Another reason I could never be orthodox
The mainline Orthodox rabbinic Association
just voted unanimously that one should die rather than ordain woman.Before the vote, the delegates heard a shiur by Rav Hershel Schachter, shlit”a, who said that there were two reasons lehalachah that women could not be ordained. He saw such ordination as a violation of the issur of serarah, citing an Avnei Nezer that modern semichah is invested with power. He then drew gasps from the audience when he said that it was also a yehareg v’al ya’avor – because the Conservative movement had made egalitarianism a key plank in its platform.
Read more: http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2010/04/28/the-day-the-rca-became-agudah/#ixzz0mUZ5S800
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Saturday, April 24, 2010
a Secure and strong Israel is vital to US interests
Obama endangers US National security by undermining Israel
Caroline Glick
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Israel's status as the US's most vital ally in the Middle East has been so widely recognized for so long that over the years, Israeli and American leaders alike have felt it unnecessary to explain what it is about the alliance that makes it so important for the US.
Today, as the Obama administration is openly distancing the US from Israel while giving the impression that Israel is a strategic impediment to the administration's attempts to strengthen its relations with the Arab world, recalling why Israel is the US's most important ally in the Middle East has become a matter of some urgency.
Much is made of the fact that Israel is a democracy. But we seldom consider why the fact that Israel is a representative democracy matters. The fact that Israel is a democracy means that its alliance with America reflects the will of the Israeli people. As such, it remains constant regardless of who is power in Jerusalem.
All of the US's other alliances in the Middle East are with authoritarian regimes whose people do not share the pro-American views of their leaders. The death of leaders or other political developments are liable to bring about rapid and dramatic changes in their relations with the US.
For instance, until 1979, Iran was one of the US's closest strategic allies in the region. Owing to the gap between the Iranian people and their leadership, the Islamic revolution put an end to the US-Iran alliance.
Egypt flipped from a bitter foe to an ally of the US when Gamal Abdel Nasser died in 1969. Octogenarian President Hosni Mubarak's encroaching death is liable to cause a similar shift in the opposite direction.
Instability in the Hashemite kingdom in Jordan and the Saudi regime could transform those countries from allies to adversaries.
Only Israel, where the government reflects the will of the people is a reliable, permanent US ally.
America reaps the benefits of its alliance with Israel every day. As the US suffers from chronic intelligence gaps, Israel remains the US's most reliable source for accurate intelligence on the US's enemies in the region.
Israel is the US's only ally in the Middle East that always fights its own battles. Indeed, Israel has never asked the US for direct military assistance in time of war. Since the US and Israel share the same regional foes, when Israel is called upon to fight its enemies, its successes redound to the US's benefit.
FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO INFLUENTIAL NEWSLETTER
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". HUNDREDS of columnists and cartoonists regularly appear. Sign up for the daily update. It's free. Just click here.
Here it bears recalling Israel's June 1982 destruction of Syria's Soviet-made anti-aircraft batteries and the Syrian air force. Those stunning Israeli achievements were the first clear demonstration of the absolute superiority of US military technology over Soviet military technology. Many have argued that it was this Israeli demonstration of Soviet technological inferiority that convinced the Reagan administration it was possible to win the Cold War.
In both military and non-military spheres, Israeli technological achievements - often developed with US support - are shared with America. The benefits the US has gained from Israeli technological advances in everything from medical equipment to microchips to pilotless aircraft are without peer worldwide.
Beyond the daily benefits the US enjoys from its close ties with Israel, the US has three fundamental, permanent, vital national security interests in the Middle East. A strong Israel is a prerequisite for securing all of these interests.
America's three permanent strategic interests in the Middle East are as follows:
1 - Ensuring the smooth flow of affordable petroleum products from the region to global consumers through the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Aden and the Suez Canal.
2 - Preventing the most radical regimes, sub-state and non-state actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm.
3 - Maintaining the US's capacity to project its power to the region.
A strong Israel is the best guarantor of all of these interests. Indeed, the stronger Israel is, the more secure these vital American interests are. Three permanent and unique aspects to Israel's regional position dictate this state of affairs.
1 - As the first target of the most radical regimes and radical sub-state actors in the region, Israel has a permanent, existential interest in preventing these regimes and sub-state actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm.
Israel's 1981 airstrike that destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor prevented Iraq from acquiring nuclear weapons. Despite US condemnation at the time, the US later acknowledged that the strike was a necessary precondition to the success of Operation Desert Storm ten years later. Richard Cheney - who served as secretary of defense during Operation Desert Storm - has stated that if Iraq had been a nuclear power in 1991, the US would have been hard pressed to eject Saddam Hussein's Iraqi army from Kuwait and so block his regime from asserting control over oil supplies in the Persian Gulf.
2 - Israel is a non-expansionist state and its neighbors know it. In its 62 year history, Israel has only controlled territory vital for its national security and territory that was legally allotted to it in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate which has never been abrogated or superseded.
Israel's strength, which it has used only in self-defense, is inherently non-threatening. Far from destabilizing the region, a strong Israel stabilizes the Middle East by deterring the most radical actors from attacking.
In 1970, Israel blocked Syria's bid to use the PLO to overthrow the Hashemite regime in Jordan. Israel's threat to attack Syria not only saved the Hashemites then, it has deterred Syria from attempting to overthrow the Jordanian regime ever since.
Similarly, Israel's neighbors understand that its purported nuclear arsenal is a weapon of national survival and hence they view it as non-threatening. This is the reason Israel's alleged nuclear arsenal has never spurred a regional nuclear arms race.
In stark contrast, if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, a regional nuclear arms race will ensue immediately.
Although they will never admit it, Israel's non-radical neighbors feel more secure when Israel is strong. On the other hand, the region's most radical regimes and non-state actors will always seek to emasculate Israel.
3-- Since as the Jewish state Israel is the regional bogeyman, no Arab state will agree to form a permanent alliance with it. Hence, Israel will never be in a position to join forces with another nation against a third nation.
In contrast, the Egyptian-Syrian United Arab Republic of the 1960s was formed to attack Israel. Today, the Syrian-Iranian alliance is an inherently aggressive alliance against Israel and the non-radical Arab states in the region. Recognizing the stabilizing force of a strong Israel, the moderate states of the region prefer for Israel to remain strong.
