Archive for the ‘New York Times’ Category

Post-9-11 New York Times Article Promotes Noahide Laws as World’s Only Hope

June 12, 2008
New York Times columnist, Thomas L. Friedman

This 2002 article uses the 1 year anniversary of 9-11 as an occasion to promote the Talmudic “Noahide Laws” as the world’s “only hope” in avoiding a catastrophe of Biblical great flood proportions. This message comes to us via the “secular ‘Jew'” Thomas L. Friedman writing for the New York Times. This “Noahide Law” peddler, Thomas L. Friedman, who has referred to the destruction of Iraq as “a war of choice,” was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2004. Friedman is currently resuscitating the corporate-Green-population reduction amalgamation concocted by Ira Einhorn circa 1970.

Noah and 9/11

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN – New York Times

September 11, 2002

Over the past year several friends have remarked to me how much they still feel a pit in their stomachs from 9/11. One even said she felt as if this was the beginning of the end of the world. And no wonder. Those suicide hijackings were such an evil act that they shattered your faith in human beings and in the wall of civilization that was supposed to constrain the worst in human behavior. There is now a big jagged hole in that wall.

What to do? For guidance, I turned to one of my mentors, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, who teaches in the Netherlands. He offered me a biblical analogy. ”To some extent,” said Tzvi, ”we feel after 9/11 like we have experienced the flood of Noah — as if a flood has inundated our civilization and we are the survivors. What do we do the morning after?”

The story of Noah has a lot to offer. ”What was the first thing Noah did when the flood waters receded and he got off the ark?” asked Tzvi. ”He planted a vine, made wine and got drunk.” Noah’s first response to the flood’s devastation of humanity, and the challenge he now faced, was to numb himself to the world.

”But what was God’s reaction to the flood?” asked Tzvi. ”Just the opposite. God’s reaction was to offer Noah a more detailed set of rules for mankind to live by — rules which we now call the Noahite laws. His first rule was that life is precious, so man should not murder man.” (These Noahite laws were later expanded to include prohibitions against idolatry, adultery, blasphemy and theft.)

It’s interesting — you would have thought that after wiping out humanity with a devastating flood, God’s first post-flood act wouldn’t have been to teach that all life is precious. But it was. Said Tzvi: ”It is as though God said, ‘Now I understand what I’m up against with these humans. I need to set for them some very clear boundaries of behavior, with some very clear values and norms, that they can internalize.’ ”

And that is where the analogy with today begins. After the deluge of 9/11 we have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug our ears, or we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization by insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms — both for ourselves and for others.

”God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring indulge themselves in escapism,” said Tzvi, ”but he also refused to give them license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind up to that point had failed.”

The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11, but without becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We must defend ourselves — without throwing out civil liberties at home, without barring every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a huge shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can leave people feeling powerless, and without telling the world we’re going to do whatever we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off.

Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the credibility to demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand the rule of law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism, pluralism, women’s rights and respect for the notion that my grievance, however deep, does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere.

It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where have you been since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all your prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when members of your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or committed suicide against ”infidels,” your press extolled them as martyrs and your spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew no new moral red lines in their schools. That’s a problem, because if there isn’t a struggle within Islam — over norms and values — there is going to be a struggle between Islam and us.

In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not work. Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient. Building higher walls may feel comforting, but in today’s interconnected world they’re an illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by internal walls — norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and loudly demanding them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our shrinking planet.

Otherwise, start building an ark.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E7D61431F932A2575AC0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Advertisements

Post-9-11 New York Times Article Promotes Noahide Laws as World’s Only Hope

June 12, 2008
New York Times columnist, Thomas L. Friedman

This 2002 article uses the 1 year anniversary of 9-11 as an occasion to promote the Talmudic “Noahide Laws” as the world’s “only hope” in avoiding a catastrophe of Biblical great flood proportions. This message comes to us via the “secular ‘Jew'” Thomas L. Friedman writing for the New York Times. This “Noahide Law” peddler, Thomas L. Friedman, who has referred to the destruction of Iraq as “a war of choice,” was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2004. Friedman is currently resuscitating the corporate-Green-population reduction amalgamation concocted by Ira Einhorn circa 1970.

