Posted on 12/11/2002 1:09:35 AM PST by Abar
Editorials & Opinion: Tuesday, December 03, 2002
Froma Harrop/Syndicated columnist
Spare Jews (and others) the cult of victimization
A day without reading a quote from Abe Foxman is a day without reading the newspaper. The head of the Anti-Defamation League is in there without fail, purportedly defending Jews against disparagement. Now and then he has something real to discuss, but as often as not he must fill the space by magnifying slights and sometimes manufacturing them.
Foxman has become a major irritant to many non-Jews, but he drives Jews even more nuts. I'm Jewish and don't recall voting for any spokesman. And I have lots of company in finding Abe Foxman's daily pronouncements to be intensely aggravating.
Case in point is his recent carping on Chevrolet's sponsorship of a Christian music-and-worship tour. What do the media do but speed-dial Foxman, who of course has comment. "I'm a little uncomfortable with a major commercial venture going into propagating religion," he says. Oh? "Evangelical Christians believe they have the truth, so they are selling a product because it's God's product? I find it troubling." Why is that your business?
If anyone has an issue here, it is Christians some of whom might not want religious worship tied in with moving Silverados off the lot. But whether they consider it acceptable or not is strictly their call. Chevrolet has decided to ignore Foxman, which is the right response. (My own feeling at being left out of an advertising campaign is nothing less than gratitude.)
Nearly every religious and ethnic category now has a group of paid defenders looking to justify their continued employment. In an excellent article at www.reason.com, "E Pluribus Umbrage," Tim Cavanaugh describes "a Mad Monster Party of advocacy groups dedicated to rebutting every real and imagined racial or ethnic slur." The anti-defamation industry, he writes, "attracts the talented and the warped, passionate crusaders and transparent self- promoters."
There are anti-defamation groups supposedly representing Mexicans, Italians, Latvians, Arabs, Poles, Celts and just about everyone else who can be hyphenated to "American." American Hindus Against Defamation has protested the inclusion of Sanskrit shlokas (hymns) in an orgy scene in the movie "Eyes Wide Shut." You noticed the shlokas, of course.
Cavanaugh pays special attention to the Catholic League, which started off as an advocate of socially conservative views but has turned into "the champion of an abused religious sect in a relentlessly bigoted environment." Catholic League President William Donohue likes to call anti-Catholicism the "anti-Semitism of the elites" avoiding the painful reality that his main foes are liberal Catholics.
The cult of victimization clearly attracts a diverse following, but with $40 million a year to work with and an especially tragic history to exploit, Foxman's ADL stands out. While many of its campaigns rate as trivial the Anti-Defamation League actually protested the naming of Hurricane Israel some are downright appalling.
In 1994, the ADL stupidly rushed into the center of a feud over fighting dogs and missing ornamental rocks in a Denver suburb. In it, the ADL immediately backed a Jewish couple's charges that their neighbors were vicious anti- Semites. The neighbors, subjected to hate mail, death threats and the loss of a job, sued the couple and the ADL for defamation. Last year, a federal judge upheld most of a $10 million judgment against the ADL.
Then there was Foxman's famous letter to President Clinton supporting a pardon for Marc Rich, the fugitive crook. Rich had sent the ADL a $100,000 donation a few weeks earlier. Foxman expressed hurt and shock at the insinuation, totally believable, that he had been bought.
The ADL's most toxic contributions are the "rising tide of anti-Semitism" letters sent to potential contributors. I've been on those mailing lists and can testify to the monthly doses of skinheads and Nazi insignia meant to frighten mostly older Jews into writing checks.
As for the young people, defining Jewish identity as a torment of persecution and death sends them walking out the door. What can they do when Foxman issues batty warnings about a "big eruption" of anti-Semitism in New York, and the media treat him not as a lunatic or publicity hound, but as a serious spokesman?
The media really have to help out, because Foxman has no "off" switch. Reporters can be lazy, and there are the pressures of the slow news day. But they should question whether it's their job to slake a man's unquenchable thirst for media attention.
