Archive for the ‘Maimonides’ Category

Who Says Judaism Isn’t a Proselytizing System?

January 26, 2008

Contrary to common belief, proselytism is a very important part of Judaism. But the rabbis don’t seek new converts to Judaism. Judaism is only for “The Jews.” The rabbis have concocted a lower-tier religion for non-“Jews” whom they hold to be of a lower-tier species than so-called “Jews”.

From Rabbi Shlomo Riskin writing for the Jerusalem Post:

And Maimonides rules that only the Jews must keep the 613 commandments for ultimate “salvation”; it is enough for the gentile world to accept the Seven Noahide Laws of morality (Laws of Kings [Hilchot Melachim] 8,10).

But we certainly must proselytize every human being to keep those seven laws – do not worship an idol, do not misuse God’s Name, do not murder, do not commit licentious sexual acts, do not steal, respect all creatures, and create a judicial system to enforce the first six laws. (Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, “Parashat Yitro: Every Knee Shall Bend,” Jerusalem Post, Jan 24, 2008)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1201070786760&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Rabbi Riskin fails to mention how Maimonides provided for the distinctness of the two-tiered Judaic system of law to be enforced:

A gentile who studies Torah is liable to the death penalty. They should be involved in the study of their Seven Mitzvot [“Noahide Laws”] only. (Moses Maimonides, Hilchot Melachim 10:9, Moznaim Publishing edition)

And so you see, rabbinic Judaism compels Judaic people to seek proselytes not to their own religion, but to a lower-tier system which the rabbis fabricted for non-“Jews:” the so-called “Noahide Laws.” It is worth mentioning, however, that cajoling proselytism to the “Noahide Laws” would turn to convert-or-die compulsion where Judaic rule is open and fully consolidated.

In 2004 JPII misrepresented his elder brother Maimonides and his murderous system of “proselytizing,” praising Maimonides as a figure of benevolence, and rejoicing in his vision of the Judaic Messianic age, which Maimonides wrote would be a time when all Christians would either give up their fundamental beliefs and accept the talmudic “Noahide Laws” or be executed. More on that here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/02/jpiis-522-jest-at-expense-of-noachides.html

More on the “Noahide Laws” here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/07/real-hidden-dangers-of-rainbow.html

Also of interest, see this transcript of Rabbi Riskin interviewed on the Larry King Show defending the presidential pardon of his good friend and convicted fraudster Marc Rich from Bill Clinton:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0102/28/lkl.00.html

Advertisements

Who Says Judaism Isn’t a Proselytizing System?

January 26, 2008

Contrary to common belief, proselytism is a very important part of Judaism. But the rabbis don’t seek new converts to Judaism. Judaism is only for “The Jews.” The rabbis have concocted a lower-tier religion for non-“Jews” who they hold to be of a lower-tier species than so-called “Jews”.

From Rabbi Shlomo Riskin writing for the Jerusalem Post:

And Maimonides rules that only the Jews must keep the 613 commandments for ultimate “salvation”; it is enough for the gentile world to accept the Seven Noahide Laws of morality (Laws of Kings [Hilchot Melachim] 8,10).

But we certainly must proselytize every human being to keep those seven laws – do not worship an idol, do not misuse God’s Name, do not murder, do not commit licentious sexual acts, do not steal, respect all creatures, and create a judicial system to enforce the first six laws. (Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, “Parashat Yitro: Every Knee Shall Bend,” Jerusalem Post, Jan 24, 2008)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1201070786760&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Rabbi Riskin fails to mention how Maimonides provided for the distinctness of the two-tiered Judaic system of law to be enforced:

A gentile who studies Torah is liable to the death penalty. They should be involved in the study of their Seven Mitzvot [“Noahide Laws”] only. (Moses Maimonides, Hilchot Melachim 10:9, Moznaim Publishing edition)

And so you see, rabbinic Judaism compels Judaic people to seek proselytes not to their own religion, but to a lower-tier system which the rabbis fabricted for non-“Jews:” the so-called “Noahide Laws.” It is worth mentioning, however, that cajoling proselytism to the “Noahide Laws” would turn to convert-or-die compulsion where Judaic rule is open and fully consolidated.

