Israel Approves New Settlement Construction After Mass Murder of Family

Middle East • Views: 30,940

Palestinian terrorists infiltrated the Israeli West Bank settlement of Itamar late Friday night, and viciously stabbed to death a family of five in their beds — including a three-month old baby.

In response to this monstrous attack, Israel today approved the construction of hundreds of new housing units in several West Bank settlements.

Jump to bottom

361 comments
1 SpaceJesus  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:34:19pm

fuckers. hope they catch those responsible.

2 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:36:24pm

No use of the word 'terrorist' in the article.

Speaks volumes.

3 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:37:37pm

And Israel shows restraint:

Beyond the protests, fears of revenge attacks did not materialise immediately, with Palestinian witnesses and security sources reporting only a series of minor confrontations.

Several vehicles were damaged by stone throwing and one house suffered minor damage after being set on fire.

Troops quickly arrived and sent the settlers away from the villages.

Troops kept up their hunt for the perpetrators, imposing a curfew for a second day on Awarta village immediately west of Itamar, with Defence Minister Ehud Barak saying he was confident the killers would be caught.

4 Sol Berdinowitz  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:38:07pm

re: #2 researchok

No use of the word 'terrorist' in the article.

Speaks volumes.

What do you mean?

The last line reads ""The security of Israel -- its future and its borders -- will be determined by us, and not by murderous terror."

5 Warberg  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:41:11pm

More illegal settlements, yeah, that'll teach them! Uhm...

6 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:42:41pm

And folks, do yourselves a favor: don't read the comments on this article. It's yahoo; they're always a cesspool. Yahoo apparently doesn't think they have any responsibility to moderate their comments section.

7 Sol Berdinowitz  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:43:44pm

re: #3 Obdicut


Building more settlements is an odd form of restraint.

8 zora  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:43:54pm

re: #6 Obdicut

i read some of them. vile indeed.

9 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:44:39pm

re: #7 ralphieboy

I'm not commenting on the settlement issue. I'm pointing out there was no significant violent reprisal and that the Israeli government took steps to make sure that there wouldn't be, either.

10 SpaceJesus  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:44:55pm

re: #6 Obdicut


i like reading everything from fox to freep out of morbid curiosity (and the occasional trolling desire), but even i don't go near yahoo or youtube comments.

11 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:45:35pm

You can beat up on Israel and Israelis policies- I have no issue with that.

When even terror attacks are deliberately mislabeled and whitewashed, well, that is a whole other matter- as if misrepresenting the nature of the attack somehow makes the Palestinians less culpable. Further, it clarifies just how biased much of the MSM really is.

There's the real 'magical balance fairy'.

Deliberately stabbing an infant is not an assault- it is evil, it is vicious and it is terror. That takes a special kind of hate, one that is taught and accepted as an acceptable form of 'resistance'. This is not civilized behavior anywhere.

This cannot be whitewashed, explained or apologized for. Ever.

Thanks to VB for bringing attention to that.

12 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:46:01pm

re: #10 SpaceJesus

i like reading everything from fox to freep out of morbid curiosity (and the occasional trolling desire), but even i don't go near yahoo or youtube comments.

Meh. You haven't seen comments on the Russian-language news sites yet.

13 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:46:23pm

re: #6 Obdicut

And folks, do yourselves a favor: don't read the comments on this article. It's yahoo; they're always a cesspool. Yahoo apparently doesn't think they have any responsibility to moderate their comments section.

I don't know why Yahoo allows comments at all. The comments posted there are utterly worthless, and completely dominated by creeps and sickos. And it's been that way for many years.

14 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:46:55pm

re: #4 ralphieboy

What do you mean?

The last line reads ""The security of Israel -- its future and its borders -- will be determined by us, and not by murderous terror."

That was a quote- not a part of the reporting.

As if only Israelis consider the acts terror.

15 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:47:17pm

re: #11 researchok

as if misrepresenting the nature of the attack somehow makes the Palestinians less culpable

Sorry if I don't believe in collective responsibility.

16 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:47:45pm

re: #13 Charles

Yeah. It'd improve the quality of the site if they just did away with them entirely. I hadn't even thought of that, but that'd probably be the cleanest solution.

If you're not going to take the time and expense to moderate sufficiently, don't allow comments. You're just going to get people calling Israelis Nazis and Muslims animals.

17 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:47:46pm

I was at the funeral today in Jerusalem. 20,000 attended. Here are pictures of the family members who were murdered and pictures from the murder scene.
It is crucial to remember that the same Palestinians Israel is supposed to make peace with are teaching their children to hate Jews, that Jews are sub-human and deserve to die. I do not see how there can be any pretense of making peace as long as this incitement persists.

18 Sol Berdinowitz  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:48:27pm

re: #9 Obdicut


Israel is a functioning state, whever faults it might have. The same cannot be said of the Palestinians.

19 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:48:53pm

re: #15 Sergey Romanov

Sorry if I don't believe in collective responsibility.

This isn't about collective responsibility- this is about a culture and society that embraces the ideas that calls to racism and genocide are perfectly acceptable forms of expression.

20 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:49:20pm

re: #17 treasured people

It's not just Palestinians teaching that. The anti-semite industry is throughout the Middle East, large amounts of it coming from Saudi Arabia-- the US ally.

The reason for the power of the anti-semitic regimes surrounding Israel is oil. That is where their money and force comes from. That is why the US cannot afford to offend Saudi Arabia, even as they publish reams of anti-semitic propaganda.

The way to peace for Israel is the development of alternative energy.

21 steve_davis  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:52:06pm

re: #10 SpaceJesus

i like reading everything from fox to freep out of morbid curiosity (and the occasional trolling desire), but even i don't go near yahoo or youtube comments.

Actually, youtube comments can be pretty funny, at least where music is concerned. You'll get some joker who will state what a complete fraud Vic Wooten is on bass, and two comments later, you'll get a comment from another world-renowned bassist telling the first commenter what a complete moron he is. It's sort of like the Woody Allen movie where he pulls a movie director out from behind a display in order to rebut a loud-mouthed theater-goer.

22 Sol Berdinowitz  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:52:20pm

re: #20 Obdicut


Despots all over the Middle east can always count on stirring up hatred of Israel to keep their people distracted from their own excesses and failures.

23 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:53:20pm

re: #19 researchok

This isn't about collective responsibility- this is about a culture and society that embraces the ideas that calls to racism and genocide are perfectly acceptable forms of expression.

I'm pointing out the language problem. "The Palestinians" don't have culpability - unless there is collective responsibility. They're not an single entity responsible for each action of a member. The Palestinian murderers do have culpability, the Palestinian terrorists do have culpability, those who preach hatred in schools and on TV do have culpability, the whole nation doesn't.

24 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:54:44pm

re: #7 ralphieboy

Building more settlements is an odd form of restraint.

Some form of reprisal is needed. You don't want to go killing people who weren't responsible for the attack, but you do want to make it clear you're not going to be intimidated.

25 Sol Berdinowitz  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:56:35pm

re: #24 Dark_Falcon

Building settlements will all but guarantee further attacks.

But I must admit that I gave up trying to make sense of the settlement issue ages ago and only noice it when something like this happnes and puts it back in the headlines...

26 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:57:02pm

re: #20 Obdicut

Now that Israel is in a position to make a major impact on world gas and oil supply, it will be interesting to see if your theory about Arab oil and anti-Semitism holds up.

27 Kid A  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:58:11pm

Didn't President Clinton during his last weeks in office offer Arafat 98% of what he wanted, only to have Arafat's middle finger in his face?

28 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:58:52pm

re: #23 Sergey Romanov

I'm pointing out the language problem. "The Palestinians" don't have culpability - unless there is collective responsibility. They're not an single entity responsible for each action of a member. The Palestinian murderers do have culpability, the Palestinian terrorists do have culpability, those who preach hatred in schools and on TV do have culpability, the whole nation doesn't.

I understand your point and in fact, I'm sympathetic to it. I've said that before, as you know.

Imagine you had a neighbor who said he loved puppies and kittens. Imagine that neighbor spent every waking moment of every single day, promising the world that if just given the opportunity, he would take care of puppies and kittens, always. Suppose that neighbor went to the media and declared his commitment to puppies and kittens. Sounds like a pretty wonderful guy, right?

Now imagine that neighbor also said he wanted to kill blacks. Imagine he sang songs about killing blacks and imagine he sent his kids to a school that taught killing black people was mandated by God. Imagine your neighbor voted for a political party who promised the elimination or enslavement of all black people. Imagine that your neighbor went to a church where calls for the genocide of black people was considered a Godly idea. Imagine your neighbor celebrated violence against blacks with great joy and happiness.

Supposing there were a group of black people who lived next door who were sick and tired of all the attacks, threats and calls for genocide made not only by those neighbors, but by their friends as well. Supposing those black people said that they weren’t going to acquiesce to their bigoted and violent neighbor.