From the US's perspective, far from impairing its alliance-making capabilities in the region, by providing military assistance to Israel, America isn't just strengthening the most stabilizing force in the region. It is showing all states and non-state actors in the greater Middle East it is trustworthy.
On the other hand, every time the US seeks to attenuate its ties with Israel, it is viewed as an untrustworthy ally by the nations of the Middle East. US hostility towards Israel causes Israel's neighbors to hedge their bets by distancing themselves from the US lest America abandon them to their neighboring adversaries.
A strong Israel empowers the relatively moderate actors in the region to stand up to the radical actors in the region because they trust Israel to keep the radicals in check. Today's regional balance of power in which the moderates have the upper hand over the radicals is predicated on a strong Israel.
On the other hand, when Israel is weakened the radical forces are emboldened to threaten the status quo. Regional stability is thrown asunder. Wars become more likely. Attacks on oil resources increase. The most radical sub-state actors and regimes are emboldened.
To the extent that the two-state solution assumes that Israel must contract itself to within the indefensible 1949 ceasefire lines, and allow a hostile Palestinian state allied with terrorist organizations to take power in the areas it vacates, the two-state solution is predicated on making Israel weak and empowering radicals. In light of this, the two-state solution as presently constituted is antithetical to America's most vital strategic interests in the Middle East.
When we bear in mind the foundations for the US's alliance with Israel, it is obvious that US support for Israel over the years has been the most cost-effective national security investment in post-World War II US history.
who votes with the US who votes against?
How Does Israel Vote?
1999 Israel voted WITH America 90% of the time!
2000 Israel voted WITH America 96.2% of the time!
2001 Israel voted WITH America 100% of the time!
2002 Israel voted WITH America 92.6% of the time!
2003 Israel voted WITH America 89% of the time!
Israel is America's Most Loyal Ally!
How do other "friends of America vote?
Great Britain voted with America 60% of the time.
Australia voted with America 56% of the time.
France voted with America 54% of the time.
Canada voted with America 49% of the time.
Japan voted with America 42% of the time.
Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:
Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time
United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time.
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time.
India votes against the United States 81% of the time.
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.
U S Foreign Aid to those that hate us:
Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2 billion annually in US Foreign Aid.
Jordan votes 71% against the United States
And receives $192,814,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
Pakistan votes 75% against the United States
Receives $6,721,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
India votes 81% against the United States
Receives $143,699,000 annually.
Caroline Glick
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Israel's status as the US's most vital ally in the Middle East has been so widely recognized for so long that over the years, Israeli and American leaders alike have felt it unnecessary to explain what it is about the alliance that makes it so important for the US.
Today, as the Obama administration is openly distancing the US from Israel while giving the impression that Israel is a strategic impediment to the administration's attempts to strengthen its relations with the Arab world, recalling why Israel is the US's most important ally in the Middle East has become a matter of some urgency.
Much is made of the fact that Israel is a democracy. But we seldom consider why the fact that Israel is a representative democracy matters. The fact that Israel is a democracy means that its alliance with America reflects the will of the Israeli people. As such, it remains constant regardless of who is power in Jerusalem.
All of the US's other alliances in the Middle East are with authoritarian regimes whose people do not share the pro-American views of their leaders. The death of leaders or other political developments are liable to bring about rapid and dramatic changes in their relations with the US.
For instance, until 1979, Iran was one of the US's closest strategic allies in the region. Owing to the gap between the Iranian people and their leadership, the Islamic revolution put an end to the US-Iran alliance.
Egypt flipped from a bitter foe to an ally of the US when Gamal Abdel Nasser died in 1969. Octogenarian President Hosni Mubarak's encroaching death is liable to cause a similar shift in the opposite direction.
Instability in the Hashemite kingdom in Jordan and the Saudi regime could transform those countries from allies to adversaries.
Only Israel, where the government reflects the will of the people is a reliable, permanent US ally.
America reaps the benefits of its alliance with Israel every day. As the US suffers from chronic intelligence gaps, Israel remains the US's most reliable source for accurate intelligence on the US's enemies in the region.
Israel is the US's only ally in the Middle East that always fights its own battles. Indeed, Israel has never asked the US for direct military assistance in time of war. Since the US and Israel share the same regional foes, when Israel is called upon to fight its enemies, its successes redound to the US's benefit.
FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO INFLUENTIAL NEWSLETTER
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". HUNDREDS of columnists and cartoonists regularly appear. Sign up for the daily update. It's free. Just click here.
Here it bears recalling Israel's June 1982 destruction of Syria's Soviet-made anti-aircraft batteries and the Syrian air force. Those stunning Israeli achievements were the first clear demonstration of the absolute superiority of US military technology over Soviet military technology. Many have argued that it was this Israeli demonstration of Soviet technological inferiority that convinced the Reagan administration it was possible to win the Cold War.
In both military and non-military spheres, Israeli technological achievements - often developed with US support - are shared with America. The benefits the US has gained from Israeli technological advances in everything from medical equipment to microchips to pilotless aircraft are without peer worldwide.
Beyond the daily benefits the US enjoys from its close ties with Israel, the US has three fundamental, permanent, vital national security interests in the Middle East. A strong Israel is a prerequisite for securing all of these interests.
America's three permanent strategic interests in the Middle East are as follows:
1 - Ensuring the smooth flow of affordable petroleum products from the region to global consumers through the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Aden and the Suez Canal.
2 - Preventing the most radical regimes, sub-state and non-state actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm.
3 - Maintaining the US's capacity to project its power to the region.
A strong Israel is the best guarantor of all of these interests. Indeed, the stronger Israel is, the more secure these vital American interests are. Three permanent and unique aspects to Israel's regional position dictate this state of affairs.
1 - As the first target of the most radical regimes and radical sub-state actors in the region, Israel has a permanent, existential interest in preventing these regimes and sub-state actors from acquiring the means to cause catastrophic harm.