Jews are now into the eight-night festival of Hanukkah. Few gifts would be more appreciated than eight consecutive days of no Abe Foxman.
Providence Journal columnist Froma Harrop's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is fharrop@projo.com.
Your description was perfect! Right on target!!! They had found these scuffy little nomadic tribes around the world and I'll be dam#ed if they were not all pieces of the lost tribes! And Stacy Keach narrated it with a straight face. We just laughed and laughed it was such a put up deal.
They have to sell this pitch to kids I guess because no adult would be dumb enough to believe it. Don't you just have to guess where the money came from for this propaganda "search"? LOL.
Bring out your little dancing gif and some more slander. But seriously, you haven't been answering questionng. Try this:
It doesn't take a lot of imagination to figure out in whose interest it is that the Lost Tribes never be found.
Whose best interests would that be for? Come on, say it.
EZEKIEL 37:15-22 FYI
Ezekiel 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows (friend*), and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
Strong's:
02270 chaver {khaw-vare'}
from 02266; TWOT - 598c
AV - companions 7, fellow 4, knit together 1; 12
adj
1) united
n m
2) associate, fellow, worshippers
3) companion
NTC Hebrew - English Dictionary:
[chaver] 1 friend, comrade. 2 partner, associate. 3 fellow, member. 4 scholar
Thank You. I'm not sure I deserve all that. (But the check is in the mail.) {ggg}.
I bought a copy of this CD (The Myth of The Lost Tribes of Israel aka Beyond The Sambatyon) several years ago to examine it and had the same reaction. Slick Propaganda masquerading as a serious and honest search, just like the TV specials with Mr. Spock and others.
They must not have sold many as they have dumping them on eBay now some time. OTOH maybe they are being produced and dumped at cost to "buy market share". {ggg}.
With all those embarrassing Hebrew words in European languages? It's just a coincidence that Gaelic and Hebrew are syntactly interchangeable.
Ironically enough, there is reasonably good evidence that the Pashtan of Afghanistan are (at least some) the LTs.
Not ironic at all. We have a population problem, and remember all the Israelites have at least a racial similarity since they are from one partiachial line.
Since the LT's are part of history and you're interested in history, not the Bible, there are a few facts that have to be considered about the LT's. If your interested in the LTs as purely historical objects, you must know about when they were captured and we know when they released themselves from tablets uncovered in Ninivah, discovered in 1850 and translations published in 1930.
The tribes were placed on Assyria's northern border as a buffer against invaders. When they won their freedom allied with other peoples in the same fix, they did not go home. This can only mean they didn't go back southward.
West would have led to Europe. North would have led into Europe. East would have led them into Asia, and oddly enough there are some traces of them there, but nowhere near the traces in Europe and not enough to assume a large portion went east (note: in order to defeat the Assyrian army even with allies, there had to be a lot of Israelite fighting men, which you x6 to get the total population including women, children, old folks, infirm, crippled, and nother non-combatants).
So we have suspicious sighting near the scene of the crime. There has been discussion of the proto celts already there in Europe, the biggest finds being the Haalstadt and Le Tene sites. There is evidence that many Israelites left Egypt long before the exodus by ship. They did not go home. Again, Europe is the most likely direction.
But even if there were people in Europe, proto-celts, that were not Israelites, there is plenty of evidence the Israelite took over when they got there, as I have mentioned. That evidence is records in Ireland, Scotland, England, and other places that have links back to the Israelites.
There even ancient records of lineages all the back to David. "Ancient", that means they weren't currently written forgeries; they actually in stone and parchment archives.
(But it's strange, don't you think, about those proto-celts, that people can just grow up out of the ground like that, not coming from anywhere?)
How is it that you know all this historical support (written down and verified) and you still rely on wayward particles here and there to defeat it?
I guess that's what puzzles me about you objective historians, interested in Israel merely because of their historical existence.
Since the Assyrians had overextended themselves by invading Egypt, their major military assets were deployed there. This weakened their borders with the Medes and Persians protected in some measure by the Northern Kingdom Israelites who were supposed to be acting as buffers. The Israelites generally got along OK with the Medes and Persians. Everyone understood the game.