Maybe that wonderful neighbor who says he only wants to take care of kittens and puppies isn’t so wonderful after all. Maybe we ought to be asking the media why they are elevating the bigoted neighbor? Shouldn’t we be asking the media why they are characterizing those neighbors as loving puppies and kittens but not talking about their racism, bigotry and genocidal intent?

29 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 1:59:52pm

If only this went through in '08. We were so close.

30 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:00:03pm

re: #26 treasured people

Huh? It doesn't really matter. It might lower the price of oil a bit, but it won't have enough of an effect to seriously cut into the cash-flow of those regimes. And since oil is fungible, it won't make the US any more likely to spurn Saudi Arabia for its anti-Semitism.

Besides, Israel is a nation very, very vulnerable to AGW, so promoting oil and gas use is a definite double-edged sword for them. Luckily, Israel is taking the lead in many forms of alternative energy.

It'd be really awesome if the new energy age came from Israeli technology. A fitting end to this cold war.

31 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:01:15pm

re: #28 researchok

All you did with that analogy was use collective responsibility again. Kind of misses the point.

32 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:01:20pm

re: #23 Sergey Romanov

I'm pointing out the language problem. "The Palestinians" don't have culpability - unless there is collective responsibility. They're not an single entity responsible for each action of a member. The Palestinian murderers do have culpability, the Palestinian terrorists do have culpability, those who preach hatred in schools and on TV do have culpability, the whole nation doesn't.

Sergey, we only differ on how to deal with the problem, not with the nature of the problem.

You have no idea how much I wished you were right and I were wrong.

33 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:01:26pm

re: #28 researchok

That's the same argument that islamophobes make against all muslims for not denouncing islamic terrorism enough.

34 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:02:09pm

re: #29 recusancy

If only this went through in '08. We were so close.

The Palestinian 'leadership' didn't want it. They don't a real peace because they'd have to tell the Palestinian 'refugees' that they've been lied to and the 'refugees' won't be going to get their family's former property in Israel back.

35 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:02:56pm

If you think Yahoo's comments are bad, though, just have a look at what's being posted at the Geller-thing's site, where she published graphic oversized photos of the murdered children.

36 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:03:52pm

re: #31 Obdicut

All you did with that analogy was use collective responsibility again. Kind of misses the point.

No, it has never been about the kind of collective responsibility you are talking about- it is about the kind of responsibility that comes from allowing that kind of society and apologizing for it.

37 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:04:02pm

re: #21 steve_davis

Actually, youtube comments can be pretty funny, at least where music is concerned. You'll get some joker who will state what a complete fraud Vic Wooten is on bass, and two comments later, you'll get a comment from another world-renowned bassist telling the first commenter what a complete moron he is. It's sort of like the Woody Allen movie where he pulls a movie director out from behind a display in order to rebut a loud-mouthed theater-goer.

sconded, if you're looking for music links off the beaten path, Youtube has great comments


Just like, never go to a political yt video's comments, yow *_*

38 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:04:28pm

re: #28 researchok

You make a fair point about the media failing to point out the darker sides of the Palestinian culture. My point is larger than that. I cringe whenever Southerners are being beaten up here, though I understand the point of those making these comments. I cringe whenever someone accuses "the Germans" of the Holocaust. The comments about dysfunctional culture are fair and necessary. E.g. I think it's not racist to point out the dysfunction in the African American culture. But it's bad to say something negative about "the blacks". That's the whole of my point.

39 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:04:29pm

re: #5 Warberg

More illegal settlements, yeah, that'll teach them! Uhm...

What else should they do? Kill some Palestinian babies?

40 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:04:59pm

re: #35 Charles

If you think Yahoo's comments are bad, though, just have a look at what's being posted at the Geller-thing's site, where she published graphic oversized photos of the murdered children.

What's a little exploitation?
//

Shame on her. Disgusting.

41 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:05:00pm

re: #34 Dark_Falcon

The Palestinian 'leadership' didn't want it. They don't a real peace because they'd have to tell the Palestinian 'refugees' that they've been lied to and the 'refugees' won't be going to get their family's former property in Israel back.

Each told me that if new violence breaks out in Palestine, as seems quite likely, historians will look back with a sense of pathos on how narrow and, in some key areas, trivial the gaps were. “We were very close,” Olmert told me, “more than ever in the past, to complete an agreement on principles that would have led to the end of the conflict between us and the Palestinians.” Abbas said the talks produced more “creative ideas” than any in the past. He took pains to assure me that he had been most flexible on Israel’s security demands. Olmert, in retrospect, agrees, saying that Abbas “had never said no.” Olmert insisted that he had conceded to Abbas every major demand Palestinians had made for decades: a border based scrupulously on the 1967 lines, a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem and “recognition of the problem” of refugees. “I was ready to take complete responsibility and move forward forcefully,” Olmert told me. “I believed, I still believe, that I would have broken through all the barriers and won over public opinion in this country and the world.”

42 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:05:30pm

re: #35 Charles

If you think Yahoo's comments are bad, though, just have a look at what's being posted at the Geller-thing's site, where she published graphic oversized photos of the murdered children.

I am not going there, and I am not posting the crime scene photos at my blog, out of respect for the victims.

43 lawhawk  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:05:42pm

Hamas approves of the terror attacks, and Fatah's response is to name a street after a Fatah terrorist who killed 37 people in 1978 (just days after naming a youth center after the first female suicide bomber last week).

Incitement is expressly forbidden under Olso, but Fatah and Hamas routinely ignore that.

Those are the terror groups that Israel is supposed to be negotiating peace with.

Building housing is not an impediment to peace - and it never has been. Housing can always be transferred, but when Israel lacks a partner, talk about negotiating and peace deals is a pipe dream.

As for who was behind the attack - both Islamic Jihad and Hamas claimed responsibility (and other Hamas thugs say it wasn't them) but Israeli authorities don't think that those groups were involved since they lack the terror network in the West Bank. Yet, Hamas is saying that they're going to resume terror ops from the West Bank.

Hamas militants in the West Bank have resumed their efforts to kill Israeli soldiers or civilians and abduct their bodies, Palestinian and Israeli security sources have told Haaretz.

The sources said Hamas activists believe they cannot keep Israeli hostages out of the Shin Bet and Palestinian Authority's reach for long. So they plan to kill them, abduct and bury the bodies, then negotiate returning them to Israel.

Hamas headquarters in Damascus and Gaza are pressuring organization cells in the West Bank to kill Israelis and abduct their bodies, in view of the effect Gilad Shalit's abduction has had on Israeli public opinion. Another reason for the pressure is the failure of Shalit's abduction to bring the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, the sources told Haaretz.

The only way that Fatah has remained in power in the West Bank is because Israel has propped them up against Hamas - the evil of the lesser of two evils.

So, what can you take away from Hamas' contradictory statements? They are itching for a fight with Israel, but aren't ready to do so on their terms. They know that the murder of this Israeli family would be enough to get Israel to go after the terror group behind the attacks in a serious way - particularly because of the brutal and heinous way they butchered the family as they were asleep.

44 sagehen  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:06:16pm

re: #27 Kid A

Didn't President Clinton during his last weeks in office offer Arafat 98% of what he wanted, only to have Arafat's middle finger in his face?

Clinton tried to broker a deal, but let's not call it his offer.

And of course, a president who waits until his final months in office to try to broker something, both sides are going to want to wait and see who the new president will be and where he might stand on the question.

45 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:07:18pm

re: #36 researchok

It is about the kind of responsibility that comes from allowing that kind of society and apologizing for it.

Responsibility on whose part?

46 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:08:01pm

re: #17 treasured people

Oh, holy hell. I clicked. I knew I shouldn't have clicked, but I did.

Wasn't Pam being slammed earlier for posting pictures of the murdered family?

47 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:08:28pm

re: #43 lawhawk

Hamas approves of the terror attacks, and Fatah's response is to name a street after a Fatah terrorist who killed 37 people in 1978 (just days after naming a youth center after the first female suicide bomber last week).

Incitement is expressly forbidden under Olso, but Fatah and Hamas routinely ignore that.

Those are the terror groups that Israel is supposed to be negotiating peace with.

Building housing is not an impediment to peace - and it never has been. Housing can always be transferred, but when Israel lacks a partner, talk about negotiating and peace deals is a pipe dream.

As for who was behind the attack - both Islamic Jihad and Hamas claimed responsibility (and other Hamas thugs say it wasn't them) but Israeli authorities don't think that those groups were involved since they lack the terror network in the West Bank. Yet, Hamas is saying that they're going to resume terror ops from the West Bank.

The only way that Fatah has remained in power in the West Bank is because Israel has propped them up against Hamas - the evil of the lesser of two evils.

So, what can you take away from Hamas' contradictory statements? They are itching for a fight with Israel, but aren't ready to do so on their terms. They know that the murder of this Israeli family would be enough to get Israel to go after the terror group behind the attacks in a serious way - particularly because of the brutal and heinous way they butchered the family as they were asleep.