In 2004 JPII misrepresented his elder brother Maimonides and his murderous system of “proselytizing,” praising Maimonides as a figure of benevolence, and rejoicing in his vision of the Judaic Messianic age, which Maimonides wrote would be a time when all Christians would either give up their fundamental beliefs and accept the talmudic “Noahide Laws” or be executed. More on that here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/02/jpiis-522-jest-at-expense-of-noachides.html

More on the “Noahide Laws” here:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/07/real-hidden-dangers-of-rainbow.html

Also of interest, see this transcript of Rabbi Riskin interviewed on the Larry King Show defending the presidential pardon of his good friend and convicted fraudster Marc Rich from Bill Clinton:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0102/28/lkl.00.html

Constance Cumbey Responds

August 9, 2007

The following is a response from the author of the book, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, Constance Cumbey, to the recent blog posting titled “The Real Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow” which can be found at this link:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/07/real-hidden-dangers-of-rainbow.html

Clearly the Jews are equally a target of New Age planners along with Christians — Catholic and Protestant, and even Moslems. A key strategy is to pit target groups off against each other. One only has to read the Alice Bailey books to see that Jews are the most despised of all the New Age targets. I have made clear links between the Historical Revisionist Movement and the New Age Movement, between Eustace Mullins, Ezra Pound etc and the New Age Movement. The New Agers label the “rainbow” as “antahkarana” or “rainbow bridge between the personality and oversoul.

I do not know you, but your site looks disturbingly like anti-Jewish propaganda to me. Please do not imply that I endorse such. I do not.

CONSTANCE E. CUMBEY

In response I should say that I have not implied that Constance Cumbey endorses anti-“Jewish” propaganda. Neither have I written anything about Ezra Pound or Eustace Mullins, which begs the question, what do these things have to do with what I have written? This wouldn’t be an attempt to imply an endorsement of Pound, Mullins and New Ageism from me, would it? Perhaps Mrs. Cumbey will extend me the same courtesy which she asks for herself.

I will make clear that I do see virtue in the practice of historical revisionism in it’s best form, which is the reassessment of historical people, places and events in light of new evidence. I fail to see how any person who honors truth could be opposed to this concept. To reject it would be to allow propaganda and errors which often become part of the established historical record to remain set in stone. If Cumbey is opposed to historical revisionism, that’s her right, but to imply that historical revisionism is directly connected with the New Age movement is disingenuous at best, and to those who know better, it’s rather a joke.

I should add, since Cumbey has brought it up, that I find Ezra Pound’s poem “With Usura” to contain insight which today’s “Christians” should aspire to, but that’s hardly an endorsement of Pound’s Gnostic tendencies or affiliations; W. B. Yeats and the Golden Dawn, for instance.

I must say I don’t enjoy writing this response. I found Mrs. Cumbey’s book, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow to be informative when it was first published in the early 80’s. I had no idea what direction Mrs. Cumbey’s research had taken since that book was published. Surely, she could be forgiven for not making the connection between the rainbow and the Noahide movement of Judaism (which predates Alice Bailey by millenia) 25 years ago when reliable information on the occult and Judaism was more difficult to come by. But that’s not so much the case today.

Since Mrs. Cumbey has written a response to my blog posting on the Noahide movement and it’s symbol, the rainbow, I must assume that she has read it, but in her response she has studiously ignored the content of that posting including the quotes from the Talmud, Mishneh Torah, the Encyclopaedia Judaica, a joint Rabbinic Council-Pontifical Commission document, U.S. laws and presidential proclamations, news articles and video clips cited, choosing instead to imply that it’s all just “anti-‘Jewish’ propaganda” and expressing concern that she may be associated with it. Fear not, Mrs. Cumbey. It’s clear to me now that you have no fellowship with the kind of research conducted here, and I wouldn’t think of associating your work with it.

I do hope that you will give the matter further consideration, however, lest the true hidden danger of the rainbow remain hidden to your readers.

P.S. I do realize that there are anti-“semitic” elements within occult movements, Mrs. Cumbey. Anti-“semitism” is a very important tool of the rabbis and Zionists. Consider this: is it likely that the world would have extended the Zionists a blank check to build a “Jewish” state called “Israel” on someone else’s land–to kill and drive off the land’s occupants–if the Nazi persecutions had not taken place beforehand? I highly doubt it. Many have called Hitler the true founding father of the “Jewish” state and as ironic as it may seem on the surface, I find no fault in that statement. This apparently ironic, but quite logical dialectic is clear to see in the thinking of one of the founders of modern Zionism, Theodore Herzl:

It is essential that the sufferings of Jews … become worse … this will assist in realization of our plans … I have an excellent idea … I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth … The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends. (Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Part I, p. 16)

Everything depends upon our propelling force. And what is our propelling force? The misery of the Jews. (Theodore Herzl, A Jewish State, p. 8)

Rabbi E. Schwartz further clarified:

“To achieve their goal of statehood the Zionists have always deliberately provoked anti-Semitism … Their interest was not to save Jews, on the contrary, more spilling of Jewish blood would strengthen their demand of the nations for the creation of their state.” (New York Times, May 18, 1993)

Whatever anti-“semitism” that exists in occult movements of the West, whether real or mocked, most often serves the purposes of the Zionist movement. The Nazi movement is the strongest case in point. Most Western occult movements (Masonry in particular, with it’s fixation on the rebuilding of Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem) are Zionist at the core.