But when the Assyrians got in trouble in Egypt they all saw their chance. The Israelites turned from being in the way of the Medes and Persians to joining them, and that was the beginning of the end for Assyria. The trick now was for the Israelites to get out of the way and let the others have their long desired victory over Assyria.
As you pointed out, at this point the Israelites could not escape back towards home in Canaan. So "they took council among themselves" and decided not to even try since they didn't much care for their Southern Kingdom cousins anyway. When they were anywhere close it was just fight, fight, fight. Besides, the Southern Kingdom had done them no favours with the Assyrians while they were in captivity. But that's another story for another time.
So the Israelites determined to get the Hell out of Dodge any way possible. The South & SW were blocked by the Assyrians and that war. The SE and E were blocked by the Medes and Persians who weren't real excited about having 6 MILLION Israelites traipsing through their territory on the way to who knows where. Besides, would you really trust 6 MILLION agitated Israelites to not try something funny after all those years in border tension? Only the NE, N and W were open for escape.
So "with great noise and confusion" it took "a year and a half" for MILLIONS of Israelites with their possessions to "pass through the headwaters" of the Tigris and Euphrates and make their way north through the Darial Pass (aka the Caucasian Gates) in the Caucasus Mountains. From there they headed west and northwest toward the otherwise mostly uninhabited area we call the Ukraine and Russian Steppes.
Most of the others went west past Lake Van and along the south coast of the Black Sea. Hundreds of years later some of their offspring as The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel were met by and corresponded with the Apostle Paul at places like Corinth, Phillipi, Galatia and Ephesus.
A few other Israelites escaped to the NE around the Caspian Sea. It is speculated that some of these may be ancestors of the Caucasians which are found in China. All in all, this was probably the greatest migration in the history of man.
>there had to be a lot of Israelite fighting men,
The largest military armada in world history was comprised of American, Canadian and British forces which landed at Normandy with 156,000 men on the first day. 25 days later total Allied forces landed in France was 660,000. The Israelites had 1,000,000 (1 MILLION) fighting men. We have to assume the Assyrians, Medes and Persians had even more. With all that vacant (and free) land available in uncharted, undeveloped and unpeopled Europe no wonder they heard the call of the west.
We know of no Century 21 or ReMAX offices in the Caucasus at that time, but there were undoubtedly Assyrian and other traders who traveled the routes and brought back stories. After all, the proto-Celts, the Israelites much older Israelite cousins from Egypt and Caanan were already busy at Hallstadt, Austria and elsewhere. The Assyrians were great business men and their was society quite developed for the time. They had one of historys great libraries at Ninevah where the 23,000 Assyrian Tablets were kept. Assyrians regarded business activity as so important to the economy that businessmen were exempt from Assyrian military service.
>which you x6 to get the total population including women, children, old folks, infirm, crippled, and nother non-combatants.
Some historians, archeologists and anthropologists include slaves in the x6, while others fudge it with a more arbitrary x7 to allow for possible slaves. Yes, the Bible says some Israelites did have slaves, we just don't know how many. In the course of history it was not uncommon for even some slaves to have slaves. How terribly un-PC that is to learn, but then we are shattering one delusion after another! {ggg}.
Owning slaves was far from the worst of the transgressions of ALL of the Israelites. That is, after all, why the North was being punished! It wouldn't be long until the South got theirs.
Faith vs. Fact is never an enriching discussion.
You didn't like faith so I gave you fact. I'm here to serve.
It is frustrating to contemplate the huge size of the "combined" 10 tribes which made up the Northern Kingdom in light of their erratic success in military ventures. The Romans and others noted (later) that while putting on a good act with naked warriors painted in bright colors, etc., these Celts were the gang that couldn't shoot straight. As great artists and craftsmen they seemed to be better lovers than fighters. They would rather argue than fight.