Quite Concur.

48 abolitionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:09:46pm

re: #30 Obdicut

[snip] It'd be really awesome if the new energy age came from Israeli technology. A fitting end to this cold war.

Zinc Powder Will Drive Your Hydrogen Car If you have any understanding of chemistry, you might appreciate the animation (scroll down a bit). It's a slick solution to the hydrogen storage problem.

49 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:10:49pm

re: #25 ralphieboy

Building settlements will all but guarantee further attacks.

But I must admit that I gave up trying to make sense of the settlement issue ages ago and only noice it when something like this happnes and puts it back in the headlines...

Jews building houses is not the problem. Israel removed every last "settler" from Gaza and turned over the "settlements" and their greenhouse industry. How well did that work out?

Focusing on "settlements" as an issue is a red herring.

50 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:11:14pm

Murder porn...

51 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:12:28pm

re: #30 Obdicut

It'd be really awesome if the new energy age came from Israeli technology. A fitting end to this cold war.

Hydrogen cars are coming and Israel is at the forefront of their development.

52 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:13:05pm

re: #38 Sergey Romanov

You make a fair point about the media failing to point out the darker sides of the Palestinian culture. My point is larger than that. I cringe whenever Southerners are being beaten up here, though I understand the point of those making these comments. I cringe whenever someone accuses "the Germans" of the Holocaust. The comments about dysfunctional culture are fair and necessary. E.g. I think it's not racist to point out the dysfunction in the African American culture. But it's bad to say something negative about "the blacks". That's the whole of my point.

You and I have had this exchange before- you know where I stand on the victimization of the Palestinians by the Palestinians leadership.

That is the greatest tragedy of all. The Israelis can take care of themselves and will survive as a distinguished member of civilized society. The Palestinians will not until there are some real changes.

Before you came here, CJ used to post images of what he called 'Palestinian child abuse'. In truth, they were more tragic than graphic on many levels.

He was right to do so then and call it for what it was.

It wasn't a left/right issue.

53 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:14:02pm

re: #49 Alouette

Thank you nad G-d bless you!

54 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:15:28pm

re: #46 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I also don't get why people still link to Arutz Sheva. It's a hate site as far as I'm concerned.

Exhibit A:

[Link: www.google.com...]

Exhibit B:

[Link: www.google.com...]

55 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:16:45pm

re: #35 Charles

If you think Yahoo's comments are bad, though, just have a look at what's being posted at the Geller-thing's site, where she published graphic oversized photos of the murdered children.

Of course she would - it's her attempt to group all Arabs as child-murdering terrorists. Her agenda is clear.

56 lawhawk  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:18:12pm

re: #44 sagehen

Clinton tried to broker a deal, but let's not call it his offer.

And of course, a president who waits until his final months in office to try to broker something, both sides are going to want to wait and see who the new president will be and where he might stand on the question.

It wasn't his offer, it was Israel's Ehud Barak who offered up a deal. Arafat didn't even dignify the offer with a response. He rejected it out of hand and the 2d Intifada ensued shortly thereafter.

Arafat's Fatah (which is the largest faction of the PLO and is part of the PA) answered a peace initiative with an uprising that saw an uptick in terrorism and attacks.

57 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:19:40pm

re: #5 Warberg

More illegal settlements, yeah, that'll teach them! Uhm...

Except that the home and communities being built are done so legally.

Those settlers included an infant of three months, a four year old and an eleven year old. Do you even care?

58 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:21:01pm

re: #49 Alouette

Jews building houses is not the problem. Israel removed every last "settler" from Gaza and turned over the "settlements" and their greenhouse industry. How well did that work out?

Focusing on "settlements" as an issue is a red herring.

It never was about settlements or settlers, of course.

In a nutshell, it was because Jews did in 50 years what the Arab world could not do in 2000 years- they created a modern, functioning society in the region- and a free one at that.

For some shame societies, the only way to get rid of the shame is to eliminate the source of shame.

59 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:21:03pm

re: #56 lawhawk

It wasn't his offer, it was Israel's Ehud Barak who offered up a deal. Arafat didn't even dignify the offer with a response. He rejected it out of hand and the 2d Intifada ensued shortly thereafter.

Arafat's Fatah (which is the largest faction of the PLO and is part of the PA) answered a peace initiative with an uprising that saw an uptick in terrorism and attacks.

The PNA is under new management. We can either dwell on past grudges and failures or we can move forward. Abbas and Olmert moved forward. Hopefully we keep moving that way.

60 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:22:06pm

re: #38 Sergey Romanov

You make a fair point about the media failing to point out the darker sides of the Palestinian culture. My point is larger than that. I cringe whenever Southerners are being beaten up here, though I understand the point of those making these comments. I cringe whenever someone accuses "the Germans" of the Holocaust. The comments about dysfunctional culture are fair and necessary. E.g. I think it's not racist to point out the dysfunction in the African American culture. But it's bad to say something negative about "the blacks". That's the whole of my point.

I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of collective guilt as well.

But is collective guilt always wrong, or is there a point at which it becomes correct to say that a society in general, collectively, must bear some guilt for terrorist crimes like this?

This incident really brings the question into sharp relief, because no one can deny that both the Hamas and Fatah governments do engage in near-constant, mind-blowingly hateful incitement -- and they start indoctrinating their populace at a very early age.

61 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:22:41pm

re: #59 recusancy

The PNA is under new management. We can either dwell on past grudges and failures or we can move forward. Abbas and Olmert moved forward. Hopefully we keep moving that way.

It will depend on the Arabs. We already know that Hamas is not on board.

62 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:22:43pm

re: #55 eclectic infidel

Of course she would - it's her attempt to group all Arabs as child-murdering terrorists. Her agenda is clear.

As I said when Killgore mentioned it and I went and looked in over at Crazy Pam's:

"Agitprop at its finest. Just seeing those photos makes your blood boil."

Pam sees making people's blood boil as a good idea. I don't, not anymore. Rage is a very dangerous thing and its almost always best to not stoke it.

63 Warberg  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:22:44pm

re: #39 Alouette

Must I provide an alternative on "how to respond"? How about not at all. I don't think the mosaic sense of justice is very helpful in a civilized world.

64 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:24:00pm

re: #58 researchok

It never was about settlements or settlers, of course.

In a nutshell, it was because Jews did in 50 years what the Arab world could not do in 2000 years- they created a modern, functioning society in the region- and a free one at that.

For some shame societies, the only way to get rid of the shame is to eliminate the source of shame.

That has an echo of "they attacked us because they hate our freedom" to me.

65 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:24:08pm

re: #39 Alouette

What else should they do? Kill some Palestinian babies?

Apprehend the murderer. Like every other civilized society would do.

66 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:24:18pm

re: #58 researchok


In a nutshell, it was because Jews did in 50 years what the Arab world could not do in 2000 years- they created a modern, functioning society in the region- and a free one at that.


That doesn't really make a hell of a lot of sense. Obviously, nobody was going to create a 'modern' society 2000 years ago. Arab culture and science was, for hundreds and hundreds of years, more advanced than the West, and they preserved and improved on many intellectual traditions that otherwise would have been lost. Without the Arab world's contributions, we wouldn't have had the Enlightenment; without the Enlightenment, Israel would not be a modern society.

67 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:25:11pm

re: #60 Charles

It should be noted that societies do automatically bear collective punishment during the time of war. Because it's not possible to wage a war otherwise. But that's the exception. Otherwise it's too slippery a slope. Where it stops nobody knows.

68 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:25:34pm

re: #66 Obdicut

That doesn't really make a hell of a lot of sense. Obviously, nobody was going to create a 'modern' society 2000 years ago. Arab culture and science was, for hundreds and hundreds of years, more advanced than the West, and they preserved and improved on many intellectual traditions that otherwise would have been lost. Without the Arab world's contributions, we wouldn't have had the Enlightenment; without the Enlightenment, Israel would not be a modern society.

And that, in a nutshell, is the soft bigotry often displayed towards Arabs.

69 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:25:36pm

re: #66 Obdicut

That doesn't really make a hell of a lot of sense. Obviously, nobody was going to create a 'modern' society 2000 years ago. Arab culture and science was, for hundreds and hundreds of years, more advanced than the West, and they preserved and improved on many intellectual traditions that otherwise would have been lost. Without the Arab world's contributions, we wouldn't have had the Enlightenment; without the Enlightenment, Israel would not be a modern society.

OK, they haven't managed to create a modern society in 100 years,

70 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:26:45pm

re: #67 Sergey Romanov

It should be noted that societies do automatically bear collective punishment during the time of war. Because it's not possible to wage a war otherwise. But that's the exception. Otherwise it's too slippery a slope. Where it stops nobody knows.

That's because war is generally a state action, and it is therefore appropropriate to respond against the offending state.

Where it gets murky is with (as here) non-state actors.