And it is plain to see that occultists pair target groups off against each other, as you say. One only need observe how Skull and Bones member, George W. Bush and his Zionist handlers have pitted “Judeo-Christians” against Muslims in a misnamed “war on terror” which is in reality a war on Amalak, the eternal enemy of the rabbis, and a war for Israeli dominion in the Middle East.

I hope that you will consider your own point more deeply. As the traditions, cultures and religions of the world–mostly Christendom–are broken down, the tradition of Judaism is being simultaneously built up. As sovereign nations around the world are being slowly dissolved into large unions, a “Jewish” nation is simultaneously being unnaturally propped up at astronomical expense to outside sources from where the required resources are extracted. The Christian nations that are having their soveriegnty and religion robbed from them are forced to finance the building of a “Jewish” state. If the New Age movement is the true force behind the deChristianization of the West, the fruit of it’s labor certainly seems to benefit the “Jewish” state. How could this possibly take place if the “all-powerful” New Age movement were truly against it?

Anti-“Jewish” quotes from Alice Bailey are interesting at most to me, Mrs. Cumbey. I am a Christian, and Jesus Christ said that it’s by their fruits that you will know them, not by their rhetoric.

Constance Cumbey Responds

August 9, 2007

The following is a response from the author of the book, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, Constance Cumbey, to the recent blog posting titled “The Real Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow” which can be found at this link:

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2007/07/real-hidden-dangers-of-rainbow.html

Clearly the Jews are equally a target of New Age planners along with Christians — Catholic and Protestant, and even Moslems. A key strategy is to pit target groups off against each other. One only has to read the Alice Bailey books to see that Jews are the most despised of all the New Age targets. I have made clear links between the Historical Revisionist Movement and the New Age Movement, between Eustace Mullins, Ezra Pound etc and the New Age Movement. The New Agers label the “rainbow” as “antahkarana” or “rainbow bridge between the personality and oversoul.

I do not know you, but your site looks disturbingly like anti-Jewish propaganda to me. Please do not imply that I endorse such. I do not.

CONSTANCE E. CUMBEY

In response I should say that I have not implied that Constance Cumbey endorses anti-“Jewish” propaganda. Neither have I written anything about Ezra Pound or Eustace Mullins, which begs the question, what do these things have to do with what I have written? This wouldn’t be an attempt to imply an endorsement of Pound, Mullins and New Ageism from me, would it? Perhaps Mrs. Cumbey will extend me the same courtesy which she asks for herself.

I will make clear that I do see virtue in the practice of historical revisionism in it’s best form, which is the reassessment of historical people, places and events in light of new evidence. I fail to see how any person who honors truth could be opposed to this concept. To reject it would be to allow propaganda and errors which often become part of the established historical record to remain set in stone. If Cumbey is opposed to historical revisionism, that’s her right, but to imply that historical revisionism is directly connected with the New Age movement is disingenuous at best, and to those who know better, it’s rather a joke.

I should add, since Cumbey has brought it up, that I find Ezra Pound’s poem “With Usura” to contain insight which today’s “Christians” should aspire to, but that’s hardly an endorsement of Pound’s Gnostic tendencies or affiliations; W. B. Yeats and the Golden Dawn, for instance.

I must say I don’t enjoy writing this response. I found Mrs. Cumbey’s book, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow to be informative when it was first published in the early 80’s. I had no idea what direction Mrs. Cumbey’s research had taken since that book was published. Surely, she could be forgiven for not making the connection between the rainbow and the Noahide movement of Judaism (which predates Alice Bailey by millenia) 25 years ago when reliable information on the occult and Judaism was more difficult to come by. But that’s not so much the case today.

Since Mrs. Cumbey has written a response to my blog posting on the Noahide movement and it’s symbol, the rainbow, I must assume that she has read it, but in her response she has studiously ignored the content of that posting including the quotes from the Talmud, Mishneh Torah, the Encyclopaedia Judaica, a joint Rabbinic Council-Pontifical Commission document, U.S. laws and presidential proclamations, news articles and video clips cited, choosing instead to imply that it’s all just “anti-‘Jewish’ propaganda” and expressing concern that she may be associated with it. Fear not, Mrs. Cumbey. It’s clear to me now that you have no fellowship with the kind of research conducted here, and I wouldn’t think of associating your work with it.