Israel's 1981 airstrike that destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor prevented Iraq from acquiring nuclear weapons. Despite US condemnation at the time, the US later acknowledged that the strike was a necessary precondition to the success of Operation Desert Storm ten years later. Richard Cheney - who served as secretary of defense during Operation Desert Storm - has stated that if Iraq had been a nuclear power in 1991, the US would have been hard pressed to eject Saddam Hussein's Iraqi army from Kuwait and so block his regime from asserting control over oil supplies in the Persian Gulf.
2 - Israel is a non-expansionist state and its neighbors know it. In its 62 year history, Israel has only controlled territory vital for its national security and territory that was legally allotted to it in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate which has never been abrogated or superseded.
Israel's strength, which it has used only in self-defense, is inherently non-threatening. Far from destabilizing the region, a strong Israel stabilizes the Middle East by deterring the most radical actors from attacking.
In 1970, Israel blocked Syria's bid to use the PLO to overthrow the Hashemite regime in Jordan. Israel's threat to attack Syria not only saved the Hashemites then, it has deterred Syria from attempting to overthrow the Jordanian regime ever since.
Similarly, Israel's neighbors understand that its purported nuclear arsenal is a weapon of national survival and hence they view it as non-threatening. This is the reason Israel's alleged nuclear arsenal has never spurred a regional nuclear arms race.
In stark contrast, if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, a regional nuclear arms race will ensue immediately.
Although they will never admit it, Israel's non-radical neighbors feel more secure when Israel is strong. On the other hand, the region's most radical regimes and non-state actors will always seek to emasculate Israel.
3-- Since as the Jewish state Israel is the regional bogeyman, no Arab state will agree to form a permanent alliance with it. Hence, Israel will never be in a position to join forces with another nation against a third nation.
In contrast, the Egyptian-Syrian United Arab Republic of the 1960s was formed to attack Israel. Today, the Syrian-Iranian alliance is an inherently aggressive alliance against Israel and the non-radical Arab states in the region. Recognizing the stabilizing force of a strong Israel, the moderate states of the region prefer for Israel to remain strong.
From the US's perspective, far from impairing its alliance-making capabilities in the region, by providing military assistance to Israel, America isn't just strengthening the most stabilizing force in the region. It is showing all states and non-state actors in the greater Middle East it is trustworthy.
On the other hand, every time the US seeks to attenuate its ties with Israel, it is viewed as an untrustworthy ally by the nations of the Middle East. US hostility towards Israel causes Israel's neighbors to hedge their bets by distancing themselves from the US lest America abandon them to their neighboring adversaries.
A strong Israel empowers the relatively moderate actors in the region to stand up to the radical actors in the region because they trust Israel to keep the radicals in check. Today's regional balance of power in which the moderates have the upper hand over the radicals is predicated on a strong Israel.
On the other hand, when Israel is weakened the radical forces are emboldened to threaten the status quo. Regional stability is thrown asunder. Wars become more likely. Attacks on oil resources increase. The most radical sub-state actors and regimes are emboldened.
To the extent that the two-state solution assumes that Israel must contract itself to within the indefensible 1949 ceasefire lines, and allow a hostile Palestinian state allied with terrorist organizations to take power in the areas it vacates, the two-state solution is predicated on making Israel weak and empowering radicals. In light of this, the two-state solution as presently constituted is antithetical to America's most vital strategic interests in the Middle East.
When we bear in mind the foundations for the US's alliance with Israel, it is obvious that US support for Israel over the years has been the most cost-effective national security investment in post-World War II US history.
who votes with the US who votes against?
How Does Israel Vote?
1999 Israel voted WITH America 90% of the time!
2000 Israel voted WITH America 96.2% of the time!
2001 Israel voted WITH America 100% of the time!
2002 Israel voted WITH America 92.6% of the time!
2003 Israel voted WITH America 89% of the time!
Israel is America's Most Loyal Ally!
How do other "friends of America vote?
Great Britain voted with America 60% of the time.
Australia voted with America 56% of the time.
France voted with America 54% of the time.
Canada voted with America 49% of the time.
Japan voted with America 42% of the time.
Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:
Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time
United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time.
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time.
India votes against the United States 81% of the time.
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.
U S Foreign Aid to those that hate us:
Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2 billion annually in US Foreign Aid.
Jordan votes 71% against the United States
And receives $192,814,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
Pakistan votes 75% against the United States
Receives $6,721,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
India votes 81% against the United States
Receives $143,699,000 annually.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
Monday, April 12, 2010
Is America selling Israel down the river?
Monday, April 12, 2010
Is America selling Israel down the river?
Obama's Seam Line Policy and Israel's Conditional Existence
By Yisrael Ne'eman
This past Thursday, April 8, Israel's Channel 10 reported that US Administration sources confirmed that as far as Israel is concerned, American policy towards Iran will be linked to advancements made on the Palestinian-Israeli peace front. Such a laconic statement betrays a major shift in American foreign policy, driving home the new foreign policy message of the Obama Administration. Should such a linkage now exist where it never existed before, Israel may very well be facing an existential threat not only in the short term from Iran, but in the overall long run of American foreign policy thinking. The strategic alliance with the United States will now be coming to an end and Jewish national sovereignty under certain circumstances will be considered expendable by the Americans. Previously Israel's existence was an unshakeable "given" as made clear by the previous two administrations. Certainly since 1969 and the beginning of the alliance under Nixon and despite Bush Sr. and even Pres. Carter, it was understood that the existence of the Israeli state was not negotiable. Now it may be.
see rest of article http://israelgreatest.blogspot.com/p/obama-and-israel.html
Is America selling Israel down the river?
Obama's Seam Line Policy and Israel's Conditional Existence
By Yisrael Ne'eman
This past Thursday, April 8, Israel's Channel 10 reported that US Administration sources confirmed that as far as Israel is concerned, American policy towards Iran will be linked to advancements made on the Palestinian-Israeli peace front. Such a laconic statement betrays a major shift in American foreign policy, driving home the new foreign policy message of the Obama Administration. Should such a linkage now exist where it never existed before, Israel may very well be facing an existential threat not only in the short term from Iran, but in the overall long run of American foreign policy thinking. The strategic alliance with the United States will now be coming to an end and Jewish national sovereignty under certain circumstances will be considered expendable by the Americans. Previously Israel's existence was an unshakeable "given" as made clear by the previous two administrations. Certainly since 1969 and the beginning of the alliance under Nixon and despite Bush Sr. and even Pres. Carter, it was understood that the existence of the Israeli state was not negotiable. Now it may be.
see rest of article http://israelgreatest.blogspot.com/p/obama-and-israel.html
Are Democrat's turning on Israel?