71 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:27:08pm

re: #67 Sergey Romanov

It should be noted that societies do automatically bear collective punishment during the time of war. Because it's not possible to wage a war otherwise. But that's the exception. Otherwise it's too slippery a slope. Where it stops nobody knows.

"Collective punishment" is a different thing from "collective guilt."

72 TedStriker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:27:16pm

re: #35 Charles

If you think Yahoo's comments are bad, though, just have a look at what's being posted at the Geller-thing's site, where she published graphic oversized photos of the murdered children.

You know what they say: never let a crisis go to waste!

/dripping

73 PhillyPretzel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:27:18pm

The Wall Street Journal: [Link: online.wsj.com...]

74 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:27:28pm

re: #69 researchok

OK, they haven't managed to create a modern society in 100 years,

And therefore they didn't take a deal they didn't like? That's a non-sequitur.

75 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:27:45pm

re: #60 Charles

I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of collective guilt as well.

But is collective guilt always wrong, or is there a point at which it becomes correct to say that a society in general, collectively, must bear some guilt for terrorist crimes like this?

This incident really brings the question into sharp relief, because no one can deny that both the Hamas and Fatah governments do engage in near-constant, mind-blowingly hateful incitement -- and they start indoctrinating their populace at a very early age.

To add one point to a thoughtful response:

As long as the incitement continues, the problem will become greater.

All pathologies left untreated, escalate.

76 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:28:14pm

re: #71 Charles

"Collective punishment" is a different thing from "collective guilt."

Were all southern white people (during slavery) collectively guilty for slavery?

77 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:28:20pm

re: #63 Warberg

Must I provide an alternative on "how to respond"? How about not at all. I don't think the mosaic sense of justice is very helpful in a civilized world.

Israel didn't respond in kind to the murderous, and cowardly act of the Palestinian terrorists. They are the ones being civil here.

Israel will continue to build communities and improve life in the West Bank regardless of ruthless attacks on her civilians. That was the message: Israel will not bow to terrorism, it will not be forced back from the acts of immoral and vicious cowards. Good for Israel.

78 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:28:34pm

re: #74 garhighway

And therefore they didn't take a deal they didn't like? That's a non-sequitur.

You're missing my point.

79 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:28:59pm

re: #78 researchok

You're missing my point.

I'm disagreeing with your point.

80 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:29:53pm

re: #69 researchok

OK, they haven't managed to create a modern society in 100 years,

Most of the rulers in the Arab countries have been actively resisting the creation of a modern society, either to preserve their oligarchies or to keep semi-theocratic regimes in control.

I don't really think they're jealous of Israel's modernity, or that it shames them. To the extent the Arab countries want modernity, they generally have it-- as in Dubai. I'm also very dubious about the concept of 'shame society' in general.

81 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:29:57pm

re: #77 eclectic infidel

Israel didn't respond in kind to the murderous, and cowardly act of the Palestinian terrorists. They are the ones being civil here.

Israel will continue to build communities and improve life in the West Bank regardless of ruthless attacks on her civilians. That was the message: Israel will not bow to terrorism, it will not be forced back from the acts of immoral and vicious cowards. Good for Israel.

If they continue to build communities in the west bank they make a future Palestinian state that much more difficult.

82 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:30:25pm

re: #76 recusancy

Were all southern white people (during slavery) collectively guilty for slavery?

No, but the South as a society fought a civl war over that very issue.

They didn't lack for volunteers.

83 Nautilus  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:30:41pm

The most depressing of news. Expressing my pitié for the victims is way beyond my wordpower.

Even though I'm fairly young, I doubt I will ever see true peace in Palistine in my lifetime. Mostly because of that kind of bad, bad crazyness demonstrated by the whackjobs behind this.

84 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:32:12pm

re: #23 Sergey Romanov

There really isn't a good English linguistic way around that. It's something that you just have to be aware of when reading. Or, at least ask Researchok if he thinks that every single Palestinian is responsible for this. I'm reading the same comments that you are, and I don't think he is holding every single Palestinian responsible--although it's clear that the leadership holds responsibility, as does the culprit (monster) who perpetrated the attack, and the various Palestinian institutions that maintain cultural continuity.

85 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:32:46pm

re: #76 recusancy

Were all southern white people (during slavery) collectively guilty for slavery?

I'd have to say yes. Their elected government's main purpose was to protect the institution of slavery, and their society was built around it in many ways.

86 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:34:00pm

re: #80 Obdicut

Most of the rulers in the Arab countries have been actively resisting the creation of a modern society, either to preserve their oligarchies or to keep semi-theocratic regimes in control.

I don't really think they're jealous of Israel's modernity, or that it shames them. To the extent the Arab countries want modernity, they generally have it-- as in Dubai. I'm also very dubious about the concept of 'shame society' in general.

More.

Excellent article here, SHAME, THE ARAB PSYCHE, AND ISLAM

87 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:35:27pm

re: #79 garhighway

I'm disagreeing with your point.

Yes- and you've called me a bigot to boot.

88 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:35:34pm

There are many Arab villages and towns within 1967 Israel borders and no one asks the Arabs living there to leave. If the Arabs really wanted to make peace with Israel, why would they object to Jews living within a Palestinian state?

89 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:35:35pm

re: #81 recusancy

If they continue to build communities in the west bank they make a future Palestinian state that much more difficult.

Israel has had its hand open for peace, only to have it slapped away. If more land is dedicated to Israeli communities, as far as I see it, the Palestinians only have their selves to blame.

90 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:35:58pm

re: #86 researchok

More.

Excellent article here, SHAME, THE ARAB PSYCHE, AND ISLAM

How does carving up the west bank with settlements and Israeli-only roads help alleviate that shame?

91 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:36:18pm

re: #87 researchok

Yes- and you've called me a bigot to boot.

WTF?

92 Buck  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:36:28pm

re: #2 researchok

No use of the word 'terrorist' in the article.

Speaks volumes.

Right only as a quote. However the usual is for them to start the article with something like: "Israeli police went on high alert" and " Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said ministers had approved construction of "several hundred housing units within the settlement blocs" of Gush Etzion, Maale Adumim, Ariel and Kiryat Sefer."

and only after discussing clearly how that these actions are an impediment to peace, then mentioning the "deaths" Not murder... not terror, but deaths.

That is probably how Reuters and the Guardian do it. I am really not willing to check.

93 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:36:45pm

re: #77 eclectic infidel

Israel didn't respond in kind to the murderous, and cowardly act of the Palestinian terrorists. They are the ones being civil here.

Israel will continue to build communities and improve life in the West Bank regardless of ruthless attacks on her civilians. That was the message: Israel will not bow to terrorism, it will not be forced back from the acts of immoral and vicious cowards. Good for Israel.

Agreed. If you stop building or pull back, you send the message that terrorism works. And if you send that message, the terrorists will double down in their attacks.

94 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:36:47pm

re: #71 Charles

"Collective punishment" is a different thing from "collective guilt."


Acknowledging guilt without punishment doesn't take us much further. It's just words. I don't think guilt-searching is that much of a productive endeavor, unless one has specific actors in mind (Hamas, Fatah) which can then be acted on one way or another.

What should be acknowledged is the deep dysfunction that runs in the society. The way to deal with this dysfunction in, say, just-post-war Germany was a temporary occupation, enforcing the "new rules" by force. But it cannot be directly compared to this situation since the cultures are different. If, say, NATO occupies the Palestine nothing will come out of it.

One way to deal with it is to let the Palestinians have their state despite themselves. And then answer each such attack as an act of war - with a military action.

95 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:36:56pm

re: #90 recusancy

How does carving up the west bank with settlements and Israeli-only roads help alleviate that shame?

The barrier and Israel only roads are there to protect Israelis from violence.

I know that might disappoint you, but it's true.

96 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:36:57pm

re: #25 ralphieboy

So, do you think that the penalty for building a house is capital punishment? This kind of hatred is a constant. Israel has tried any number of options to stop these kind of attacks, to stop the incitement of the attacks--and nothing works. It's easy to say the new buildings will provoke the Palestinians, but we've noticed that our act of breathing seems to provoke the exact kind of murder that we just saw.

Don't take my word for it. Read the history, and watch closely--or not, if you value your sanity.

97 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:37:14pm

re: #88 treasured people

There are many Arab villages and towns within 1967 Israel borders and no one asks the Arabs living there to leave. If the Arabs really wanted to make peace with Israel, why would they object to Jews living within a Palestinian state?

Are they Israeli citizens? Jews can live in the west bank. They would just have to be Palestinian citizens.

98 palomino  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:37:45pm

re: #13 Charles

I don't know why Yahoo allows comments at all. The comments posted there are utterly worthless, and completely dominated by creeps and sickos. And it's been that way for many years.

And they supposedly tried to clean up their act to filter out all the vile hateful racist xenophobic anti-Semitic garbage. But it hasn't worked. Every other comment about Obama, for example, has something to do with him being a terrorist or an ape. Yahoo attracts the dregs of the internet, and AOL isn't much better.