I do hope that you will give the matter further consideration, however, lest the true hidden danger of the rainbow remain hidden to your readers.

P.S. I do realize that there are anti-“semitic” elements within occult movements, Mrs. Cumbey. Anti-“semitism” is a very important tool of the rabbis and Zionists. Consider this: is it likely that the world would have extended the Zionists a blank check to build a “Jewish” state called “Israel” on someone else’s land–to kill and drive off the land’s occupants–if the Nazi persecutions had not taken place beforehand? I highly doubt it. Many have called Hitler the true founding father of the “Jewish” state and as ironic as it may seem on the surface, I find no fault in that statement. This apparently ironic, but quite logical dialectic is clear to see in the thinking of one of the founders of modern Zionism, Theodore Herzl:

It is essential that the sufferings of Jews … become worse … this will assist in realization of our plans … I have an excellent idea … I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth … The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends. (Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Part I, p. 16)

Everything depends upon our propelling force. And what is our propelling force? The misery of the Jews. (Theodore Herzl, A Jewish State, p. 8)

Rabbi E. Schwartz further clarified:

“To achieve their goal of statehood the Zionists have always deliberately provoked anti-Semitism … Their interest was not to save Jews, on the contrary, more spilling of Jewish blood would strengthen their demand of the nations for the creation of their state.” (New York Times, May 18, 1993)

Whatever anti-“semitism” that exists in occult movements of the West, whether real or mocked, most often serves the purposes of the Zionist movement. The Nazi movement is the strongest case in point. Most Western occult movements (Masonry in particular, with it’s fixation on the rebuilding of Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem) are Zionist at the core.

And it is plain to see that occultists pair target groups off against each other, as you say. One only need observe how Skull and Bones member, George W. Bush and his Zionist handlers have pitted “Judeo-Christians” against Muslims in a misnamed “war on terror” which is in reality a war on Amalak, the eternal enemy of the rabbis, and a war for Israeli dominion in the Middle East.

I hope that you will consider your own point more deeply. As the traditions, cultures and religions of the world–mostly Christendom–are broken down, the tradition of Judaism is being simultaneously built up. As sovereign nations around the world are being slowly dissolved into large unions, a “Jewish” nation is simultaneously being unnaturally propped up at astronomical expense to outside sources from where the required resources are extracted. The Christian nations that are having their soveriegnty and religion robbed from them are forced to finance the building of a “Jewish” state. If the New Age movement is the true force behind the deChristianization of the West, the fruit of it’s labor certainly seems to benefit the “Jewish” state. How could this possibly take place if the “all-powerful” New Age movement were truly against it?

Anti-“Jewish” quotes from Alice Bailey are interesting at most to me, Mrs. Cumbey. I am a Christian, and Jesus Christ said that it’s by their fruits that you will know them, not by their rhetoric.

The REAL Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow

July 30, 2007

Some of you may have read this book, Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, by Constance Cumbey, a book on the New Age movement in which it is said that true Christians would not make it into the New Age alive. Have you made the connection that this book does not make?

“Sons of Noah,” or Noahide

“It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they will be killed.” (Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, Ma’ariv, October 6, 2004)

http://www.peacenow.org/mepr.asp?rid=&cid=141

The rainbow is the symbol of the Noahide movement–the movement to bring humanity under a rabbinic system of double standards called “Noahide Law” enforced by subsidiary courts of a Sanhedrin based in Jerusalem.

From Chabad Lubavitch website, noahide.org:

The Seven Noachide laws are general commandments with many details. Transgressing any one of them is considered such a breach in the natural order that the offender incurs the death penalty. Apart from a few exceptions, the death sentence for a Ben Noach is Sayif, death by the sword / decapitation, the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals (see the Rambam’s Hilchos Melachim 9:14). (The four methods of capital punishment in Torah are: S’kilah – Stoning; S’rifah – Burning; Hereg – Decapitation; Henek – Strangulation.) The many formalities of procedure essential when the accused is an Israelite need not be observed in the case of the Noachite. The latter may be convicted on the testimony of one witness, even on that of relatives, but not on that of a woman. He need have had no warning from the witnesses; and a single judge may pass sentence on him (Sanhedrin 57a, b; Rambam, Hilchos Melakim 9:14).

http://www.noahide.org/article.asp?Level=173&Parent=166

From the Talmud:

“A non-Jew is put to death on the basis of a decision given by one judge [no jury], and on the basis of testimony given by a single witness, and even if he was not given a proper warning prior to the commission of his offense. He is put to death on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a man but not on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a woman, and the man who testified or decided against him can even be a relative.

