Posted on 06/08/2010 8:47:27 PM PDT by nickcarraway
A number of Goldblog readers have written to ask, in essence, why the big deal over batty Helen Thomas? What is so especially offensive about her comments (comments that now seem to have gotten her fired)? I think the answer is fairly obvious. While it is one thing (not a good thing, of course) to argue in euphemism for the destruction of Israel by invoking the so-called one-state solution, it is quite another to advocate for the "return" of Israeli Jews to their German and Polish homelands, not merely because such advocacy is almost comically absurd and cruel (or, at the very least, stunningly ignorant of recent European history) but because this argument denies to Jews what Helen Thomas, and people like Helen Thomas, want to grant the Palestinians: Recognition that they comprise, collectively, a nation.
The Jews, of course, are an ancient nation, a nation whose history took place in a sliver of land called Israel. Helen Thomas's argument, if you can call it an argument, centers on the pernicious belief that Jews are strangers in a place called "Palestine." Palestine, of course, is the name that was given by the Romans to the Land of Israel precisely in order to sever the connection between the Jews and their homeland. Helen Thomas, and people like her, are thus soldiers in a (Roman-inspired) war against history.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Now that is probably the most interesting thing I have read resulting from the Helen Thomas outing.
WHY did the Romans have it in for the Jews? Was it because they were mono-theists?
This was a great post, because it makes me want to find out more!
Helen Thomas was an adult in WWII and knew very well what happened to Jews in Germany or Poland at that time. Her comment was a malignant act of Jew baiting.
The irony is that she comes from Lebanese Christians who basically are being ethnically cleansed from Lebanon by militant Muslims.
Yes. Usually, when one people conquered another, the victorious made the subject group worship their gods. That Jews refused to worship other any god but their own.
So she basically has Stockholm Syndrome.
I don’t know. Maybe she figures Lebanese Christians would do better if Israel wasn’t around, maybe she doesn’t give a flip, but her position makes no sense given her background.
>>>WHY did the Romans have it in for the Jews? Was it because they were mono-theists?<<<
The short version of the answer is that the Romans insisted on displaying the bust of the emperor in public and proclaiming him to be one of the gods, to which the Jews answered, “No thanks, we already have one.”
It’s also good to keep in mind that Jews made up about 10 percent of the Roman population, so they were able to make a fair amount of noise when they were displeased.
There were several Judean wars, the Romans finally had enough, and they nuked the place, first century style, sending my ancestors to Russia.
Interestingly enough, I married a woman who looks just like the girls on the frescos in the Roman villas - almond eyes, curled hair - whose ancestors had been in Italy for thousands of years. Strange how things work out.
The Romans were pagans and quite willing to let people worship whichever gods they wanted. Part of classical Hellenistic paganism was tolerance towards many different beliefs. And, in fact, many "foreign" religions returned to Rome and ended up with temples and adherents there.
I have never read that the Romans wanted the Jews to worship their gods, and seeing aas the Romans had all different gods, what difference would one more make.
What is the source for your claim?
She is expressing the liberal worldview.
Note the lack of condemnation from the left side of the aisle — the Party of Tolerance has a long record and from that long record, obviously agrees with Helen.
By the looks of her, she's been a Roman foot-soldier since before Caesar invented his salad.
The Jews attempted several revolts against Roman rule. The Romans responded with dispersal of the Jews, the diaspora, and importing gentiles. The Roman Empire also changed the name from Judea to Palestine to de-emphasize the Jewish heritage.
Thanks all for filling me in!
Really my ancient history is weak.
Actually, there were 5 major revolts, the last one in 617CE agains the Eastern Roman Empire.
Now THAT is interesting... not the least of which is the implication that there were still Jews living in their ancestral homeland five hundred years after the Diaspora.
To which I give Helen Thomas the middle finger salute.
Thanks for the info.
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.