Noah and 9/11

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN – New York Times

September 11, 2002

Over the past year several friends have remarked to me how much they still feel a pit in their stomachs from 9/11. One even said she felt as if this was the beginning of the end of the world. And no wonder. Those suicide hijackings were such an evil act that they shattered your faith in human beings and in the wall of civilization that was supposed to constrain the worst in human behavior. There is now a big jagged hole in that wall.

What to do? For guidance, I turned to one of my mentors, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, who teaches in the Netherlands. He offered me a biblical analogy. ”To some extent,” said Tzvi, ”we feel after 9/11 like we have experienced the flood of Noah — as if a flood has inundated our civilization and we are the survivors. What do we do the morning after?”

The story of Noah has a lot to offer. ”What was the first thing Noah did when the flood waters receded and he got off the ark?” asked Tzvi. ”He planted a vine, made wine and got drunk.” Noah’s first response to the flood’s devastation of humanity, and the challenge he now faced, was to numb himself to the world.

”But what was God’s reaction to the flood?” asked Tzvi. ”Just the opposite. God’s reaction was to offer Noah a more detailed set of rules for mankind to live by — rules which we now call the Noahite laws. His first rule was that life is precious, so man should not murder man.” (These Noahite laws were later expanded to include prohibitions against idolatry, adultery, blasphemy and theft.)

It’s interesting — you would have thought that after wiping out humanity with a devastating flood, God’s first post-flood act wouldn’t have been to teach that all life is precious. But it was. Said Tzvi: ”It is as though God said, ‘Now I understand what I’m up against with these humans. I need to set for them some very clear boundaries of behavior, with some very clear values and norms, that they can internalize.’ ”

And that is where the analogy with today begins. After the deluge of 9/11 we have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug our ears, or we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization by insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms — both for ourselves and for others.

”God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring indulge themselves in escapism,” said Tzvi, ”but he also refused to give them license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind up to that point had failed.”

The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11, but without becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We must defend ourselves — without throwing out civil liberties at home, without barring every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a huge shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can leave people feeling powerless, and without telling the world we’re going to do whatever we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off.

Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the credibility to demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand the rule of law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism, pluralism, women’s rights and respect for the notion that my grievance, however deep, does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere.

It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where have you been since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all your prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when members of your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or committed suicide against ”infidels,” your press extolled them as martyrs and your spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew no new moral red lines in their schools. That’s a problem, because if there isn’t a struggle within Islam — over norms and values — there is going to be a struggle between Islam and us.

In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not work. Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient. Building higher walls may feel comforting, but in today’s interconnected world they’re an illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by internal walls — norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and loudly demanding them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our shrinking planet.

Otherwise, start building an ark.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E7D61431F932A2575AC0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Post-9-11 New York Times Article Promotes Noahide Laws as World’s Only Hope

June 12, 2008
New York Times columnist, Thomas L. Friedman

This 2002 article uses the 1 year anniversary of 9-11 as an occasion to promote the Talmudic “Noahide Laws” as the world’s “only hope” in avoiding a catastrophe of Biblical great flood proportions. This message comes to us via the “secular ‘Jew'” Thomas L. Friedman writing for the New York Times. This “Noahide Law” peddler, Thomas L. Friedman, who has referred to the destruction of Iraq as “a war of choice,” was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2004. Friedman is currently resuscitating the corporate-Green-population reduction amalgamation concocted by Ira Einhorn circa 1970.

Noah and 9/11

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN – New York Times

September 11, 2002

Over the past year several friends have remarked to me how much they still feel a pit in their stomachs from 9/11. One even said she felt as if this was the beginning of the end of the world. And no wonder. Those suicide hijackings were such an evil act that they shattered your faith in human beings and in the wall of civilization that was supposed to constrain the worst in human behavior. There is now a big jagged hole in that wall.

What to do? For guidance, I turned to one of my mentors, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, who teaches in the Netherlands. He offered me a biblical analogy. ”To some extent,” said Tzvi, ”we feel after 9/11 like we have experienced the flood of Noah — as if a flood has inundated our civilization and we are the survivors. What do we do the morning after?”