Whittling Away at Bipartisan Support of Israel
Max Boot - 04.12.2010 - 11:23 AM
Jeff Jacoby, the Boston Globe’s excellent columnist, puts his finger on a disturbing trend: the increasing partisan split over Israel. This split was partially masked by the fact that a bipartisan group of 333 House members signed a letter in support of Israel — in effect, a rebuke to President Obama — organized by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Minority Whip Eric Cantor. But, as Jeff notes, “only seven Republicans … declined to sign the letter, compared with 91 Democrats — more than a third of the entire Democratic caucus.” Similarly, while the Gallup poll shows that 67 percent of Americans have a favorable view of Israel and only 15 percent support the Palestinians, there is a partisan split hidden in the numbers:
While support for Israel vs. the Palestinians has climbed to a stratospheric 85 percent among Republicans, the comparable figure for Democrats is an anemic 48 percent. (It was 60 percent for independents.)
These figures are hardly cause for panic. Support for Israel still remains deep and strong in American politics, but you can see that the hard Left’s turn against Israel, which has been getting more pronounced for decades, is starting to affect the Democratic mainstream. My concern is that President Obama’s sharp rebukes of Prime Minister Netanyahu will further drive down support in his party for Israel — especially if the president decides to mount a concerted public campaign painting Israel as the culprit in the peace talks. For the time being, pro-Israel sentiment on Capitol Hill will somewhat rein in the president’s ability to punish Israel (although he would have a free hand not to veto the usual anti-Israel resolutions in the United Nations Security Council). But for how much longer can Israel count on the support of Democratic and Republican administrations alike? I don’t know, and that worries me — as it should worry all supporters of Israel
Max Boot - 04.12.2010 - 11:23 AM
Jeff Jacoby, the Boston Globe’s excellent columnist, puts his finger on a disturbing trend: the increasing partisan split over Israel. This split was partially masked by the fact that a bipartisan group of 333 House members signed a letter in support of Israel — in effect, a rebuke to President Obama — organized by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Minority Whip Eric Cantor. But, as Jeff notes, “only seven Republicans … declined to sign the letter, compared with 91 Democrats — more than a third of the entire Democratic caucus.” Similarly, while the Gallup poll shows that 67 percent of Americans have a favorable view of Israel and only 15 percent support the Palestinians, there is a partisan split hidden in the numbers:
While support for Israel vs. the Palestinians has climbed to a stratospheric 85 percent among Republicans, the comparable figure for Democrats is an anemic 48 percent. (It was 60 percent for independents.)
These figures are hardly cause for panic. Support for Israel still remains deep and strong in American politics, but you can see that the hard Left’s turn against Israel, which has been getting more pronounced for decades, is starting to affect the Democratic mainstream. My concern is that President Obama’s sharp rebukes of Prime Minister Netanyahu will further drive down support in his party for Israel — especially if the president decides to mount a concerted public campaign painting Israel as the culprit in the peace talks. For the time being, pro-Israel sentiment on Capitol Hill will somewhat rein in the president’s ability to punish Israel (although he would have a free hand not to veto the usual anti-Israel resolutions in the United Nations Security Council). But for how much longer can Israel count on the support of Democratic and Republican administrations alike? I don’t know, and that worries me — as it should worry all supporters of Israel
Friday, April 9, 2010
Holocaust 2010 reminders Chavez attacking Jews
om the beginning of his rule in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez has stridently criticized Israel. In recent months, Chavez has found a more vulnerable target: the Jewish population inside Venezuela.
Last week, an angry mob broke out in Miranda, Venezuela’s second largest state. Reports indicate that the Mayor of Miranda’s capital city incited an angry group of Chavez supporters to paint Nazi swastikas on the home of an anti-Chavez Jewish politician, Governor Henrique Capriles Radonski. “We are showing Capriles that …people are opposed to his continuous attacks against the initiatives and socialist projects of president Chávez,” explained Los Teques Mayor Alirio Mendoza. Governor Radonski is a charismatic Chavez opponent, and has spent time in jail for a minor role in Venezuela’s failed coup of 2004. Further, since he is perhaps the only well-known Jewish politician in the country, it is easy to understand why he has become a prime target for irate Chavistas.
Last week, an angry mob broke out in Miranda, Venezuela’s second largest state. Reports indicate that the Mayor of Miranda’s capital city incited an angry group of Chavez supporters to paint Nazi swastikas on the home of an anti-Chavez Jewish politician, Governor Henrique Capriles Radonski. “We are showing Capriles that …people are opposed to his continuous attacks against the initiatives and socialist projects of president Chávez,” explained Los Teques Mayor Alirio Mendoza. Governor Radonski is a charismatic Chavez opponent, and has spent time in jail for a minor role in Venezuela’s failed coup of 2004. Further, since he is perhaps the only well-known Jewish politician in the country, it is easy to understand why he has become a prime target for irate Chavistas.
Holocaust 2010 reminders Muslim cleric calls jew pigs
Australia: Muslim cleric calls Jews pigs and urges children to die for Allah
In accord with Qur'an 2:62-5; 5:59-60; and 7:166. "Sydney cleric ridicules Jews: report," from AAP, with thanks to David:
Sydney's most influential radical Muslim cleric has been reportedly caught on film calling Jews pigs and urging children to die for Allah.
Sheikh Feiz Mohammed, head of the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, delivers the hateful rants on a collection of DVDs called the Death Series, sold in Australia and overseas, News Limited newspapers report.
In accord with Qur'an 2:62-5; 5:59-60; and 7:166. "Sydney cleric ridicules Jews: report," from AAP, with thanks to David:
Sydney's most influential radical Muslim cleric has been reportedly caught on film calling Jews pigs and urging children to die for Allah.
