Rabbi Meir Kahane, Zt"l
Posted on 03/22/2007 4:24:55 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator
`Am Yisra'el's legitimate and true leaders are not the government of the State of Israel (a "Hebrew-speaking Portugal," in the words of Rabbi Kahana'), America's "official Jewish community leaders," members of the "alphabet" organizations (here or abroad), advocates of ecumenicism and the notion that non-Jews need not give up their false religions to embrace the Noachide Laws. The true leaders of `Am Yisra'el always have been, are now, and always will be the authentic Orthodox rabbinate, the successors of Moses and the True Sanhedrion (which will be reinstated one day!).
Purely political Zionism is nothing but a big bust.
Ping.
Somewhat off. Buchanan considers America only fighting for America as the true conservative position. This excludes not only Israel but Korea, Formosa, Kosovo, etc. The Afghan war was America's war.
Pat Buchanan hates Jews. Period.
The fact that Buchanan puts national above religious loyalty illustrates that for him religion is primarily an ethno-national phenomenon--thus is preference for Protestant fellow-Europeans to Mexican co-religionists.
The only legitimate loyalty of every creature is to HaShem, the Creator. To put anything or anyone in His place (or to demand that He share one's loyalty) is nothing but idolatry.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
He says that Buchanan no more hates Israel than South Korea; however, you don't hear Buchanan both cutting off aid to South Korea and giving aid to North Korea. You do hear Buchanan urging America give foreign aid to Hamas.
Also, Pat gives the impression that he will go to war against Israel (if he had the power) if they dare try to defend themselves against Iran's upcoming plans to turn that nation into cinder ashes. He has never talked about going to war against South Korea if it makes a pre emptive move against North Korea. For an anti-Semite, attacking Israel makes plenty of sense. I'm sure if there was a Pres. Buchanan (G-d forbid) and the Arab states attacke the U.S., Pat would lob a nuke at them, but, also, lob one at Israel just for that it represents the Jews.
Worth noting that flows from Pat's view of America as a ruthless predator. Comrade Wolf. A view he shares with the good Mr. Putin.
And "true conservatives"
And Geroge Soros
Iran good, America bad.
In the 27 years since the Iranian Revolution, the United States has launched air strikes on Libya, invaded Grenada, put Marines in Lebanon and run air strikes in the Bekaa Valley and Chouf Mountains in retaliation for the Beirut bombing.We invaded Panama, launched Desert Storm to liberate Kuwait and put troops into Somalia. Under Clinton, we occupied Haiti, fired cruise missiles into Sudan, intervened in Bosnia, conducted bombing strikes on Iraq and launched a 78-day bombing campaign against Serbia, a nation that never attacked us. Then, we put troops into Kosovo.
After the Soviet Union stood down in Eastern Europe, we moved NATO into Poland and the Baltic states and established U.S. bases in former provinces of Russia's in Central Asia.
Under Bush II, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, though it appears Saddam neither had weapons of mass destruction nor played a role in 9-11.
Yet, in this same quarter century when the U.S. military has been so busy it is said to be overstretched and exhausted, Iran has invaded not one neighbor and fought but one war: an 8-year war with Iraq where she was the victim of aggression. And in that war of aggression against Iran, we supported the aggressor.
Hence, when Iran says that even as we have grievances against her, she has grievances against us, does Iran not have at least a small point? And when Russian President Putin calls Bush's America "Comrade Wolf," does he not have at least a small patch of ground on which to stand?
A "true conservative America Firster" who compares America to Iran in those terms, using Putin's termonology, fits right in with Soros and Code Pink.
And yes, they're Americans too.
Perhaps one day America will be ruled by a leader of Pat's liking. A Franco, a Pinochet, a true soldier-patriot. One to save the corrupt people from themselves.
To compare Pat Buchanan to Pinochet and Franco is an insult to the latter two who, so far as I know, were not anti-Semitic (Franco, though not perfect, saved many Jewish lives during WWII). As a matter of fact, Mussolini wasn't anti-Semitic until he came under Hitler's influence (when he became a total stooge, closing Italy off for Jewish refugees and leaving them to the tender mercies of the Nazis).
But there is something very interesting in your suggestion. American "palaeocons" differ from their counterparts in other parts of the world in one major way: American palaeos favor extreme decentralization and "states' rights" whereas their counterparts everywhere else are extreme centralists and statists (witness how most American palaeos sound like a combination of John C. Calhoun and Ayn Rand rather than any "nationalist" from any other nation, even going so far as to accuse President Bush of "fascism"). So if one of their own were to take over the US would he immediately give it all away to fifty sovereign states, or would he backpeddly and create a centralized fascist state???
I didn't say there was. What I am condemning is the sort of pagan henotheism/polytheism that rejects a universal G-d in favor of a localized idol, which is what palaeconservative chr*stianity does.
During the Middle Ages there were no strong states. Instead people were primarily citezens/subjects of the Church, the empire (which Buchanan regards as a term of opprobrium), a local city/lord, or a craft guild. Modern nationalism--including the supposedly "reactionary" kind--is a very modern phenomenon.
Please note also that the "nationalists" I'm opposing are all uniformly hostile to one and only one form of nationalism--Jewish nationalism. This is for the simple reason that Israel's connection to the True Objective G-d threaten their localized, henotheistic worldview.
But G-d shares loyalty with no one or nothing. It is "palaeo" chr*stianity that insists (in the name of the "trinity") on the validity of multiple identities and loyalties.
"This applies to Foxman, Dershowitz, Lantos, Peretz, Schumer, and all the rest. Don't be surprised when all these liberals go to AIPAC and sound like Rabbi Me'ir Kahana' (zt"l, Hy"d)."
Halevei.
You forgot Lieberman. Israel is lucky to have these friends.
Kahane bump!
Any Jew - or anyone else for that matter - who regards support for Israel as the "true" liberal position has been sleeping for the last fifty years or so. Today's "liberals," typified by the extremely dangerous Soros, generally ascribe to the assinine notions that Israel is the "oppressor" of the "Palestinians," and that any Palistinian claim or desire against Israel, no matter how absurd, should be looked at with favor.
I wouldn't vote for either, but then elections might not be on their agenda.
Both are better men that Pat is. I doubt either one would plow anti-Semitism to achieve power and Franco even saved some Jews during the holocaust.
Franco was part Jewish (a fact kept from Hitler).
If Soros is the main money man for the RATs and hates Jews and Israel, someone tell me why the majority of US Jews vote for RATs? It's a major puzzle. As for Pinochet, he was a hero for most Chilenos--the man who stopped the Commies from taking over Chile. RATs hate Pinochet since they too are Commies at heart and prove it every day.
As for Pinochet, I don't see any relevance of him to this topic of Soros and Israel, so you'd best direct your comments to the posters who brought his name into the discussion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.