'VIGILANTE' JEWS WILL SET FORTH A BATTLE PLAN

New York Post ^ | 6/16/02 | PHILIP MESSING

[kattracks]

June 16, 2002 -- The Jewish Defense Group - which says it wants to protect its neighborhood even as critics call them vigilantes looking to inflame tensions - will hit the streets today with its controversial armed patrols.

Leaders of the group last week raised the hackles of cops and other city leaders by vowing to patrol Jewish neighborhoods such as Borough Park and Flatbush.

[wotan]

What part of my answer didn't you understand? The Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that Jews who have converted to Christianity to no longer be Jews. Professing no belief in God is not the same as professing belief in a different god.

Why did they so rule? What was the legal or moral justification for a ruling that discriminates against "Jews for Jesus" in favor of Atheists?

Why are you so afraid of answering the question?

[monkeyshine]

I am not afraid of answering the question. I answered it directly, and I gave you what I thought was their justifaction. Apparantly contrary to your implication, I am not an Israeli nor a legal scholar and the first I heard of this is on this thread, so my answers are stabs in the dark.

That said, I think I answered your question already. They want Israel to be a Jewish state. I suppose they interpret it like this: A Jew who professes belief in no god is still a Jew, but a mistaken one. A Jew who professes belief in Jesus is no longer a Jew, and thereby loses the privelege of being called a Jew.

Think of it this way. As an American born in the USA, you have the right to be a communist or a national socialist or to be opposed to the Constitution of the USA. But if you go to China and declare your loyalty to China, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the State Department can revoke your American citizenship. Even though by Consitutional right as a natural born American you have the right to be a citizen, that right is not absolute. It can be revoked by your own actions by announcing loyalty to another nation. I suppose it's the same logic for them in Israel.

Notice that they don't discriminate against citizens who are already Israeli. Once an Israeli, you can choose to beleive in Jesus. They just wont extend the privelege of granting automatic citizenship to those who have renounced the national religion before attaining citizenship.

Now answer my questions: Why can't a person attain citizenship of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia? Why can't a person practice another religion besides Islam in these countries? Why is the death penalty imposed on those who convert away from Islam in these countries, or who attempt to convert Muslims?

[monkeyshine]

I might add that the definition of who is, and what makes, and what is, a Jew, is pretty much decided by the Jews themselves and nobody else. Many Jews don't think of themselves as just a religion, they think of themselves as a culture and a nation -- not necessarily in the sense of modern day nationstate, but as a nation nonetheless.

Since it is within their rights to decide the definitions of "Jew", it is within their rights to say that a person who declares loyalty to another religion is no longer a part of the Jewish religion OR the Jewish nation.

Especially considering that since many Christians believe that through Jesus is the only way to attain eternal life, Jews might consider such coverts as a 5th column within their nation, diluting and diverting their national interests and energies. And given the attempts to destroy the Jews through war, violence and conversion over time, I can imagine that most Jews would be sensitive to the attempts by Christians to destroy their religion one person at a time.

[Michael2001]

Because I'm sick of a very selective and self-serving history being brought up while discussing current events.

I am still impressed by how you managed to say something negative about Jews on a thread about a Baptist Pastor speaking out againt Islam.

I don't need to know what some Jews may or may not have done 50 years ago in Poland to know that these Jews in New York have a right to defend themselves. If you don't support these guys, you are joining forces with all those leftist Jewish groups you hate so much.

This country is under attack by the liberal left and from radical Islamics. You prefer to focus on the problem of the liberal left rather than of the Islamics, that's good, we need more people who are willing to challenge them. I wish we had more people with your passion. But why do you focus on the 5% of the left that are Jewish or have Jewish last names?

Instead of supporting a Jewish group that is on "our" side, like the Jews in this article; you prefer to bash them and bring up dirty old Jewish Communists who lived long before I (and possibly you) were born. Your tactics don't do anyone on our side any good.

[Michael2001]

Do you imagine a terror attack will be stopped by street patrols in Jewish areas? Concealed carry is good against a certain type of criminal: It would be good against black gangbangers, for example.

And if they stop a few of those "accidentally" while patrolling for Islamists this would be a bad thing. Obviously this is not the final solution to our problems. But it can help (especially if it works, and we can use this to support armed citizens elsewhere) and it definitely can't hurt. So why all the negativity?