Sheikh Feiz Mohammed, head of the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, delivers the hateful rants on a collection of DVDs called the Death Series, sold in Australia and overseas, News Limited newspapers report.
Holocaust 2010 reminders Iran denies holocaust as it plans another one
Iranian leader denies Holocaust
Ahmadinejad's remarks echo other recent statements
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has courted further controversy by explicitly calling the Nazi Holocaust of European Jewry a "myth".
"They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets," he said.
Iran President Calls Israel a 'Tyrannical Regime'
NewsMax.com Wires
Thursday, May 11, 2006
JAKARTA, Indonesia -- Iran's president on Thursday intensified his attacks against Israel, calling it a "a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed,"
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has previously said Israel should be wiped off the map,
while Obama embargoes Israel's nuclear program and admits sancvtion on Iran won't work
The U.S. is refusing to admit Israeli nuclear scientists into the country and has created a “de-facto embargo” on equipment needed in the Dimona nuclear reactor, Arutz Sheva reports.
"Some people are not getting visas to the United States for the sole reason that they work at the Dimona reactor," said Zev Alfasi, professor of nuclear engineering at Ben-Gurion University."The U.S. does not sell a single piece of nuclear-related equipment to the Dimona reactor... They sell to the universities, but they refuse to sell equipment to the reactor," he added.
Ahmadinejad's remarks echo other recent statements
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has courted further controversy by explicitly calling the Nazi Holocaust of European Jewry a "myth".
"They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets," he said.
Iran President Calls Israel a 'Tyrannical Regime'
NewsMax.com Wires
Thursday, May 11, 2006
JAKARTA, Indonesia -- Iran's president on Thursday intensified his attacks against Israel, calling it a "a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed,"
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has previously said Israel should be wiped off the map,
while Obama embargoes Israel's nuclear program and admits sancvtion on Iran won't work
The U.S. is refusing to admit Israeli nuclear scientists into the country and has created a “de-facto embargo” on equipment needed in the Dimona nuclear reactor, Arutz Sheva reports.
"Some people are not getting visas to the United States for the sole reason that they work at the Dimona reactor," said Zev Alfasi, professor of nuclear engineering at Ben-Gurion University."The U.S. does not sell a single piece of nuclear-related equipment to the Dimona reactor... They sell to the universities, but they refuse to sell equipment to the reactor," he added.
Holocaust 2010 reminders Khmelnytsky Uprising
The Khmelnytsky Uprising[1] was a Cossack rebellion in Ukraine in 1648–1657 (1654[a]) which turned into a Ukrainian war of liberation from Poland. Under the command of Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, the Zaporozhian Cossacks allied with the Crimean Tatars, and the local peasantry, fought several battles against the armies and paramilitary forces of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The result was an eradication of the control of the Polish szlachta and their Jewish intermediaries, and the end of ecclesiastical jurisdiction for the Latin Rite Catholics (as well as Karaites, and other arendators) over the country.
1916 Simon Dubnow stated:
The losses inflicted on the Jews of Poland during the fatal decade 1648-1658 were appalling. In the reports of the chroniclers, the number of Jewish victims varies between one hundred thousand and five hundred thousand. But even if we accept the lower figure, the number of victims still remains colossal, even exceeding the catastrophes of the Crusades and the Black Death in Western Europe. Some seven hundred Jewish communities in Poland had suffered massacre and pillage. In the Ukrainian cities situated on the left banks of the Dnieper, the region populated by Cossacks... the Jewish communities had disappeared almost completely. In the localities on the right shore of the Dneiper or in the Polish part of the Ukraine as well as those of Volhynia and Podolia, wherever Cossacks had made their appearance, only about one tenth of the Jewish population survived.[16]
Stories about massacre victims who had been buried alive, cut to pieces, or forced to kill one another spread throughout Europe and beyond. These stories filled many with despair, and resulted in a revival of the ideas of Isaac Luria, and the identification of Sabbatai Zevi as the Messiah.[17]
From the 1960s to the 1980s historians still considered 100,000 a reasonable estimate of the Jews killed, and, according to Edward Flannery, many considered it "a minimum".[18] Max Dimont in Jews, God, and History, first published in 1962, writes "Perhaps as many as 100,000 Jews perished in the decade of this revolution." [19] Edward Flannery, writing in The Anguish of the Jews: Twenty-Three Centuries of Antisemitism, first published in 1965, also gives figures of 100,000 to 500,000, stating "Many historians consider the second figure exaggerated and the first a minimum".[18] Martin Gilbert in his Jewish History Atlas published in 1976 states "Over 100,000 Jews were killed; many more were tortured or ill-treated, others fled..."[20] Many other sources of the time give similar figures.[21]
Although many modern sources still give estimates of Jews killed in the uprising at 100,000[22] or more,[23] others put the numbers killed at between 40,000 and 100,000,[24] and recent academic studies have argued fatalities were even lower.