“A Jew can only be put to death by a court of twenty-three judges, and on the basis of the testimony of two male witnesses who are not disqualified from testifying on account of kinship, and after being properly warned against committing the transgression. But none of these rules apply in the case of a non-Jew.” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 57b, Steinsaltz edition, vol.18, page 110)

From the Encyclopaedia Judaica:

“… violation of any one of the seven laws subjects the Noachide to capital punishment by decapitation (Sanh. 57a).”(Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

From Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah:

“The Christians are idolaters, and Sunday is their holiday…” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Avodah Zorah, 9;4)

“… a gentile who worships false gods is liable, [for the death penalty] provided he worships them in the accepted manner. A gentile is executed for every type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would consider worthy of capital punishment.” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 11)

Also see:

JPII’s Noahide Jest

Chabad Rabbi to Congress: Congress Convenes to Fulfill Noahide Commandment

Papal Commission Says Noahide Laws have New Testament Basis

Benedict XVI and Hans Kung Discuss Need for “Global Ethic,” not the Gospel

U.S. Public Law, “Education Day”

Sanhedrin Moves to Establish Council For Noahides

Ronald Regan and Chabad

US President George W. Bush Discusses “Road-Map to World Peace” Based on Seven Universal Ben Noah Laws

Jewish Law Comes to Washington D.C.

Jewish law institute launched in DC

The REAL Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow

July 30, 2007

Some of you may have read this book, Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, by Constance Cumbey, a book on the New Age movement in which it is said that true Christians would not make it into the New Age alive. Have you made the connection that this book does not make?

“Sons of Noah,” or Noahide

“It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they will be killed.” (Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, Ma’ariv, October 6, 2004)

http://www.peacenow.org/mepr.asp?rid=&cid=141

The rainbow is the symbol of the Noahide movement–the movement to bring humanity under a rabbinic system of double standards called “Noahide Law” enforced by subsidiary courts of a Sanhedrin based in Jerusalem.

From Chabad Lubavitch website, noahide.org:

The Seven Noachide laws are general commandments with many details. Transgressing any one of them is considered such a breach in the natural order that the offender incurs the death penalty. Apart from a few exceptions, the death sentence for a Ben Noach is Sayif, death by the sword / decapitation, the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals (see the Rambam’s Hilchos Melachim 9:14). (The four methods of capital punishment in Torah are: S’kilah – Stoning; S’rifah – Burning; Hereg – Decapitation; Henek – Strangulation.) The many formalities of procedure essential when the accused is an Israelite need not be observed in the case of the Noachite. The latter may be convicted on the testimony of one witness, even on that of relatives, but not on that of a woman. He need have had no warning from the witnesses; and a single judge may pass sentence on him (Sanhedrin 57a, b; Rambam, Hilchos Melakim 9:14).

http://www.noahide.org/article.asp?Level=173&Parent=166

From the Talmud:

“A non-Jew is put to death on the basis of a decision given by one judge [no jury], and on the basis of testimony given by a single witness, and even if he was not given a proper warning prior to the commission of his offense. He is put to death on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a man but not on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a woman, and the man who testified or decided against him can even be a relative.

“A Jew can only be put to death by a court of twenty-three judges, and on the basis of the testimony of two male witnesses who are not disqualified from testifying on account of kinship, and after being properly warned against committing the transgression. But none of these rules apply in the case of a non-Jew.” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 57b, Steinsaltz edition, vol.18, page 110)

From the Encyclopaedia Judaica:

“… violation of any one of the seven laws subjects the Noachide to capital punishment by decapitation (Sanh. 57a).”(Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

From Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah:

“The Christians are idolaters, and Sunday is their holiday…” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Avodah Zorah, 9;4)

“… a gentile who worships false gods is liable, [for the death penalty] provided he worships them in the accepted manner. A gentile is executed for every type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would consider worthy of capital punishment.” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 11)

Also see:

JPII’s Noahide Jest

Chabad Rabbi to Congress: Congress Convenes to Fulfill Noahide Commandment

Papal Commission Says Noahide Laws have New Testament Basis

Benedict XVI and Hans Kung Discuss Need for “Global Ethic,” not the Gospel

U.S. Public Law, “Education Day”

Sanhedrin Moves to Establish Council For Noahides

Ronald Regan and Chabad

US President George W. Bush Discusses “Road-Map to World Peace” Based on Seven Universal Ben Noah Laws

Jewish Law Comes to Washington D.C.

Jewish law institute launched in DC

The REAL Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow

July 30, 2007

Some of you may have read this book, Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, by Constance Cumbey, a book on the New Age movement in which it is said that true Christians would not make it into the New Age alive. Have you made the connection that this book does not make?