99 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:38:14pm

re: #95 researchok

The barrier and Israel only roads are there to protect Israelis from violence.

I know that might disappoint you, but it's true.

How shitty of you. Implying I don't want to protect Israelis from violence.

100 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:38:21pm

BBIAB

101 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:38:46pm

re: #76 recusancy

Were all southern white people (during slavery) collectively guilty for slavery?

No, only those who supported it. Which might have been 99%, for all I know. I'm quite sure there were exceptions though.

102 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:39:13pm

re: #99 recusancy

How shitty of you. Implying I don't want to protect Israelis from violence.

Then do you care to explain yourself with this comment:

re: #90 recusancy
How does carving up the west bank with settlements and Israeli-only roads help alleviate that shame
103 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:39:29pm

re: #100 researchok

BBIAB

Good time to leave. You're getting unhinged.

104 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:39:59pm

re: #102 eclectic infidel

Then do you care to explain yourself with this comment:

How does building settlements protect Israeli's from violence?

105 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:40:19pm

re: #101 Sergey Romanov

No, only those who supported it. Which might have been 99%, for all I know. I'm quite sure there were exceptions though.

It was state action, for which (eventually) a state-level response was required.

106 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:40:28pm

re: #101 Sergey Romanov

No, only those who supported it. Which might have been 99%, for all I know. I'm quite sure there were exceptions though.

Saying that Southern society was collectively guilty for slavery, again, doesn't equate to saying they all deserved the same punishment.

107 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:40:32pm

re: #84 Bob Levin

It's not really hard to throw in some qualifiers, I think.

108 reine.de.tout  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:40:36pm

re: #76 recusancy

Were all southern white people (during slavery) collectively guilty for slavery?

Why leave out the southern blacks and mixed-race creoles who owned slaves?

109 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:40:54pm

re: #63 Warberg

Must I provide an alternative on "how to respond"? How about not at all. I don't think the mosaic sense of justice is very helpful in a civilized world.

The mass murder of a family, including infants and children, demands a response from a civilized society. At the very least it requires a response of apprehending the perpetrators and putting them on trial.

110 Nautilus  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:41:01pm

re: #58 researchok

It never was about settlements or settlers, of course.

In a nutshell, it was because Jews did in 50 years what the Arab world could not do in 2000 years- they created a modern, functioning society in the region- and a free one at that.

For some shame societies, the only way to get rid of the shame is to eliminate the source of shame.

Please, I find that comment utterly racist and bigoted. The UAE are a modern and functioning society, even though they aren't as free as the people of Israel.

It took my people (I'm European) long enough to achieve basic freedoms guaranteed by constitional rights, even the ancestors of the American people weren't free since the wonderful experiment your country turned out to be (unless they were from ancient greece).

Stop generalizing against a people as a whole, it's never a good idea.

111 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:41:14pm

re: #104 recusancy

How does building settlements protect Israeli's from violence?

Initially it probably won't but the stance Israel is taking is that it will not back down from building communities for its citizens despite the vicious hatred Jews encounter there from Arabs.

112 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:41:26pm

re: #108 reine.de.tout

Why leave out the southern blacks and mixed-race creoles who owned slaves?

True, it was not just white people who owned slaves -- it was a societal dysfunction.

113 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:41:47pm

re: #97 recusancy

All Israeli presence in West Bank would have to disappear as part of the agreement being sought by Palestinians.

114 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:41:52pm

re: #108 reine.de.tout

Why leave out the southern blacks and mixed-race creoles who owned slaves?

Were they in a position to set the policy of the southern states? Could they even vote?

115 McSpiff  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:42:30pm

re: #24 Dark_Falcon

Some form of reprisal is needed. You don't want to go killing people who weren't responsible for the attack, but you do want to make it clear you're not going to be intimidated.

re: #109 Alouette

The mass murder of a family, including infants and children, demands a response from a civilized society. At the very least it requires a response of apprehending the perpetrators and putting them on trial.

QFT.

116 Killgore Trout  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:42:46pm

re: #67 Sergey Romanov

It should be noted that societies do automatically bear collective punishment during the time of war. Because it's not possible to wage a war otherwise. But that's the exception. Otherwise it's too slippery a slope. Where it stops nobody knows.

That's part of the problem; the Palestinians have been at war pretty much constantly. They've been loosing. Even the Nazis and Japanese leadership had the common sense to spare their people further death and destruction by surrendering. The Palestinians have discovered an odd loophole in modern warfare; the keep fighting and losing with the knowledge that Israel won't just wipe them out and annex all their land. 60 or 70 years ago a country in Israel's position would just wipe them out but that's not acceptable anymore. The Palestinians are responsible for their own fate. They can have peace anytime they want it.

117 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:42:57pm

re: #82 researchok

No, but the South as a society fought a civl war over that very issue.

They didn't lack for volunteers.

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

118 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:43:04pm

re: #106 Charles

Saying that Southern society was collectively guilty for slavery, again, doesn't equate to saying they all deserved the same punishment.

Recusancy asked about "every" white Southerner. The society was shitty, there's no doubt about it, but it does not translate into "each Southerner was guilty" (regardless of the issue of punishment).

119 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:43:05pm

re: #111 eclectic infidel

Initially it probably won't but the stance Israel is taking is that it will not back down from building communities for its citizens despite the vicious hatred Jews encounter there from Arabs.

You can't even admit that building settlements has nothing to do with safety without hedging.

120 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:43:21pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

They do now. Not then.

121 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:43:56pm

re: #114 garhighway

Were they in a position to set the policy of the southern states? Could they even vote?

No doubt, the vast majority of the power in the Confederate South was in the hands of whites. But if you look at the issue of slavery throughout history, it's a human problem, not just a black-white one.

122 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:44:08pm

re: #86 researchok

Yeah. I know. I've read this Steppenwolf kind of stuff before. I really don't think it works; I think with any dualistic interpretation, it's very easy to divide people, cultures, whatever, up into those two groups. I don't think it really makes much sense, or that you couldn't make arguments for switching those groups. There are plenty of accusations in the US that shame people even when that person is innocent.

People writing about that subject seem to ignore that, by being able to express shame as a different concept from guilt, that shame must obviously be a powerful force at work inside our culture as well. It's odd.

123 McSpiff  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:44:10pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

The constitutions of the CSA states make it clear exactly which rights they were concerned about...

124 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:44:48pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

Who did?

125 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:45:31pm

re: #121 Charles

No doubt, the vast majority of the power in the Confederate South was in the hands of whites. But if you look at the issue of slavery throughout history, it's a human problem, not just a black-white one.

And if you look at the history of warring states and geographically divided tribes you'll find that it's a human problem. Not a defect of having been born a Palestinian.

126 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:47:05pm

re: #125 recusancy

I think it's mainly a propaganda problem. I think much of the problems abounding in the world today are propaganda problems.

127 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:47:22pm

re: #121 Charles

No doubt, the vast majority of the power in the Confederate South was in the hands of whites. But if you look at the issue of slavery throughout history, it's a human problem, not just a black-white one.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say it was a "human problem". By the mid-1800's, many human societies had renounced slavery, including the northern United States.

Were there other kinds of master-slave relationships in human history? Sure. Are they relevant to the southern US? I don't see how.

128 palomino  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:47:24pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

Which was totally disingenuous. Because the main right of states for which they were fighting was the right to own slaves.

The horror of slavery is so great that many southerners still can't face up to it, and therefore engage in historical revisionism.

129 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:47:50pm

re: #125 recusancy

And if you look at the history of warring states and geographically divided tribes you'll find that it's a human problem. Not a defect of having been born a Palestinian.

Did you get the impression I felt otherwise?

130 goddamnedfrank  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:48:17pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

That must be why every single Southern State secession specifically mentioned slavery in their Declaration of Causes.

131 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:48:20pm

re: #128 palomino

Which was totally disingenuous. Because the main right of states for which they were fighting was the right to own slaves.

The horror of slavery The Holocaust is so great that many southerners Europeans still can't face up to it, and therefore engage in historical revisionism.

132 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:49:04pm

re: #116 Killgore Trout

The Palestinians are responsible for their own fate. They can have peace anytime they want it.

Yes, indeed. As many have said, concerning the conflict between Israel and Moslem countries in general: "If the Moslems lay down their weapons, there will be no more war. If Israel lays down its weapons, there will be no more Jews."

133 Kragar  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:49:05pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

State's rights were a farce. The South was perfectly willing to trample the State's Rights for non-slave states and praised a strong Federal government when it was on their side.

134 Charles Johnson  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:49:47pm

re: #127 garhighway

I'm not sure what you mean when you say it was a "human problem". By the mid-1800's, many human societies had renounced slavery, including the northern United States.

Were there other kinds of master-slave relationships in human history? Sure. Are they relevant to the southern US? I don't see how.

In the Confederate South, as I said, it was a black-white issue, I'm not arguing that point.