A 2003 study by Israeli demographer Shaul Stampfer of Hebrew University dedicated solely to the issue of Jewish casualties in the uprising concludes that 18,000-20,000 Jews were killed out of a total population of 40,000.[25] Paul Robert Magocsi states that Jewish chroniclers of the seventeenth century "provide invariably inflated figures with respect to the loss of life among the Jewish population of Ukraine. The numbers range from 60,000-80,000 (Nathan Hannover) to 100,000 (Sabbatai Cohen), but that "[t]he Israeli scholars Shmuel Ettinger and Bernard D. Weinryb speak instead of the 'annihilation of tens of thousands of Jewish lives'
1916 Simon Dubnow stated:
The losses inflicted on the Jews of Poland during the fatal decade 1648-1658 were appalling. In the reports of the chroniclers, the number of Jewish victims varies between one hundred thousand and five hundred thousand. But even if we accept the lower figure, the number of victims still remains colossal, even exceeding the catastrophes of the Crusades and the Black Death in Western Europe. Some seven hundred Jewish communities in Poland had suffered massacre and pillage. In the Ukrainian cities situated on the left banks of the Dnieper, the region populated by Cossacks... the Jewish communities had disappeared almost completely. In the localities on the right shore of the Dneiper or in the Polish part of the Ukraine as well as those of Volhynia and Podolia, wherever Cossacks had made their appearance, only about one tenth of the Jewish population survived.[16]
Stories about massacre victims who had been buried alive, cut to pieces, or forced to kill one another spread throughout Europe and beyond. These stories filled many with despair, and resulted in a revival of the ideas of Isaac Luria, and the identification of Sabbatai Zevi as the Messiah.[17]
From the 1960s to the 1980s historians still considered 100,000 a reasonable estimate of the Jews killed, and, according to Edward Flannery, many considered it "a minimum".[18] Max Dimont in Jews, God, and History, first published in 1962, writes "Perhaps as many as 100,000 Jews perished in the decade of this revolution." [19] Edward Flannery, writing in The Anguish of the Jews: Twenty-Three Centuries of Antisemitism, first published in 1965, also gives figures of 100,000 to 500,000, stating "Many historians consider the second figure exaggerated and the first a minimum".[18] Martin Gilbert in his Jewish History Atlas published in 1976 states "Over 100,000 Jews were killed; many more were tortured or ill-treated, others fled..."[20] Many other sources of the time give similar figures.[21]
Although many modern sources still give estimates of Jews killed in the uprising at 100,000[22] or more,[23] others put the numbers killed at between 40,000 and 100,000,[24] and recent academic studies have argued fatalities were even lower.
A 2003 study by Israeli demographer Shaul Stampfer of Hebrew University dedicated solely to the issue of Jewish casualties in the uprising concludes that 18,000-20,000 Jews were killed out of a total population of 40,000.[25] Paul Robert Magocsi states that Jewish chroniclers of the seventeenth century "provide invariably inflated figures with respect to the loss of life among the Jewish population of Ukraine. The numbers range from 60,000-80,000 (Nathan Hannover) to 100,000 (Sabbatai Cohen), but that "[t]he Israeli scholars Shmuel Ettinger and Bernard D. Weinryb speak instead of the 'annihilation of tens of thousands of Jewish lives'
Holocaust 2010 reminders bar cochba massacres
According to Cassius Dio, 580,000 Jews were killed, and 50 fortified towns and 985 villages razed.[7][8] The Talmud, however, claims a death toll in the millions. The latter figure is unlikely, because there were simply not that many Jews in the region at that time. Cassius Dio claimed that "Many Romans, moreover, perished in this war. Therefore, Hadrian, in writing to the Senate, did not employ the opening phrase commonly affected by the emperors: 'If you and your children are in health, it is well; I and the army are in health.'" [2]
Hadrian attempted to root out Judaism, which he saw as the cause of continuous rebellions. He prohibited the Torah law and the Hebrew calendar, and executed Judaic scholars. The sacred scroll was ceremonially burned on the Temple Mount. At the former Temple sanctuary, he installed two statues, one of Jupiter, another of himself. In an attempt to erase any memory of Judea or Ancient Israel, he wiped the name off the map and replaced it with Syria Palaestina, after the Philistines, the ancient enemies of the Jews; previously, similar terms had been used to describe only the (smaller) former Philistine homeland to the west of Judaea. Since then, the land has been referred to as "Palestine," which supplanted earlier terms such as "Iudaea" (Judaea) and Israel. Similarly, he re-established Jerusalem as the Roman pagan polis of Aelia Capitolina, and Jews were forbidden from entering it. Unfortunately for Hadrian, Rabbinic Judaism had already become a portable religion, centered around synagogues, and the Jews themselves kept books and dispersed throughout the Roman world and beyond.
Hadrian attempted to root out Judaism, which he saw as the cause of continuous rebellions. He prohibited the Torah law and the Hebrew calendar, and executed Judaic scholars. The sacred scroll was ceremonially burned on the Temple Mount. At the former Temple sanctuary, he installed two statues, one of Jupiter, another of himself. In an attempt to erase any memory of Judea or Ancient Israel, he wiped the name off the map and replaced it with Syria Palaestina, after the Philistines, the ancient enemies of the Jews; previously, similar terms had been used to describe only the (smaller) former Philistine homeland to the west of Judaea. Since then, the land has been referred to as "Palestine," which supplanted earlier terms such as "Iudaea" (Judaea) and Israel. Similarly, he re-established Jerusalem as the Roman pagan polis of Aelia Capitolina, and Jews were forbidden from entering it. Unfortunately for Hadrian, Rabbinic Judaism had already become a portable religion, centered around synagogues, and the Jews themselves kept books and dispersed throughout the Roman world and beyond.
Holocaust 2010 reminders Crusades and dead jews
Massacres During the Crusades - The first well documented riots or pogroms took place during the Crusades. Though violence was forbidden officially by the various popes, the bands of knights who set out on the crusades were essentially lawless marauders. Rather than protecting the Eastern Christians, which was one of the official goals of the Crusades, they often as not destroyed and plundered their communities. The conquest of Jerusalem itself was accompanied by a horrific pogrom, in which all the Jews who were not expelled were murdered.
Not surprisingly, the Crusaders turned on the Jews closest to hand. The first Crusade began in 1095. Guibert of Nogent (1053-1124) reported that the Crusaders of Rouen said: "we desire to combat the enemies of God in the East; but we have under our eyes the Jews, a race more inimical to God than all the others... The crusaders in Rouen and elsewhere in Lorraine massacred Jews who refused baptism. This was not the first instance of forced conversions. German Jews largely ignored warnings of their French coreligionists. The crusaders, egged on by preachers like Peter the Hermit and others, began to murder and pillage throughout the Rhine valley. In Speyer, "only" 10 Jews were reportedly murdered, thanks to the intervention of Bishop John. At Wurms, the majority of the Jews were killed, despite the protection and shelter granted them by Bishop Adalbert. Several hundred were massacred at Mainz with the approval of Achbishop Ruthard, and some committed suicide. In Koln (Cologne) Jews were hidden by order of Archbishop Adalbert, but they were soon discovered and murdered. In Ratisbon, the entire Jewish community was forcibly baptized in the Danube, to the accompaniment of a massacre. The massacres spread to Treves, Neuss, and Prague and many other other towns in Germany and Bohemia. In Jerusalem, Godfrey de Bouillon found all all the Jews conveniently assembled in a synagogue. He burnt it down and burned the Jews to death.