“Sons of Noah,” or Noahide

“It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they will be killed.” (Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, Ma’ariv, October 6, 2004)

http://www.peacenow.org/mepr.asp?rid=&cid=141

The rainbow is the symbol of the Noahide movement–the movement to bring humanity under a rabbinic system of double standards called “Noahide Law” enforced by subsidiary courts of a Sanhedrin based in Jerusalem.

From Chabad Lubavitch website, noahide.org:

The Seven Noachide laws are general commandments with many details. Transgressing any one of them is considered such a breach in the natural order that the offender incurs the death penalty. Apart from a few exceptions, the death sentence for a Ben Noach is Sayif, death by the sword / decapitation, the least painful of the four modes of execution of criminals (see the Rambam’s Hilchos Melachim 9:14). (The four methods of capital punishment in Torah are: S’kilah – Stoning; S’rifah – Burning; Hereg – Decapitation; Henek – Strangulation.) The many formalities of procedure essential when the accused is an Israelite need not be observed in the case of the Noachite. The latter may be convicted on the testimony of one witness, even on that of relatives, but not on that of a woman. He need have had no warning from the witnesses; and a single judge may pass sentence on him (Sanhedrin 57a, b; Rambam, Hilchos Melakim 9:14).

http://www.noahide.org/article.asp?Level=173&Parent=166

From the Talmud:

“A non-Jew is put to death on the basis of a decision given by one judge [no jury], and on the basis of testimony given by a single witness, and even if he was not given a proper warning prior to the commission of his offense. He is put to death on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a man but not on the basis of testimony and a decision given by a woman, and the man who testified or decided against him can even be a relative.

“A Jew can only be put to death by a court of twenty-three judges, and on the basis of the testimony of two male witnesses who are not disqualified from testifying on account of kinship, and after being properly warned against committing the transgression. But none of these rules apply in the case of a non-Jew.” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 57b, Steinsaltz edition, vol.18, page 110)

From the Encyclopaedia Judaica:

“… violation of any one of the seven laws subjects the Noachide to capital punishment by decapitation (Sanh. 57a).”(Encyclopaedia Judaica, “Noahide Laws”)

From Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah:

“The Christians are idolaters, and Sunday is their holiday…” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Avodah Zorah, 9;4)

“… a gentile who worships false gods is liable, [for the death penalty] provided he worships them in the accepted manner. A gentile is executed for every type of foreign worship which a Jewish court would consider worthy of capital punishment.” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 11)

Also see:

JPII’s Noahide Jest

Chabad Rabbi to Congress: Congress Convenes to Fulfill Noahide Commandment

Papal Commission Says Noahide Laws have New Testament Basis

Benedict XVI and Hans Kung Discuss Need for “Global Ethic,” not the Gospel

U.S. Public Law, “Education Day”

Sanhedrin Moves to Establish Council For Noahides

Ronald Regan and Chabad

US President George W. Bush Discusses “Road-Map to World Peace” Based on Seven Universal Ben Noah Laws

Jewish Law Comes to Washington D.C.

Jewish law institute launched in DC

New York Times Reveals Talmudic Basis for Legalistic Murder of Goys, Fake Benevolence

July 23, 2007

This was emailed in by a reader:

“Maurice Pinay”:

You might enjoy reading this Sunday’s “New York Times Magazine” piece, “Orthodox Paradox.” It initiated many of its readers into forbidden knowledge.

It reveals that, to the Orthodox mind, the sole justification for Judaics to adopt a benevolent posture toward the goyim is that such a stance tilts Judaic-goyim relations in favor of Judaic interests, under certain circumstances.

Perhaps it’s a classic modified limited hangout, the piece’s narrative authority rests on the insider membership, twice over, of its author, the Orthodox prep-school formed, CFR senior fellow and Harvard Law School professor, Noah Feldman. Our conditioned response will be the misrecognition which holds that the only people who would challenge what Feldman tells us are the hateful and stupid.

Given all that is revealed, what is limited about this?

The piece keeps the Unique Goyim Evil theory alive. Nothing in Feldman’s article attacks the “bad goyim made us poor Jews this way” account. Because he does not address this, everything unappealing that he reveals about Orthodox folkways can be blamed on the goyim.

… Since the birth of modern Orthodox Judaism in 19th-century Germany, a central goal of the movement has been to normalize the observance of traditional Jewish law — to make it possible to follow all 613 biblical commandments assiduously while still participating in the reality of the modern world. You must strive to be, as a poet of the time put it, “a Jew in the home and a man in the street.” Even as we students of the Maimonides School spent half of every school day immersed in what was unabashedly a medieval curriculum, our aim was to seem to outsiders — and to ourselves — like reasonable, mainstream people, not fanatics or cult members.