The story of Noah has a lot to offer. ”What was the first thing Noah did when the flood waters receded and he got off the ark?” asked Tzvi. ”He planted a vine, made wine and got drunk.” Noah’s first response to the flood’s devastation of humanity, and the challenge he now faced, was to numb himself to the world.

”But what was God’s reaction to the flood?” asked Tzvi. ”Just the opposite. God’s reaction was to offer Noah a more detailed set of rules for mankind to live by — rules which we now call the Noahite laws. His first rule was that life is precious, so man should not murder man.” (These Noahite laws were later expanded to include prohibitions against idolatry, adultery, blasphemy and theft.)

It’s interesting — you would have thought that after wiping out humanity with a devastating flood, God’s first post-flood act wouldn’t have been to teach that all life is precious. But it was. Said Tzvi: ”It is as though God said, ‘Now I understand what I’m up against with these humans. I need to set for them some very clear boundaries of behavior, with some very clear values and norms, that they can internalize.’ ”

And that is where the analogy with today begins. After the deluge of 9/11 we have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug our ears, or we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization by insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms — both for ourselves and for others.

”God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring indulge themselves in escapism,” said Tzvi, ”but he also refused to give them license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind up to that point had failed.”

The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11, but without becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We must defend ourselves — without throwing out civil liberties at home, without barring every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a huge shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can leave people feeling powerless, and without telling the world we’re going to do whatever we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off.

Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the credibility to demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand the rule of law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism, pluralism, women’s rights and respect for the notion that my grievance, however deep, does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere.

It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where have you been since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all your prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when members of your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or committed suicide against ”infidels,” your press extolled them as martyrs and your spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew no new moral red lines in their schools. That’s a problem, because if there isn’t a struggle within Islam — over norms and values — there is going to be a struggle between Islam and us.

In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not work. Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient. Building higher walls may feel comforting, but in today’s interconnected world they’re an illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by internal walls — norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and loudly demanding them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our shrinking planet.

Otherwise, start building an ark.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E7D61431F932A2575AC0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Post-9-11 New York Times Article Promotes Noahide Laws as World’s Only Hope

June 12, 2008
New York Times columnist, Thomas L. Friedman

This 2002 article uses the 1 year anniversary of 9-11 as an occasion to promote the Talmudic “Noahide Laws” as the world’s “only hope” in avoiding a catastrophe of Biblical great flood proportions. This message comes to us via the “secular ‘Jew'” Thomas L. Friedman writing for the New York Times. This “Noahide Law” peddler, Thomas L. Friedman, who has referred to the destruction of Iraq as “a war of choice,” was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2004. Friedman is currently resuscitating the corporate-Green-population reduction amalgamation concocted by Ira Einhorn circa 1970.

Noah and 9/11

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN – New York Times

September 11, 2002

Over the past year several friends have remarked to me how much they still feel a pit in their stomachs from 9/11. One even said she felt as if this was the beginning of the end of the world. And no wonder. Those suicide hijackings were such an evil act that they shattered your faith in human beings and in the wall of civilization that was supposed to constrain the worst in human behavior. There is now a big jagged hole in that wall.

What to do? For guidance, I turned to one of my mentors, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, who teaches in the Netherlands. He offered me a biblical analogy. ”To some extent,” said Tzvi, ”we feel after 9/11 like we have experienced the flood of Noah — as if a flood has inundated our civilization and we are the survivors. What do we do the morning after?”

The story of Noah has a lot to offer. ”What was the first thing Noah did when the flood waters receded and he got off the ark?” asked Tzvi. ”He planted a vine, made wine and got drunk.” Noah’s first response to the flood’s devastation of humanity, and the challenge he now faced, was to numb himself to the world.

”But what was God’s reaction to the flood?” asked Tzvi. ”Just the opposite. God’s reaction was to offer Noah a more detailed set of rules for mankind to live by — rules which we now call the Noahite laws. His first rule was that life is precious, so man should not murder man.” (These Noahite laws were later expanded to include prohibitions against idolatry, adultery, blasphemy and theft.)