The Assyrians by contrast were great organizers and businessmen, and fierce warriors, a deadly combination weakened only by overconfidence. By sheer military skill (blitzkreig?) the Assyrians nibbled away at the Northern Kingdom in Canaan removing it piece by piece (perhaps tribe by tribe) over the years while the disorganized Israelites debated. A very much smaller but skilled Assyrian force could have prevailed both in the initial conquest and in keeping the Israelites under control as a buffer between the Medes and Persians. It doesn't take much of a force to keep unarmed and debilitated prisoners under control.
The Imaginative, technologically brilliant, but reputedly disorganized Celts were one of the great founding people of Europe. However, their lack of written records [ED: Were against their religion] has meant that their prevailing image comes from Ancient Greek or Roman obsrvers who were not kindly inclined toward them...
The one-sided picture of the barbaric, uncivilised and compulsively warlike Celts left by the Ancient Greeks and Romans failed to note what archeology later discovered; artifacts which showed that the Celts were intelligent, complex and wealthy people, whose art and technical skills were unsurpassed in prehistoric Europe.
The Celts were energetic traders, bartering salt, furs and gold for wine, oil, mirrors and luxury pottery with the Mediterranean peoples of southern Europe. They were establishing contact with the Greek colonies of the western Mediterranean as early as 600 BC, and their customers soon found that Celtic goods were worth acquiring. [ED: maybe they learned something about "international" business from the Assyrians.]
Trade made the Celts rich. ... wealth of gold and bronze objects ... many luxury items ... Their long, double-edged iron swords were decorated in Etruscan style or were taken from their links with southern Russia.
Celtic society was based on clans and blood ties [Ed: aka separate Tribes] with powerful princes and prosperous, outward-looking settlements which were frequently established on well-defended hilltops where strong forts were constructed.
The aristocracy was a warrior aristocracy. ... life was based on a patriarch in which households consisted of a man, his wives and their children and grandchildren.
Basically, the Celts were a farming society so that ownership of land, [ED: Ukraine, France, Holland, Denmark, England, Etc.] vested in their kin, was important to them. Mixed farming was the foundation of the economy. ... horses acquired great importance in Celtic life ... Caesar wrote of the great passion Celts felt towards them.
Druidism was established in Gaul ... around 100 BC. Druids taught that the human soul was immortal and subject to reincarnation. It was not a monotheistic religion, for the Celts had many Gods... Celtic gods and goddesses feature in many myths. One of the most powerful tells of the invasion of Ireland by Tuatha Da' Dannann, the People of the Goddess Danu [ED: named after the tribe of Dan?]
...the celts were warlike ... they were physically built for it .. generally tall and muscular.
...spread of Celts across Europe was probably achieved through a serious of aggressions...
...a great migration of Celtic tribes took place around 400 BC.. [ED: they were still in tribes. Had apparently not assimilated even among themselves.]
...Celtic warfare became virtually synonymous with fighting from chariots...
... some evidence the Celts fought naked and ... beheaded their enemies. No wonder even the Roman army feared them... [ED: Even though it usually kicked their heinies.]...
Potential beheading is a powerful motivator not to lose, even if your opponent is disorganized.
I don't know if you are aware that the northern kingdom was greatly weakened by a war with Syria. Syrian was also weakened. Then the Assyrians came in and first took out the Syrians. Next on the list were the weakend northerners and that's all she wrote.
Yes, and this came at a bad time. The split between the Kingdoms in 933 BC was not for nothing, and the North and South continued to battle. The first 80 years after the split was continuous warfare. The next 80 years was more or less peaceful. The final 50 years before the Assyrians took over there was intermittant war between the Kingdoms.
It was a time of constant stress, then came war with Syria on their north which lasted until 732 BC. Soon the Assyrians were on their border, and by 721 BC all traces of the Northern Kingdom were gone.
The Assyrians were at best simply encouraged by the South. At worst, they were substantially aided. To the extend the Assyrians were aided by the Southern Kingdom their job was simplified and their military needs were reduced.
I would like to hear more sometime about the real reaons why the north and south split.
Kind of says it all, doesn't it?
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.