This ambition is best exemplified today by Senator Joe Lieberman. His run for the vice presidency in 2000 put the “modern” in modern Orthodox, demonstrating that an Orthodox Jewish candidate could be accepted by America at large as essentially a regular guy …

One time at Maimonides a local physician — a well-known figure in the community who later died tragically young — addressed a school assembly on the topic of the challenges that a modern Orthodox professional may face. The doctor addressed the Talmudic dictum that the saving of a life trumps the Sabbath. He explained that in its purest form, this principle applies only to the life of a Jew. The rabbis of the Talmud, however, were unprepared to allow the life of a non-Jew to be extinguished because of the no-work commandment, and so they ruled that the Sabbath could be violated to save the life of a non-Jew out of concern for maintaining peaceful relations between the Jewish and non-Jewish communities.

Depending on how you look at it, this ruling is either an example of outrageously particularist religious thinking, because in principle it values Jewish life more than non-Jewish life, or an instance of laudable universalism, because in practice it treats all lives equally. The physician quite reasonably opted for the latter explanation. And he added that he himself would never distinguish Jewish from non-Jewish patients: a human being was a human being.

This appealing sentiment did not go unchallenged. One of my teachers rose to suggest that the doctor’s attitude was putting him in danger of violating the Torah. The teacher reported that he had himself heard from his own rabbi, a leading modern-Orthodox Talmudist associated with Yeshiva University, that in violating the Sabbath to treat a non-Jew, intention was absolutely crucial. If you intended to save the patient’s life so as to facilitate good relations between Jews and non-Jews, your actions were permissible. But if, to the contrary, you intended to save the patient out of universal morality, then you were in fact guilty of violating the Sabbath, because the motive for acting was not the motive on the basis of which the rabbis allowed the Sabbath violation to occur.

Later, in class, the teacher apologized to us students for what he said to the doctor. His comments, he said, were inappropriate — not because they were wrongheaded, but because non-Jews were present in the audience when he made them. The double standard of Jews and non-Jews, in other words, was for him truly irreducible: it was not just about noting that only Jewish lives merited violation of the Sabbath, but also about keeping the secret of why non-Jewish lives might be saved … (Noah Feldman, Orthodox Paradox, New York Times, July 22, 2007)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/magazine/22yeshiva-t.html?ei=5087&em=&en=4f9d372ba8aa7e8a&ex=1185336000&pagewanted=print

My, my. So much for the claims that “elder brother in the faith” Maimonides was being misinterpreted by “antisemitic conspiracy theorists,” or even more outrageous, that the quotes are “antisemitic fabrications.” Read about it in the New York Times.

New York Times Reveals Talmudic Basis for Legalistic Murder of Goys, Fake Benevolence

July 23, 2007

This was emailed in by a reader:

“Maurice Pinay”:

You might enjoy reading this Sunday’s “New York Times Magazine” piece, “Orthodox Paradox.” It initiated many of its readers into forbidden knowledge.

It reveals that, to the Orthodox mind, the sole justification for Judaics to adopt a benevolent posture toward the goyim is that such a stance tilts Judaic-goyim relations in favor of Judaic interests, under certain circumstances.

Perhaps it’s a classic modified limited hangout, the piece’s narrative authority rests on the insider membership, twice over, of its author, the Orthodox prep-school formed, CFR senior fellow and Harvard Law School professor, Noah Feldman. Our conditioned response will be the misrecognition which holds that the only people who would challenge what Feldman tells us are the hateful and stupid.

Given all that is revealed, what is limited about this?

The piece keeps the Unique Goyim Evil theory alive. Nothing in Feldman’s article attacks the “bad goyim made us poor Jews this way” account. Because he does not address this, everything unappealing that he reveals about Orthodox folkways can be blamed on the goyim.

… Since the birth of modern Orthodox Judaism in 19th-century Germany, a central goal of the movement has been to normalize the observance of traditional Jewish law — to make it possible to follow all 613 biblical commandments assiduously while still participating in the reality of the modern world. You must strive to be, as a poet of the time put it, “a Jew in the home and a man in the street.” Even as we students of the Maimonides School spent half of every school day immersed in what was unabashedly a medieval curriculum, our aim was to seem to outsiders — and to ourselves — like reasonable, mainstream people, not fanatics or cult members.

