopathic state.

The downside is that sociopathology cannot be cured because of its generational development over so many years, whereas, psychopathology can be managed so that the individual psychopath can actually become a functioning and productive member of society…

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER

50.  Francis Miville says:Next New Comment

Shahak had a very cliché and inaccurate view of what Sparta stood for. The prime model for a totalitarian society based on mind control was Athens, not Sparta. In Sparta you were a good person if you physically fought for the good cause and proved it through acts of physical heroism : discussion about religious or philosophical ideas was otherwise absolutely free. In Athens you were a good person if the contents of your mind was political correctness and group think, everybody was constantly inquiring about the wrongness of the other’s ideas. You could otherwise behave as a perfect traitor to the common good or asshole if you uphold the common political correctness and submitted to the common mind control : actually there was no concept of res publica in Athens. No blows were barred in business and business was essentially spying and piracy.

There were many intellectual refugees and consciousness fleeing Athens to Sparta not to undergo Socrates’ fate, NEVER any known case of any one having taken refuge in the reverse direction. The proof and explanation of that is very straightforward : Peloponese had an economy based on the production of physical goods, both through agriculture and crafts, while Attica had an economy based on speculation alone as it lacked proper land for growing enough food and raw materials to make its crafts go. The only natural ressource it had was silver from the time the giant ore deposit of Laurion was discovered, which instantly turned Athens into a money-minting city for the whole Aegean sea region. The tutelary deity of Sparta was not Ares as is commonly and wrongly guessed in pop questionaries : it was Artemis, the goddess of natural order and natural fertility. Athena, most opposite, was the goddess of cunning (sophia : seing in the night without being seen) and dirty tricks (technai), both terms having been bowdlerized in translation as wisdom and arts.

Between the Helots and the warrior citizens, Sparta had a big middle class of people called the perioikoi, mostly prosperous small farmers and craftsmen who enjoyed full status as law-abiding inhabitants (the only thing they couldn’t do was voting), while in Athens outside the demos, which comprised about 13% of voting-age males of Attica (Athen’s suburbia) and 3% of the greater Athenian-ruled territory, people had zero rights and were subject to absolute arbitrary. There was no Athenian middle class majority as such, dirt-level poverty was the norm, while among the demos (not the people : the exact translation would be the party in the sense of former Eastern bloc countries, with the difference any form of productive work was considered as a blemish, not a virtue) one was called a poor man in need of community support because he could afford only seven slaves. In Sparta the lowest group, the swarthy Helots, comprised 25% of Peloponese about the same proportion as Blacks in states where they are traditionally present in the US. They were never slaves and despite their very low rank and the various humiliations they suffered from were entitled to 50% of the plus-value of their work. In Athens slaves were the majority, followed by the metics who were transitory guest workers.

Jews always admired Athens, not Sparta, as Athens the city of reference for the other Greek cities where Jews grew so prosperous, especially Alexandria, and had a morality ensconcing speculation as the highest occupation in life. Many Jews even believed they themselves had in reality founded the political system of Athens so as to educate and civilize the rest of Greece, that is to say make that whole white people most docile : Plato believed Athens had been made into a democracy by the “Phoenicians” (ho phoinikos mythos) with the difference he did not consider that influence to be positive but the beginning of the demise of the Greek race. Saint Paul believed in that rumor he never questioned but rather used for his propaganda (first the Jew, then the Greek… along a long pecking order).

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

51.  saggy says: • WebsiteNext New Comment

The Hebrew prophets are very universal in their message.

? …. here is 1 Samuel 15:3

Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

Here is popular rabbi Manis Friedman saying the same thing today …. https://www.haaretz.com/1.5062382

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

52.  milosevic says:Next New Comment

see here (http://daatemet.org.il/en/torah-talmud/daily-peppers/ ] for more pearls of Talmudic wisdom, including these burning issues:

— Is one who urinates from the roof of the synagogue permitted to hold his sexual organ?

— How should one remove a snake which sexually desires a woman and enters her sexual organ?

— On the Sabbath, should one use pottery or a stone to wipe the anus?

— Is one permitted to learn Torah in the presence of the odor of flatulence?

— Is it permissible for one to place his sexual organ into his own anus?

— If a person has sexual relations with his sister, and that same sister is also his aunt on his mother’s side, and his aunt on his father’s side, does that count as one sin, or three?

REPLYAGREE/DISAGREE/ETC. THIS COMMENTER THIS THREAD HIDE THREAD

53.  Trinity says:

White traitor trash have done more harm to America and Europe than all the smelly Jews and lying Dindus combined. Any way you slice it, it was greedy white traitor trash that are the main culprit in the destruction of the West.

Thank you, Woody, Cuckhill, Ike, FDR, Trump, Joey Biden, Willie, Dubya, Ronnie,etc.

 


No comments:

Post a Comment