It’s interesting — you would have thought that after wiping out humanity with a devastating flood, God’s first post-flood act wouldn’t have been to teach that all life is precious. But it was. Said Tzvi: ”It is as though God said, ‘Now I understand what I’m up against with these humans. I need to set for them some very clear boundaries of behavior, with some very clear values and norms, that they can internalize.’ ”

And that is where the analogy with today begins. After the deluge of 9/11 we have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug our ears, or we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization by insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms — both for ourselves and for others.

”God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring indulge themselves in escapism,” said Tzvi, ”but he also refused to give them license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind up to that point had failed.”

The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11, but without becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We must defend ourselves — without throwing out civil liberties at home, without barring every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a huge shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can leave people feeling powerless, and without telling the world we’re going to do whatever we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off.

Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the credibility to demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand the rule of law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism, pluralism, women’s rights and respect for the notion that my grievance, however deep, does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere.

It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where have you been since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all your prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when members of your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or committed suicide against ”infidels,” your press extolled them as martyrs and your spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew no new moral red lines in their schools. That’s a problem, because if there isn’t a struggle within Islam — over norms and values — there is going to be a struggle between Islam and us.

In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not work. Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient. Building higher walls may feel comforting, but in today’s interconnected world they’re an illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by internal walls — norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and loudly demanding them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our shrinking planet.

Otherwise, start building an ark.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E7D61431F932A2575AC0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Post-9-11 New York Times Opinion Piece Promotes "Noahide Laws" as World’s Only Hope

June 12, 2008
New York Times reporter and columnist, Thomas L. Friedman

This 2002 article uses the 1 year anniversary of 9-11 as an occasion to promote the Talmudic “Noahide Laws” as the world’s “only hope” in avoiding a catastrophe of Biblical great flood proportions. This message comes to us via the “secular ‘Jew'” Thomas L. Friedman writing for the New York Times. This “Noahide Law” peddler, Thomas L. Friedman, who has referred to the destruction of Iraq as “a war of choice,” was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 2004. Friedman is currently resuscitating the corporate-Green-population reduction amalgamation concocted by Ira Einhorn circa 1970.

Noah and 9/11

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN – New York Times

September 11, 2002

Over the past year several friends have remarked to me how much they still feel a pit in their stomachs from 9/11. One even said she felt as if this was the beginning of the end of the world. And no wonder. Those suicide hijackings were such an evil act that they shattered your faith in human beings and in the wall of civilization that was supposed to constrain the worst in human behavior. There is now a big jagged hole in that wall.

What to do? For guidance, I turned to one of my mentors, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, who teaches in the Netherlands. He offered me a biblical analogy. ”To some extent,” said Tzvi, ”we feel after 9/11 like we have experienced the flood of Noah — as if a flood has inundated our civilization and we are the survivors. What do we do the morning after?”

The story of Noah has a lot to offer. ”What was the first thing Noah did when the flood waters receded and he got off the ark?” asked Tzvi. ”He planted a vine, made wine and got drunk.” Noah’s first response to the flood’s devastation of humanity, and the challenge he now faced, was to numb himself to the world.

”But what was God’s reaction to the flood?” asked Tzvi. ”Just the opposite. God’s reaction was to offer Noah a more detailed set of rules for mankind to live by — rules which we now call the Noahite laws. His first rule was that life is precious, so man should not murder man.” (These Noahite laws were later expanded to include prohibitions against idolatry, adultery, blasphemy and theft.)

It’s interesting — you would have thought that after wiping out humanity with a devastating flood, God’s first post-flood act wouldn’t have been to teach that all life is precious. But it was. Said Tzvi: ”It is as though God said, ‘Now I understand what I’m up against with these humans. I need to set for them some very clear boundaries of behavior, with some very clear values and norms, that they can internalize.’ ”

And that is where the analogy with today begins. After the deluge of 9/11 we have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug our ears, or we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization by insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms — both for ourselves and for others.

”God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring indulge themselves in escapism,” said Tzvi, ”but he also refused to give them license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind up to that point had failed.”