It is estimated that upwards of 10,000 Jews were murdered in Europe during the first Crusade, constituting a third to a quarter of the Jewish population. (Flannery, Edward, The Anguish of the Jews, Paulist Press, 2004 pp 93-94). This is likely to be an underestimate, since genetic studies indicate a "bottleneck" in the Jewish population of Europe at this time.
In Wurms, the massacre was preceded by a concocted blood libel:
It was the tenth of Iyar, Monday, that they connived against the Jews. They took a corpse of theirs, a trodden one that had been buried thrity days previously, and carried it through the city, saying "See what the Jews did to our neighbor! They took a Gentile, boiled him in water, and poured the water in our wells, in order kill us." When the Crusaders and burghers heard this, they shouted; anyone capable of wearing and unsheathing a sword gathered -- young and old -- and said, "Lo, the time and season have now arrived to avenge the one nailed into wood, whom their ancestors killed. Now let not one of them escape as a refugee -- even the young, the suckling in its crib!" They came and smote those remaining in their homes -- fine bachelors, fine and pleasant maidens, and the elderly, all stretched out their necks [to be slaughtered]; even freedmen and maids were killed among them, to honor the name of Gos">od - (Anonymous Chronicle of Mainz)
The remaining Jews were given shelter by the Bishop, but the mob murdered them too thirteen days later.
In Mainz, between 1014 and 1,200 Jews were murdered. (Ahituv, Shmuel, The Jewish People: An Illustrated History, Continuum, 2006, p. 251) The slaughter was conducted by armed knights under Emmicho (or Emich), rather than by an unruly mob. The chronicler of Mainz recorded:
When the enemies came to the rooms, they broke the doors and found the Jews still twitching and rolling in their own blood. They took the Jews' money, stripped them naked, and smote the remaining ones, not leaving any remnant. This they did in all the rooms that had members of the holy covenant. But there was one room that was strongly [fortified]; the enemies fought until evening to [enter] it. When the holy ones saw that the enemies were stronger than they, they stood up, men and women, and slaughtered the children, and then one another; some fell on their swords and died, some were killed by their own swords or knives. The righteous women would toss rocks to the enemies outside the windows, so the enemies could stone them, and they accepted all the stones [thrown back], until their entire flesh and face had become strips. They were abusing and insulting the Crusaders regarding the name of the hung one, the disgraced, disgusting son of adultery: "In whom do you trust, a trodden corpse?" And the Crusaders approached the door to break it...
The Crusaders killed everyone in that room and stripped them naked; the corpses were still twitching and becoming stained in their own blood as they were stripping them.
-- See, God! Look how I have become despicable! --
They then tossed them, naked, from the room through the windows; hills upon hills, mounds upon mounds, until they became like a tall mountain. Many members of the holy covenant, when they were being tossed, still had a bit of life left in them, and gestured with their fingers , "Give us water, that we may drink." When the Crusaders saw this, they asked them, "Do you want to sully (baptize) yourselves?" But they shook their heads and looked to their Father in heaven, to say, No, and they pointed to God; the Crusaders killed them.( Anonymous Chronicle of Mainz)
Following the first Crusade, many of the forcibly converted Jews were allowed to take up their faith again, against the objections of the anti-Pope Clement III. Some time during this period, the cry of "HEP, HEP" may have originated. It is variously thought to be a derisive call to livestock or the abbreviation of the Latin phrase, Heirosolyma Est Perdita (Jerusalem is lost).
The Second Crusade (1145-47) was accompanied by the preaching of an itinerant friar, Radulph, who called for slaying the Jews. Jews were expelled from Magdeburg and Halle. At Wurzburg, Crusaders slew the Rabbi and about 21 men women and children. But the strenuous intervention of St Bernard of Clairvaux attenuated the massacres. Bernard preached the crusade, but he opposed and debated Radulph. He set forth, once again and in detail, the doctrine of Jews as witnesses of the correctness of Christianity. Jews are not to be disturbed or destroyed, as they are living symbols of the Passion; they are punished mainly by dispersion, so that they shall be witnesses. They must not be murdered, as they must be saved for ultimate conversion.
The Third Crusade was marked by pogroms primarily in England. A riot took place at the coronation of Richard the Lion Hearted on September 3, 1189. Following his departure, crusaders who were preparing to follow him attacked the Jews at Lynn, Stamford, Bury St. Edmunds, Colchester, Thetford and Ospringe. At York, on March 18, 1190, 150 Jews immolated themselves to escape immolation or baptism.
The Crusades and the slaughter of the Jews during the Crusades weakened their economic and social position. Christians presently took up trade and competed with Jews. This became a motive for anti-Semitic agitation. It also made the Jews less valuable, as they no longer had a monopoly on trade, and therefore they were more vulnerable. (Sources: Jewish Encylopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica)
Ami Isseroff
March 29, 2009
Not surprisingly, the Crusaders turned on the Jews closest to hand. The first Crusade began in 1095. Guibert of Nogent (1053-1124) reported that the Crusaders of Rouen said: "we desire to combat the enemies of God in the East; but we have under our eyes the Jews, a race more inimical to God than all the others... The crusaders in Rouen and elsewhere in Lorraine massacred Jews who refused baptism. This was not the first instance of forced conversions. German Jews largely ignored warnings of their French coreligionists. The crusaders, egged on by preachers like Peter the Hermit and others, began to murder and pillage throughout the Rhine valley. In Speyer, "only" 10 Jews were reportedly murdered, thanks to the intervention of Bishop John. At Wurms, the majority of the Jews were killed, despite the protection and shelter granted them by Bishop Adalbert. Several hundred were massacred at Mainz with the approval of Achbishop Ruthard, and some committed suicide. In Koln (Cologne) Jews were hidden by order of Archbishop Adalbert, but they were soon discovered and murdered. In Ratisbon, the entire Jewish community was forcibly baptized in the Danube, to the accompaniment of a massacre. The massacres spread to Treves, Neuss, and Prague and many other other towns in Germany and Bohemia. In Jerusalem, Godfrey de Bouillon found all all the Jews conveniently assembled in a synagogue. He burnt it down and burned the Jews to death.