I'm trying to point out, though, that it's not correct to say there's something unique about European Caucasians that makes them more prone to enslave other people. Practically every race of humankind has engaged in slavery.

135 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:50:31pm

re: #134 Charles

In the Confederate South, as I said, it was a black-white issue, I'm not arguing that point.

I'm trying to point out, though, that it's not correct to say there's something unique about European Caucasians that makes them more prone to enslave other people. Practically every race of humankind has engaged in slavery.

Ah!. OK, no argument there.

136 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:51:01pm

re: #129 Charles

Did you get the impression I felt otherwise?

You, no.

137 goddamnedfrank  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:51:05pm

re: #118 Sergey Romanov

Recusancy asked about "every" white Southerner. The society was shitty, there's no doubt about it, but it does not translate into "each Southerner was guilty" (regardless of the issue of punishment).

No doubt. There were plenty of southern whites working the Underground Railroad.

138 McSpiff  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:51:25pm

re: #134 Charles

In the Confederate South, as I said, it was a black-white issue, I'm not arguing that point.

I'm trying to point out, though, that it's not correct to say there's something unique about European Caucasians that makes them more prone to enslave other people. Practically every race of humankind has engaged in slavery.

We still see it today. Sexual slavery, the living conditions of foreign workers in some countries. Humans are a horrible bunch somedays.

139 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:51:30pm

re: #81 recusancy

Don't you think acts of wanton murder and the culture that encourages that are obstacles to the formation of a state?

140 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:51:31pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

Actually they made it very explicitly clear it was only about slavery.

[Link: www.templeofdemocracy.com...]

141 palomino  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:52:20pm

re: #131 Alouette

Yes, the dynamic fits both situations. The Holocaust deniers take it one step further by claiming it never even happened. The southern revisionists don't pretend that slavery didn't exist, just that it was a benevolent institution and unrelated to the Civil War.

142 reine.de.tout  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:52:26pm

re: #112 Charles

True, it was not just white people who owned slaves -- it was a societal dysfunction.

Indeed.
And I'm not defending slavery one bit, a terrible immoral blight on the face of this earth, but lots of different sorts of folks were sucked into it, and it needed to die as a way of life and an institution.

143 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:53:03pm

re: #139 Bob Levin

Don't you think acts of wanton murder and the culture that encourages that are obstacles to the formation of a state?

Of course. How does building communities in the west bank alleviate that?

144 McSpiff  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:53:20pm

re: #139 Bob Levin

Don't you think acts of wanton murder and the culture that encourages that are obstacles to the formation of a state?

I wouldn't. Wanton murder has probably led to the establishment of more states than most other human qualities. Ideally in this post-WW2 world though, that's not how were suppose to form states.

145 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:53:35pm

re: #124 Obdicut

Who did?

Some of the justifications were about "State's Rights", though slavery was the real issue. "The Bonny Blue Flag" is an example:

146 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:55:04pm

re: #134 Charles

Really what made US slavery semi-unique was that it was racist slavery. The Romans, for example, weren't very racist at all. They were massively culturalist, but didn't even really have a concept of race. They didn't feel the need to really justify slavery; the US, post-enlightenment, did, and in a way, that made the slavery all the crueler.

147 reine.de.tout  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:55:35pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

No, they did not. Though they did cast the fight in terms of "state's rights" instead of talking about slavery.

All of the Declarations of Secession that I could find specifically mentioned "slavery".

148 McSpiff  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:56:07pm

re: #147 reine.de.tout

All of the Declarations of Secession that I could find specifically mentioned "slavery".

That page is incredibly useful.

149 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:56:18pm

re: #97 recusancy

You're not actually following the news cycle there, are you? They would not be citizens, they would be marked for death. No Jews allowed in a new Palestinian state.

150 reine.de.tout  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:56:41pm

re: #148 McSpiff

That page is incredibly useful.

I always have trouble finding it. I forget to change the date range. Takes me at least 3 searches to get it right. Argh.

151 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:56:43pm

re: #147 reine.de.tout

All of the Declarations of Secession that I could find specifically mentioned "slavery".

Not to mention all the speeches they made (see my comment above).

152 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:56:43pm

re: #99 recusancy

How shitty of you. Implying I don't want to protect Israelis from violence.

How shitty of you implying I was a racist.

153 General Nimrod Bodfish  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:56:53pm

Just a quick update on the Onagawa NPP:

#
2142: Japanese authorities have told the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, that radioactivity levels "at the site boundary" of the Onagawa nuclear power plant have returned to normal, Reuters reports. A state of emergency was declared at the site on Sunday after radioactivity readings exceeding allowed levels in the area.
154 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:57:35pm

re: #103 garhighway

Good time to leave. You're getting unhinged.

I'm back.

Wanna pick up where we left off?

155 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:58:04pm

re: #154 researchok

I'm back.

Wanna pick up where we left off?

Sure. Show me where I called you a bigot.

156 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:58:43pm

re: #146 Obdicut

Really what made US slavery semi-unique was that it was racist slavery. The Romans, for example, weren't very racist at all. They were massively culturalist, but didn't even really have a concept of race. They didn't feel the need to really justify slavery; the US, post-enlightenment, did, and in a way, that made the slavery all the crueler.

True, very true. In Rome, slaves could be freed and then have a chance to advance. One later emperor was even the son of a freed slave. In the American South, though, the racial element to slavery ensured that former slaves remained "on the bottom rail of the fence", even after slavery was abolished.

157 lawhawk  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:58:44pm

re: #143 recusancy

You do realize that Israel was going to engage in land swaps for many of the communities near the Green Line and swap them for other territory to make up the land differences - it isn't about the settlements.

What is striking though is that these plans essentially call for an elimination of a Jewish presence in the West Bank areas that would be ceded to a future Palestinian state. Palestinian Arabs can continue living in Israel and are entitled to rights and protections, but the PA can't guarantee the same for Jews that would end up on the wrong side of a line on a map. In fact, Oslo and the followup documents pretty much admitted as much when they set aside A B and C areas that limited Israeli access to regions and imposed criminal sanctions on Israelis who entered the wrong area.

Settlements can be dismantled and/or transferred. It happened in Gaza. It happened in the Sinai, and it could potentially happen with Syria in the Golan, but the Gaza experience shows that giving up land for peace when there isn't a partner in peace is a fool's errand.

158 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:58:58pm

re: #154 researchok

re: #155 garhighway

Y'all get a room.

159 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:59:13pm

re: #149 Bob Levin

You're not actually following the news cycle there, are you? They would not be citizens, they would be marked for death. No Jews allowed in a new Palestinian state.

Was there an agreement to a new state that I missed that said no Jews allowed?

160 abolitionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:59:23pm

re: #121 Charles

No doubt, the vast majority of the power in the Confederate South was in the hands of whites. But if you look at the issue of slavery throughout history, it's a human problem, not just a black-white one.

In terms of ancient warfare, treating the conquered as slaves and/or second-class citizens was perhaps considered the lesser of evils, in a short list of evils that often included annihilation. It is appalling that the latter is still taught to so many Palestinians.

161 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 2:59:46pm

re: #143 recusancy

Of course. How does building communities in the west bank alleviate that?

The Israelis have always given up land- and settlements for a negotiated peace agreement.

That has nor worked out so well for them. It seems land and settlements are not really what the Palestinians want.

162 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:00:10pm

re: #158 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

re: #155 garhighway

Y'all get a room.

He's not my type.

163 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:00:36pm

re: #146 Obdicut

Really what made US slavery semi-unique was that it was racist slavery. The Romans, for example, weren't very racist at all. They were massively culturalist, but didn't even really have a concept of race. They didn't feel the need to really justify slavery; the US, post-enlightenment, did, and in a way, that made the slavery all the crueler.

Oh yeah, RSM's favorite author Dabney comes to mind. I read his Biblical justifications for slavery with great interest.

164 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:02:14pm

re: #157 lawhawk

You do realize that Israel was going to engage in land swaps for many of the communities near the Green Line and swap them for other territory to make up the land differences - it isn't about the settlements.

What is striking though is that these plans essentially call for an elimination of a Jewish presence in the West Bank areas that would be ceded to a future Palestinian state. Palestinian Arabs can continue living in Israel and are entitled to rights and protections, but the PA can't guarantee the same for Jews that would end up on the wrong side of a line on a map. In fact, Oslo and the followup documents pretty much admitted as much when they set aside A B and C areas that limited Israeli access to regions and imposed criminal sanctions on Israelis who entered the wrong area.

Settlements can be dismantled and/or transferred. It happened in Gaza. It happened in the Sinai, and it could potentially happen with Syria in the Golan, but the Gaza experience shows that giving up land for peace when there isn't a partner in peace is a fool's errand.

I understand. That still doesn't make an argument for how building settlements is needed to protect Israelis' from violence. That was the argument made above.

165 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:02:56pm

re: #155 garhighway

Sure. Show me where I called you a bigot.

Your 'soft bigotry' remark.