The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11, but without becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We must defend ourselves — without throwing out civil liberties at home, without barring every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a huge shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can leave people feeling powerless, and without telling the world we’re going to do whatever we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off.

Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the credibility to demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand the rule of law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism, pluralism, women’s rights and respect for the notion that my grievance, however deep, does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere.

It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where have you been since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all your prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when members of your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or committed suicide against ”infidels,” your press extolled them as martyrs and your spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew no new moral red lines in their schools. That’s a problem, because if there isn’t a struggle within Islam — over norms and values — there is going to be a struggle between Islam and us.

In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not work. Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient. Building higher walls may feel comforting, but in today’s interconnected world they’re an illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by internal walls — norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and loudly demanding them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our shrinking planet.

Otherwise, start building an ark.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905E7D61431F932A2575AC0A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Observations on Benedict XVI’s Passover Eve Synagogue Visit

April 19, 2008

Witness video of Benedict’s Passover eve synagogue visit in its entirety at this link:

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/Pope.Benedict.NYC.2.703533.html

What can we observe here that has not already been pointed out?

There is a tremendous amount of effort being devoted towards propping up the idea that these people who today call themselves “Jews” are actual descendants of the ancient Israelites. Maintaining this illusion is critical to the entire charade.

Likewise there’s a great deal of effort made to associate Jesus with the people who today call themselves “Jews” and the anti-Biblical religion of Orthodox Judaism. Benedict stated, “I find it moving to recall that Jesus, as a young boy, heard the words of Scripture and prayed in a place such as this [NY synagogue].” This statement is false and ridiculous, but it does create an association between Jesus and the Talmudic synagogues of today, which is its most likely intended purpose.

The “brothers” theme was reinforced by the rabbi. This is a clear allusion to Jacob and Esau who were at conflict in the Old Testament. There is a Kabbalistic gnosis having to do with “Jacob” being reconciled with “Esau” prior to the Judaic “redemption.” This gnosis stems from the occult tradition related to the conjunction of opposites. The Vatican’s relentless drive towards “reconciliation” between Christians and Orthodox Judaic followers of the Talmud and Kabbalah is harmonious with this Kabbalistic tradition and has nothing to do with Christian, Biblical tradition. St. Paul spoke of reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles, but that it could only be through faith in Jesus Christ. This is beside the fact that we can’t know who the true descendants of Abraham, Issac and Jacob are. To apply St. Paul’s words regarding reconciliation to these Khazars and Sephardim who deny Christ and adhere to Talmud and Kabbalah is as diabolical as it is foolish.

The gifts that are exchanged at these meetings between the popes and Judaic leaders invariably are Judaic gifts. There is a lot to be read into this in terms of direction and proportion in their “dialogue.” The synagogue gave Benedict a silver Seder plate, a Passover haggadah and matzo, and he gave them a medieval Judaic codex.

The Judaic codex which Benedict gave the synagogue as a gift was a text from the medieval rabbinic codifier, Jacob ben Asher the Ba’al ha-Turim (Master of the Pillars). Jacob ben Asher is best known for his Rimzei Ba’al ha-Turim, a work of gematria, which is to say, methods for finding “hidden teachings” in Biblical texts which, consequently, nullify the written meaning.

These poor, deluded people could benefit so much more from a copy of the New Testament than the satanic gematria of Jacob ben Asher, but why would Benedict bring the Gospel to a synagogue on the anniversary of Christ’s execution? Apparently, Benedict visited these people in their synagogue on this day only to celebrate with them in their delusional ethnic conceit, praise them for their anti-Biblical traditions, and to validate those same ethnic delusions and anti-Biblical traditions in the eyes of Christians. The only preaching I heard had to do with the anti-Biblical doctrine, “Tikkun Olam” and it came from the rabbi.