This ambition is best exemplified today by Senator Joe Lieberman. His run for the vice presidency in 2000 put the “modern” in modern Orthodox, demonstrating that an Orthodox Jewish candidate could be accepted by America at large as essentially a regular guy …

One time at Maimonides a local physician — a well-known figure in the community who later died tragically young — addressed a school assembly on the topic of the challenges that a modern Orthodox professional may face. The doctor addressed the Talmudic dictum that the saving of a life trumps the Sabbath. He explained that in its purest form, this principle applies only to the life of a Jew. The rabbis of the Talmud, however, were unprepared to allow the life of a non-Jew to be extinguished because of the no-work commandment, and so they ruled that the Sabbath could be violated to save the life of a non-Jew out of concern for maintaining peaceful relations between the Jewish and non-Jewish communities.

Depending on how you look at it, this ruling is either an example of outrageously particularist religious thinking, because in principle it values Jewish life more than non-Jewish life, or an instance of laudable universalism, because in practice it treats all lives equally. The physician quite reasonably opted for the latter explanation. And he added that he himself would never distinguish Jewish from non-Jewish patients: a human being was a human being.

This appealing sentiment did not go unchallenged. One of my teachers rose to suggest that the doctor’s attitude was putting him in danger of violating the Torah. The teacher reported that he had himself heard from his own rabbi, a leading modern-Orthodox Talmudist associated with Yeshiva University, that in violating the Sabbath to treat a non-Jew, intention was absolutely crucial. If you intended to save the patient’s life so as to facilitate good relations between Jews and non-Jews, your actions were permissible. But if, to the contrary, you intended to save the patient out of universal morality, then you were in fact guilty of violating the Sabbath, because the motive for acting was not the motive on the basis of which the rabbis allowed the Sabbath violation to occur.

Later, in class, the teacher apologized to us students for what he said to the doctor. His comments, he said, were inappropriate — not because they were wrongheaded, but because non-Jews were present in the audience when he made them. The double standard of Jews and non-Jews, in other words, was for him truly irreducible: it was not just about noting that only Jewish lives merited violation of the Sabbath, but also about keeping the secret of why non-Jewish lives might be saved … (Noah Feldman, Orthodox Paradox, New York Times, July 22, 2007)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/22/magazine/22yeshiva-t.html?ei=5087&em=&en=4f9d372ba8aa7e8a&ex=1185336000&pagewanted=print

My, my. So much for the claims that “elder brother in the faith” Maimonides was being misinterpreted by “antisemitic conspiracy theorists,” or even more outrageous, that the quotes are “antisemitic fabrications.” Read about it in the New York Times.

Kabbalistic War

June 19, 2007

Israel plans attack on Gaza

Posted: Sunday, June 17, 2007

ISRAEL’s new defence minister Ehud Barak is planning an attack on Gaza within weeks to crush the Hamas militants who have seized power there.

According to senior Israeli military sources, the plan calls for 20,000 troops to destroy much of Hamas’s military capability in days.

The raid would be triggered by Hamas rocket attacks against Israel or a resumption of suicide bombings.

Barak, who is expected to become defence minister tomorrow, has already demanded detailed plans to deploy two armoured divisions and an infantry division, accompanied by assault drones and F-16 jets, against Hamas.

Full article:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1942918.ece

“Elliot Abrams’ uncivil war”

US Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams – whom Newsweek recently described as “the last neo-con standing” – has had it about for some months now that the United States is not only not interested in dealing with Hamas, it is working to ensure its failure.

In the immediate aftermath of the Palestinian elections won by Hamas last January, Abrams greeted a group of Palestinian businessmen in his White House office with talk of a “hard coup” against the newly elected Hamas government – the violent overthrow of its leadership with arms supplied by the US.

While the businessmen were shocked, Abrams was adamant – the US had to support Fatah with guns, ammunition and training, so that it could fight Hamas for control of the Palestinian government.

Full article:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA09Ak03.html

Read about Elliot Abrams’ past “civil wars” under “saint” Reagan:

Venezuela coup linked to Bush team

Specialists in the ‘dirty wars’ of the Eighties encouraged the plotters who tried to topple President Chavez

Observer Worldview

Ed Vulliamy in New York
Sunday April 21, 2002
The Observer

The failed coup in Venezuela was closely tied to senior officials in the US government, The Observer has established. They have long histories in the ‘dirty wars’ of the 1980s, and links to death squads working in Central America at that time.

Washington’s involvement in the turbulent events that briefly removed left-wing leader Hugo Chavez from power last weekend resurrects fears about US ambitions in the hemisphere.

It also also deepens doubts about policy in the region being made by appointees to the Bush administration, all of whom owe their careers to serving in the dirty wars under President Reagan.

One of them, Elliot Abrams, who gave a nod to the attempted Venezuelan coup, has a conviction for misleading Congress over the infamous Iran-Contra affair.

Full article:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html