166 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:03:08pm

My wife is working out on the Wii fit doing balancing exercises. I've asked her to come over here and balance on me.

She's ignoring me.

167 garhighway  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:03:26pm

re: #165 researchok

Your 'soft bigotry' remark.

What post?

168 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:03:30pm

re: #159 recusancy

Was there an agreement to a new state that I missed that said no Jews allowed?

It's pretty well guaranteed by the sheer level of hate felt by the Arabs. Any Jews in an Arab controlled area would be dhimis at best and murdered at worst.

169 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:03:59pm

re: #165 researchok

Your 'soft bigotry' remark.

That was me. And I stick by it because you imply Arabs are incapable of building modern societies.

170 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:04:10pm

re: #167 garhighway

What post?

Apologies- the remark was made by recusency.

Mea culpa

171 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:05:20pm

re: #168 Dark_Falcon

It's pretty well guaranteed by the sheer level of hate felt by the Arabs. Any Jews in an Arab controlled area would be dhimis at best and murdered at worst.

While I would naturally advise any Jewish person against traveling to Arab lands, there are exceptions. E.g. in Bahrain had some Jewish members of Parliaments and a Jewish ambassador.

172 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:06:05pm

re: #169 recusancy

That was me. And I stick by it because you imply Arabs are incapable of building modern societies.

Yes, I did.

Please show me a functioning modern Arab society that was predicated on producing, rather than fueled by consumption.

We don't have to discuss the state sponsored and institutionalized racism, bigotry and hate if you don't want to.

173 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:06:07pm

re: #119 recusancy

You can't even admit that building settlements has nothing to do with safety without hedging.

I hate to break it to you, but even without settlements, the violence would continue against Jews.

Israel will continue to build because it has legal right to do so. The fact that it is not backing down despite the terrorism is commendable.

Of course more Jews will die - but that speaks to the powerful desire to live in Israel as Jews, despite the cold hard reality that at any time, death could be at your doorstep.

175 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:09:21pm

re: #143 recusancy

The murders did not take place in a vacuum. There is organization, planning, funding, culture, and government that share in this act. These murders are not some psycho goes into a school and opening fire. This particular murder is one of a long series of such events--all done with the intent of scaring the Jews out of Israel. The desired consequence of the murders was to make the Jews want to flee from their homes. More building is a message to the higher ups on the terrorist food chain--this strategy isn't going to work.

176 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:10:21pm

re: #174 researchok

PA's Erekat: No Jews Allowed In Palestinian State - PA Need Not Hurry, Israel Keeps Offering More

"Jewish" is ethnicity, "Israeli" is citizenship. Why would Palestinians allow Israeli citizens (of any ethnicity, Jew or Arab) to settle? While I'm sure that any Jews left in PA would meet a sad fate, I don't think they would be officially barred on the basis of their ethnicity (which is what the headline implies).

177 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:10:25pm

re: #144 McSpiff

That's why they plan these attacks. That's why they perpetrate these horrible crimes. You've nailed it.

178 recusancy  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:11:18pm

re: #173 eclectic infidel

I hate to break it to you, but even without settlements, the violence would continue against Jews.

I'm aware. I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm arguing against the notion that settlements are needed to help protect Israelis' from violence.

179 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:12:26pm

re: #178 recusancy

I'm aware. I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm arguing against the notion that settlements are needed to help protect Israelis' from violence.

Pivot and attack.

Nice.

Dated, but nice.

180 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:12:49pm

re: #159 recusancy

I'm sure you read Lawhawk's comment 157.

181 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:13:32pm

re: #175 Bob Levin

The murders did not take place in a vacuum. There is organization, planning, funding, culture, and government that share in this act. These murders are not some psycho goes into a school and opening fire. This particular murder is one of a long series of such events--all done with the intent of scaring the Jews out of Israel. The desired consequence of the murders was to make the Jews want to flee from their homes. More building is a message to the higher ups on the terrorist food chain--this strategy isn't going to work.

Indeed. Regardless of issues collective guilt, Israel is opposed by a culture that sees Jews as having no place in the Middle East and sees their murder as a positive good. However blame is to be apportioned, pushback against such a culture is required if it is to be opposed successfully.

182 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:14:42pm

re: #176 Sergey Romanov

"Jewish" is ethnicity, "Israeli" is citizenship. Why would Palestinians allow Israeli citizens (of any ethnicity, Jew or Arab) to settle? While I'm sure that any Jews left in PA would meet a sad fate, I don't think they would be officially barred on the basis of their ethnicity (which is what the headline implies).

They've made clear on more than one occasion they aren't as nuanced as you are.

'ITBACH AL YAHUD!' (SLAUGHTER THE JEW!) has become an area rallying cry.

183 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:17:38pm

re: #182 researchok

They've made clear on more than one occasion they aren't as nuanced as you are.

'ITBACH AL YAHUD!' (SLAUGHTER THE JEW!) has become an area rallying cry.

True, true. Still, I'm not them, so I will go with nuance :P

184 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:18:17pm

re: #181 Dark_Falcon

Indeed. Regardless of issues collective guilt, Israel is opposed by a culture that sees Jews as having no place in the Middle East and sees their murder as a positive good. However blame is to be apportioned, pushback against such a culture is required if it is to be opposed successfully.

Let's take it a step further. I will concede Israel is kind of 'apartheid' state.

They have erected barriers and checkpoints to keep out racists, bigots and haters who would attempt to commit acts of terror. They want to keep out those who believe genocide is acceptable. They want to exclude those who preach terror and bigotry.

Yeah, those bastard Israelis.

185 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:18:37pm

re: #183 Sergey Romanov

True, true. Still, I'm not them, so I will go with nuance :P

LOL

Ever the gentleman!

186 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:22:54pm

The Jews who refused to resist or were unable to fight back during the Holocaust are indeed gone. The went up in smoke at Auschwitz, Dachau and Treblinka. Natural selection weeded out those weak Jews by way of centuries of pogroms, violence, racism and bigotry. Slowly but surely, thousands of years of of weak Jews have been exterminated, leaving only the those Jews now willing to defend themselves and their right to exist.

Darwin may not have been perfect, but he was no fool.

The Arab world sees themselves as cursed. They erroneously believed that accursed Jews they would dispatch were same Jews that walked passively into the gas chambers and into shtetl synagogues, to burned alive, or lined up wholesale and shot and then buried in unmarked pits. As it turns out, the Arabs had to face Jews who fight back. The Arabs had to face a very different kind of Jew, one for whom second class dhimmi status was not acceptable. In an ironic twist of fate, it was the Arabs who by way of their own dysfunctional hate allowed themselves to become the very same dhimmis of the western world. They became what they were taught to hate most.

The Arab interpretation of the Jews who might defend themselves is interesting. If the Jews just laid down to die, they would not be so humiliated, they say. Why couldn’t they just agree to die like they did in Europe? Why did they have to finally stand up when it was Arabs who wanted to kill them? To make matters worse, the Jews built a successful and properous nation in their back yard. Unlike the Arabs, the Jews worked hard to build their nation, they built schools and universities that are the envy of the world and they built a functioning world class economy. Led by dysfucntional political and religious leaders, the Arabs can only throw their hands up in the air and say, ‘ It isn’t fair, it just isn’t fair.’

187 General Nimrod Bodfish  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:24:35pm

According to Kyodo News, the radiation levels at Fukushima Daiichi NPP have exceeded legal limits again.

188 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:25:06pm

re: #178 recusancy

I'm aware. I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm arguing against the notion that settlements are needed to help protect Israelis' from violence.

Researchok doesn't appear to be arguing that.

189 treasured people  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:30:04pm

re: #186 researchok

Friend, although I applaud your pro-Israel and philosemitic sentiments, it is not proper to say that Jews who died in camps were weak. They were not weaker than anyone who is kidnapped at gun point and murdered.

190 Vicious Babushka  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:31:00pm

re: #178 recusancy

I'm aware. I'm not arguing otherwise. I'm arguing against the notion that settlements are needed to help protect Israelis' from violence.

Nobody is arguing that. You are setting up a straw man.

191 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:31:18pm

re: #186 researchok

Considering that Israel is also led by dysfunctional political and religious leaders.

semi-//

192 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:32:08pm

re: #191 Bob Levin

Considering that Israel is also led by dysfunctional political and religious leaders.

semi-//

LOL

On that we can agree.

193 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:41:25pm

re: #186 researchok

The Jews who refused to resist or were unable to fight back during the Holocaust are indeed gone. The went up in smoke at Auschwitz, Dachau and Treblinka. Natural selection weeded out those weak Jews by way of centuries of pogroms, violence, racism and bigotry. Slowly but surely, thousands of years of of weak Jews have been exterminated, leaving only the those Jews now willing to defend themselves and their right to exist.

Darwin may not have been perfect, but he was no fool.

I find this extremely disturbing. Repugnant, as a matter of fact.