It is estimated that upwards of 10,000 Jews were murdered in Europe during the first Crusade, constituting a third to a quarter of the Jewish population. (Flannery, Edward, The Anguish of the Jews, Paulist Press, 2004 pp 93-94). This is likely to be an underestimate, since genetic studies indicate a "bottleneck" in the Jewish population of Europe at this time.
In Wurms, the massacre was preceded by a concocted blood libel:
It was the tenth of Iyar, Monday, that they connived against the Jews. They took a corpse of theirs, a trodden one that had been buried thrity days previously, and carried it through the city, saying "See what the Jews did to our neighbor! They took a Gentile, boiled him in water, and poured the water in our wells, in order kill us." When the Crusaders and burghers heard this, they shouted; anyone capable of wearing and unsheathing a sword gathered -- young and old -- and said, "Lo, the time and season have now arrived to avenge the one nailed into wood, whom their ancestors killed. Now let not one of them escape as a refugee -- even the young, the suckling in its crib!" They came and smote those remaining in their homes -- fine bachelors, fine and pleasant maidens, and the elderly, all stretched out their necks [to be slaughtered]; even freedmen and maids were killed among them, to honor the name of Gos">od - (Anonymous Chronicle of Mainz)
The remaining Jews were given shelter by the Bishop, but the mob murdered them too thirteen days later.
In Mainz, between 1014 and 1,200 Jews were murdered. (Ahituv, Shmuel, The Jewish People: An Illustrated History, Continuum, 2006, p. 251) The slaughter was conducted by armed knights under Emmicho (or Emich), rather than by an unruly mob. The chronicler of Mainz recorded:
When the enemies came to the rooms, they broke the doors and found the Jews still twitching and rolling in their own blood. They took the Jews' money, stripped them naked, and smote the remaining ones, not leaving any remnant. This they did in all the rooms that had members of the holy covenant. But there was one room that was strongly [fortified]; the enemies fought until evening to [enter] it. When the holy ones saw that the enemies were stronger than they, they stood up, men and women, and slaughtered the children, and then one another; some fell on their swords and died, some were killed by their own swords or knives. The righteous women would toss rocks to the enemies outside the windows, so the enemies could stone them, and they accepted all the stones [thrown back], until their entire flesh and face had become strips. They were abusing and insulting the Crusaders regarding the name of the hung one, the disgraced, disgusting son of adultery: "In whom do you trust, a trodden corpse?" And the Crusaders approached the door to break it...
The Crusaders killed everyone in that room and stripped them naked; the corpses were still twitching and becoming stained in their own blood as they were stripping them.
-- See, God! Look how I have become despicable! --
They then tossed them, naked, from the room through the windows; hills upon hills, mounds upon mounds, until they became like a tall mountain. Many members of the holy covenant, when they were being tossed, still had a bit of life left in them, and gestured with their fingers , "Give us water, that we may drink." When the Crusaders saw this, they asked them, "Do you want to sully (baptize) yourselves?" But they shook their heads and looked to their Father in heaven, to say, No, and they pointed to God; the Crusaders killed them.( Anonymous Chronicle of Mainz)
Following the first Crusade, many of the forcibly converted Jews were allowed to take up their faith again, against the objections of the anti-Pope Clement III. Some time during this period, the cry of "HEP, HEP" may have originated. It is variously thought to be a derisive call to livestock or the abbreviation of the Latin phrase, Heirosolyma Est Perdita (Jerusalem is lost).
The Second Crusade (1145-47) was accompanied by the preaching of an itinerant friar, Radulph, who called for slaying the Jews. Jews were expelled from Magdeburg and Halle. At Wurzburg, Crusaders slew the Rabbi and about 21 men women and children. But the strenuous intervention of St Bernard of Clairvaux attenuated the massacres. Bernard preached the crusade, but he opposed and debated Radulph. He set forth, once again and in detail, the doctrine of Jews as witnesses of the correctness of Christianity. Jews are not to be disturbed or destroyed, as they are living symbols of the Passion; they are punished mainly by dispersion, so that they shall be witnesses. They must not be murdered, as they must be saved for ultimate conversion.
The Third Crusade was marked by pogroms primarily in England. A riot took place at the coronation of Richard the Lion Hearted on September 3, 1189. Following his departure, crusaders who were preparing to follow him attacked the Jews at Lynn, Stamford, Bury St. Edmunds, Colchester, Thetford and Ospringe. At York, on March 18, 1190, 150 Jews immolated themselves to escape immolation or baptism.
The Crusades and the slaughter of the Jews during the Crusades weakened their economic and social position. Christians presently took up trade and competed with Jews. This became a motive for anti-Semitic agitation. It also made the Jews less valuable, as they no longer had a monopoly on trade, and therefore they were more vulnerable. (Sources: Jewish Encylopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica)
Ami Isseroff
March 29, 2009
Friday, April 2, 2010
daily Jewish living checklist
Daily Jewish Checklist
Today did I
1. Love God with all my heart soul and might?
Pray? Say brachote when appropriate? Learn some Torah?
Kiddush and not Hillul haShem-bring glory to God’s name
2. Love my neighbor as myself?
Not lie, cheat, steal, gossip, avoid helping?
Perform gmilut Hasidim-deeds of loving kindness
3. Help the Jewish people
Volunteer? Do something positive for Israel? Donate?
4. Bring my family closer
Malachai said the Messianic era will see fathers’ hearts turned towards sons, and sons towards fathers
In short, today, did I learn, live and love Jewishly?
Today did I
1. Love God with all my heart soul and might?
Pray? Say brachote when appropriate? Learn some Torah?
Kiddush and not Hillul haShem-bring glory to God’s name
2. Love my neighbor as myself?
Not lie, cheat, steal, gossip, avoid helping?
Perform gmilut Hasidim-deeds of loving kindness
3. Help the Jewish people
Volunteer? Do something positive for Israel? Donate?
4. Bring my family closer
Malachai said the Messianic era will see fathers’ hearts turned towards sons, and sons towards fathers
In short, today, did I learn, live and love Jewishly?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