Speaking of gematria, The NY Times has gone to great lengths to document that the visit was 22 minutes long. Those who understand the Kabbalistic obsession with numbers will recognize the significance here:

Pope Benedict XVI paid a 22-minute visit to the Park East Synagogue — the first papal trip to a United States synagogue — on Friday afternoon …

The pope entered the synagogue at 5:16 p.m. …

The pope exited the synagogue at 5:38 p.m., ending a visit of just over 20 minutes. (Pope Makes First Visit to a U.S. Synagogue,” Sewell Chan, The New York Times, April 19, 2008) http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/a-key-moment-in-benedicts-relationship-with-the-jews/?hp

Benedict could well have become the most treacherous “vicar of Christ” in history after these past two days. Meanwhile, “traditionalists” are focused on complaining about the music at his baseball stadium Mass …

See also:

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2008/04/at-synagogue-pope-tells-two-lies-in-two.html

Observations on Benedict XVI’s Passover Eve Synagogue Visit

April 19, 2008

Witness video of Benedict’s Passover eve synagogue visit in its entirety at this link:

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/Pope.Benedict.NYC.2.703533.html

What can we observe here that has not already been pointed out?

There is a tremendous amount of effort being devoted towards propping up the idea that these people who today call themselves “Jews” are actual descendants of the ancient Israelites. Maintaining this illusion is critical to the entire charade.

Likewise there’s a great deal of effort made to associate Jesus with the people who today call themselves “Jews” and the anti-Biblical religion of Orthodox Judaism. Benedict stated, “I find it moving to recall that Jesus, as a young boy, heard the words of Scripture and prayed in a place such as this [NY synagogue].” This statement is false and ridiculous, but it does create an association between Jesus and the Talmudic synagogues of today, which is its most likely intended purpose.

The “brothers” theme was reinforced by the rabbi. This is a clear allusion to Jacob and Esau who were at conflict in the Old Testament. There is a Kabbalistic gnosis having to do with “Jacob” being reconciled with “Esau” prior to the Judaic “redemption.” This gnosis stems from the occult tradition related to the conjunction of opposites. The Vatican’s relentless drive towards “reconciliation” between Christians and Orthodox Judaic followers of the Talmud and Kabbalah is harmonious with this Kabbalistic tradition and has nothing to do with Christian, Biblical tradition. St. Paul spoke of reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles, but that it could only be through faith in Jesus Christ. This is beside the fact that we can’t know who the true descendants of Abraham, Issac and Jacob are. To apply St. Paul’s words regarding reconciliation to these Khazars and Sephardim who deny Christ and adhere to Talmud and Kabbalah is as diabolical as it is foolish.

The gifts that are exchanged at these meetings between the popes and Judaic leaders invariably are Judaic gifts. There is a lot to be read into this in terms of direction and proportion in their “dialogue.” The synagogue gave Benedict a silver Seder plate, a Passover haggadah and matzo, and he gave them a medieval Judaic codex.

The Judaic codex which Benedict gave the synagogue as a gift was a text from the medieval rabbinic codifier, Jacob ben Asher the Ba’al ha-Turim (Master of the Pillars). Jacob ben Asher is best known for his Rimzei Ba’al ha-Turim, a work of gematria, which is to say, methods for finding “hidden teachings” in Biblical texts which, consequently, nullify the written meaning.

These poor, deluded people could benefit so much more from a copy of the New Testament than the satanic gematria of Jacob ben Asher, but why would Benedict bring the Gospel to a synagogue on the anniversary of Christ’s execution? Apparently, Benedict visited these people in their synagogue on this day only to celebrate with them in their delusional ethnic conceit, praise them for their anti-Biblical traditions, and to validate those same ethnic delusions and anti-Biblical traditions in the eyes of Christians. The only preaching I heard had to do with the anti-Biblical doctrine, “Tikkun Olam” and it came from the rabbi.