[wotan]

OK, you seem to be saying: Jews fear Christians will contribute to the destruction of their religion based on historical bad relationships with Christians (and historical success of Christians in converting Jews maybe?). Therefore, it is legitimate to discriminate against Christians in immigration.

If so, isn't this a mistake on their part. Haven't atheists also had great success in leading Jews away from their religion. And haven't atheists had pretty terrible relationships with Jews, too. I am thinking here of persecution of religious Jews by the Communists and of Marx's extremely negative views of Jews.

[monkeyshine]

Not quite. I am saying that their law of return only applies to Jews. Former Jews do not count as Jews, in their eyes.

I don't think it's a mistake in the way you put it. Athiesm was a part of communism, and yes communism was devastating to the Jews of Europe because it enforced athiesm above Judaism. But the argument is not valid the other way around. One can be an athiest without believing that everyone must believe like you. One cannot be a communist without believing that everyone must believe like you.

[monkeyshine]

Correction: Yes, I am saying that, partially. Zionism is the movement for a Jewish national home. Zionists will be protective of the Jewishness of their home. They can still be pluralistic, democratic and tolerant, but they are under no obligation to accept anyone as a citizen. The USA would reserve the same right, perhaps through a different moral/philosophical filter, as do many European countries who are fearing the loss of their "national/ethnic purity" through immigration from Africa and the Middle East, just as many Middle Eastern countries will not extend citizenship to long time residents from Asian countries.

[Hornetsrule]

I never heard of him before

Yes, the ministry of lies is astoundingly effective!

A year ago I reread The Destructive-Labor Camps from The Gulag Archipelago Two, and noticed something I had missed on first reading 19 years before. On page 79 (paperback ed.) there are six individual photos of engineers of the Gulag - all six pictured were Jews. According to A. Solzhenitsyn, one, Naftaly Frenkel, was the prime mastermind of the Gulag camp system. (Solzhenitsyn identifies Frenkel as both Turk and Jew)

Now if Solzhenitsyn is correct, Frenkel was responsible for far more death and human suffering than even the infamous Adolf Eichmann... and who hasn't heard of Eichmann?

For more information I did a simple name search of Frenkel at Excite and got zero - NOTHING! Google was of little use also. (40 minutes ago Google had 10-15 relevant references of which, it appears, most are on "hate" sites.) Needless to say there were hundreds if not thousands of references to Eichmann.

Maybe you can shed some light on this. (post 248)

[LarryLied]

Google had 10-15 relevant references of which, it appears, most are on "hate" sites

That is the problem with trying to research the history of the Soviet Block. Many of those "hate sites" mix fact with fantasy in, my cynical side says, an attempt to discredit fact. Or there is simply little scholarly information available. A Lithuanian forum discusses the problem here

[dennisw]

Write a book about it and become famous. No one else has.

[wotan]

Thank you for your very honest answer.

[LarryLied]

The Ariel Center for Policy Research in Israel hasn't written a book on it but there is a good essay on the subject by Arieh Stav there. The title is: "Peace Now: The Latest Link in the Chain of Jewish Radicalism." (search on the title to find it) It is rough stuff, especially the parts about Mussolini. Stav sees left wing Jews as the ones who will destroy Israel.

[monkeyshine]

The left wing will destroy any country if not kept in check.

[LarryLied]

All of mankind has a propensity to elevate the most anti-human creatures to positions of power. Marxism has been the best selling form of tyranny in history. It is simply astounding that everyone does not see it.

[Hornetsrule]

Thanks for the two links.

I just now listened to the Stav essay - via TTS - and will get to the first site tomorrow.

[LarryLied]

Good site, isn't it? ACPR links to The Foundation for Constitutional Democracy which seeks to reform the Israel's system of government:

Strange as it may seem, the American Constitution—whose biblical roots are known to historians—is far more consistent with the Torah than Israel’s present form of government. Ceremonial laws aside, the Torah is itself a Written Constitution with institutional checks and balances. Indeed, its extensive protection of individual rights is the source of the American Bill of Rights.

Moreover, and contrary to the old British tradition, which fixes sovereignty in the State, the Torah posits the sovereignty of the People, of course under God. This does not mean theocracy. The rule of a priestly class over a "laity" is foreign to Judaic jurisprudence.

Ironically, whereas the American government was originally based on the Jewish conception of sovereignty, Israel’s present government is based on a non-Jewish conception of sovereignty!