Speaking of gematria, The NY Times has gone to great lengths to document that the visit was 22 minutes long. Those who understand the Kabbalistic obsession with numbers will recognize the significance here:

Pope Benedict XVI paid a 22-minute visit to the Park East Synagogue — the first papal trip to a United States synagogue — on Friday afternoon …

The pope entered the synagogue at 5:16 p.m. …

The pope exited the synagogue at 5:38 p.m., ending a visit of just over 20 minutes. (Pope Makes First Visit to a U.S. Synagogue,” Sewell Chan, The New York Times, April 19, 2008) http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/a-key-moment-in-benedicts-relationship-with-the-jews/?hp

Benedict could well have become the most treacherous “vicar of Christ” in history after these past two days. Meanwhile, “traditionalists” are focused on complaining about the music at his baseball stadium Mass …

See also:

http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2008/04/at-synagogue-pope-tells-two-lies-in-two.html

NY Times Piece on the Passover Eve Papal Synagogue Visit

April 15, 2008

The New York Times notes:

Something seems to guide popes to New York at moments of spiritual significance for Jews. John Paul landed here in October 1995 on Yom Kippur. Benedict now comes at Passover …

History Awaits the Pope and the Rabbi

By CLYDE HABERMAN – The New York Times

April 15, 2008

This is a busy time for Rabbi Arthur Schneier, and his schedule will only become more complicated as the week winds down. Preparations must be made for Passover, which begins Saturday night. Like any rabbi who leads a congregation, he has to write a sermon for the Sabbath. Then he needs to come up with themes for Passover services on Sunday and Monday.

Oh, one other thing: He also has to welcome a pope.

The New York journey of Pope Benedict XVI will include a historic stop of 20 minutes or so late Friday afternoon at the Park East Synagogue on East 67th Street, where Rabbi Schneier has been the spiritual leader since 1962. “Historic” is an often abused word. But in this instance it isn’t misplaced.

Never before has a pope visited a synagogue in this country. Indeed, till now, there have been only two recorded papal visits to synagogues anywhere: by John Paul II in Rome in 1986 and by Benedict in Cologne, Germany, in 2005, four months after he ascended to the papacy.

So Benedict’s conversation with Jewish religious and lay figures at Park East — think of it, with absolute respect, as the Schmooze of the Fisherman — is a certified big deal, brief though it will be.

“I look at it as a message of good will by Pope Benedict, saluting the largest Jewish community in the world outside of Israel — New York — but in a greater context, American Jewry and world Jewry,” Rabbi Schneier said. “Basically, the message is: ‘I am continuing the outreach to the Jews.’ ”

Something seems to guide popes to New York at moments of spiritual significance for Jews.

John Paul landed here in October 1995 on Yom Kippur. Benedict now comes at Passover …

Full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/nyregion/15nyc.html?ref=nyregion

NY Times Piece on the Passover Eve Papal Synagogue Visit

April 15, 2008

The New York Times notes:

Something seems to guide popes to New York at moments of spiritual significance for Jews. John Paul landed here in October 1995 on Yom Kippur. Benedict now comes at Passover …

History Awaits the Pope and the Rabbi

By CLYDE HABERMAN – The New York Times

April 15, 2008

This is a busy time for Rabbi Arthur Schneier, and his schedule will only become more complicated as the week winds down. Preparations must be made for Passover, which begins Saturday night. Like any rabbi who leads a congregation, he has to write a sermon for the Sabbath. Then he needs to come up with themes for Passover services on Sunday and Monday.

Oh, one other thing: He also has to welcome a pope.

The New York journey of Pope Benedict XVI will include a historic stop of 20 minutes or so late Friday afternoon at the Park East Synagogue on East 67th Street, where Rabbi Schneier has been the spiritual leader since 1962. “Historic” is an often abused word. But in this instance it isn’t misplaced.

Never before has a pope visited a synagogue in this country. Indeed, till now, there have been only two recorded papal visits to synagogues anywhere: by John Paul II in Rome in 1986 and by Benedict in Cologne, Germany, in 2005, four months after he ascended to the papacy.

So Benedict’s conversation with Jewish religious and lay figures at Park East — think of it, with absolute respect, as the Schmooze of the Fisherman — is a certified big deal, brief though it will be.

“I look at it as a message of good will by Pope Benedict, saluting the largest Jewish community in the world outside of Israel — New York — but in a greater context, American Jewry and world Jewry,” Rabbi Schneier said. “Basically, the message is: ‘I am continuing the outreach to the Jews.’ ”

Something seems to guide popes to New York at moments of spiritual significance for Jews.

John Paul landed here in October 1995 on Yom Kippur. Benedict now comes at Passover …

Full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/nyregion/15nyc.html?ref=nyregion

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.