The Arab world sees themselves as cursed. They erroneously believed that accursed Jews they would dispatch were same Jews that walked passively into the gas chambers and into shtetl synagogues, to burned alive, or lined up wholesale and shot and then buried in unmarked pits. As it turns out, the Arabs had to face Jews who fight back. The Arabs had to face a very different kind of Jew, one for whom second class dhimmi status was not acceptable. In an ironic twist of fate, it was the Arabs who by way of their own dysfunctional hate allowed themselves to become the very same dhimmis of the western world. They became what they were taught to hate most.

The Arab interpretation of the Jews who might defend themselves is interesting. If the Jews just laid down to die, they would not be so humiliated, they say. Why couldn’t they just agree to die like they did in Europe? Why did they have to finally stand up when it was Arabs who wanted to kill them? To make matters worse, the Jews built a successful and properous nation in their back yard. Unlike the Arabs, the Jews worked hard to build their nation, they built schools and universities that are the envy of the world and they built a functioning world class economy. Led by dysfucntional political and religious leaders, the Arabs can only throw their hands up in the air and say, ‘ It isn’t fair, it just isn’t fair.’

You know, you always say you have Arab friends (or at least one anyway) and that you don't hate all Arabs, you feel bad for the common guy in the street, etcetera, yet when you talk about them collectively it's often with either a sort of sneering contempt or an annoyingly patronizing tone. I find that...strange.

194 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:46:55pm

re: #186 researchok

Natural selection weeded out those weak Jews by way of centuries of pogroms, violence, racism and bigotry.

I don't think rounding up Jews, or any group for that matter by means of force, violence or intimidation can be rightly termed as natural selection. It doesn't strike me as being properly used in context.

195 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:47:58pm

re: #189 treasured people

It's amazing how many of the disagreements here come from unspoken differences in methodology. For instance, Researchok takes a very macro viewpoint, and hence, you get generalities in language. That's the method, it's an established part of the social sciences.

Then there was the discussion about where collective language delineates from specific language, and the acknowledgment that this is a slippery slope. True, and that's why in the social sciences there is the micrology. The two do not meet. The reader just has to understand right off which method the writer is using.

Another example of method is in comment 186, he's keeping religion out of the discussion. If we bring religion into the discussion--then the prayer dayaan ha'emet becomes relevant to explain why certain Jews were spared, why others were not. That prayer is also relevant to all of nature, the link being Tu B'Shevat, the New Year for trees.

196 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:52:24pm

re: #193 CuriousLurker

You need to read the entire exchange.

As I have noted earlier (on more than one occasion) I wished to hell I were wrong.

I'm sorry you find my words repugnat, but in fact, I am referring to those Arab regimes and cultures that have institutionalized racism, bigotry and hate.

There are specific examples available, if you need them.

My issue has never been with Arabs or Muslims, per se. In fact, I havce always gone to great lengths to make that distinction. There is no question as to who the biggest victims of Arab dysfunction are- other Arabs.

My issue is with those regimes that have exploited their people and reduced their societies to monuments to failure.

197 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:53:16pm

re: #194 eclectic infidel

I don't think rounding up Jews, or any group for that matter by means of force, violence or intimidation can be rightly termed as natural selection. It doesn't strike me as being properly used in context.

My remarks were rhetorical. I'm sorry if that was not clear.

198 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:56:00pm

re: #193 CuriousLurker

It's not like that. It's too bad we can't see each other's faces and hear inflection. Like I said above, there's a sociological method that speaks in this kind of macro language. Also, I think the general language could also come from Jung--who speaks of a collective consciousness. You'd have to ask him, but I'm not hearing any kind of patronizing tone, just a disciplined method.

199 Eclectic Infidel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:58:01pm

re: #197 researchok

My remarks were rhetorical. I'm sorry if that was not clear.

Understood.

200 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 3:59:17pm

re: #196 researchok

Well, let's have this discussion. I'm reading your comments and getting the sense that you know your methodology, others read it as you painting with a broad brush. How are you approaching the issues?

201 skidancer  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:03:56pm

Does anyone remember the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony for Rabin, Peres, and Arafat? I do because I was watching it on TV in a bar in the mideast. The basics are the following:
1. Rabin spoke about peace and building a society together
2. Peres spoke about technology and science being the basis for a shared partnership going into the future.
2. Arafat spoke about (in the future) spilling rivers of Jewish blood on the way to Jerusalem. The only amusing part of that was that the speech was long and rambling, and Peres, who was seated in the front row along with Rabin, seemed to nod off to sleep. I wonder if that was the way he handled cognitive dissonance.

'Nuff said. Nothing's changed.

--David

202 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:04:27pm

re: #200 Bob Levin

Well, let's have this discussion. I'm reading your comments and getting the sense that you know your methodology, others read it as you painting with a broad brush. How are you approaching the issues?

Strictly from a cultural/societal POV.

I take very few issues with individuals (save for those commit acts of evil or those who encourage them), because ultimately they are a product of the society from which they come. That society is by any standard of measurement is broken. Therein lies the tragedy.

203 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:06:10pm

re: #201 skidancer

Does anyone remember the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony for Rabin, Peres, and Arafat? I do because I was watching it on TV in a bar in the mideast. The basics are the following:
1. Rabin spoke about peace and building a society together
2. Peres spoke about technology and science being the basis for a shared partnership going into the future.
2. Arafat spoke about (in the future) spilling rivers of Jewish blood on the way to Jerusalem. The only amusing part of that was that the speech was long and rambling, and Peres, who was seated in the front row along with Rabin, seemed to nod off to sleep. I wonder if that was the way he handled cognitive dissonance.

Arafat was a cause of great grief and hopelessness in the region for decades.

The wasted lives and potential lost is heartbreaking.

'Nuff said. Nothing's changed.

--David

204 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:07:41pm

re: #201 skidancer

Does anyone remember the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony for Rabin, Peres, and Arafat? I do because I was watching it on TV in a bar in the mideast. The basics are the following:
1. Rabin spoke about peace and building a society together
2. Peres spoke about technology and science being the basis for a shared partnership going into the future.
2. Arafat spoke about (in the future) spilling rivers of Jewish blood on the way to Jerusalem. The only amusing part of that was that the speech was long and rambling, and Peres, who was seated in the front row along with Rabin, seemed to nod off to sleep. I wonder if that was the way he handled cognitive dissonance.

'Nuff said. Nothing's changed.

--David

Arafat was the cause of millions of wasted lives and the loss of lifetimes of potential.

One of the great tragedies of modern times.

205 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:09:04pm

re: #202 researchok

And you're aware of this, so it's method. That is the problem with the social sciences--that the method isn't as clear as in the hard sciences, and easily lends itself to misinterpretation.

206 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:13:36pm

re: #205 Bob Levin

And you're aware of this, so it's method. That is the problem with the social sciences--that the method isn't as clear as in the hard sciences, and easily lends itself to misinterpretation.

True.

This what I do for a living. I do forget at times that most people don't 'understand the rules'.

207 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:19:21pm

re: #196 researchok

You need to read the entire exchange.

As I have noted earlier (on more than one occasion) I wished to hell I were wrong.

I'm sorry you find my words repugnat, but in fact, I am referring to those Arab regimes and cultures that have institutionalized racism, bigotry and hate.

There are specific examples available, if you need them.

My issue has never been with Arabs or Muslims, per se. In fact, I havce always gone to great lengths to make that distinction. There is no question as to who the biggest victims of Arab dysfunction are- other Arabs.

My issue is with those regimes that have exploited their people and reduced their societies to monuments to failure.

Give me a little credit—I didn't just jump in at 180-odd posts, cherry pick one of your comments, and decide to start talking out of my ass. I've been lurking for several hours.

Yes, you say a lot of things about Arabs & Muslims. You make statements that seem diametrically opposed to each other. Statements which, if I want to believe one reflects your true feelings, then trying to accommodate the other as equally true causes me no small amount of cognitive dissonance.

As for my feeling of repugnance, it had nothing to do with what you said about Arabs. It had to do with the statement about Darwin and "weak" Jews being weeded out, as if the Nazi's performed some sort useful purification service. No doubt that was their intent, though obviously not as a method for strengthening the Jewish people. Nonetheless, I found the wording...well, I don't really have the words to describe how I felt on a visceral level, so I settled for "repugnant". I understand what you were trying to say, but the words you used were seriously disturbing, at least to me.

208 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:21:19pm

re: #186 researchok

The Jews who refused to resist or were unable to fight back during the Holocaust are indeed gone. The went up in smoke at Auschwitz, Dachau and Treblinka. Natural selection weeded out those weak Jews by way of centuries of pogroms, violence, racism and bigotry. Slowly but surely, thousands of years of of weak Jews have been exterminated, leaving only the those Jews now willing to defend themselves and their right to exist.

I know you don't realize that this is insanely and amazingly offensive, but it is.

For god's sake, never write anything like that again.

And read Primo Levi's "The Drowned and the Saved" and "Survival in Auschwitz".

209 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:21:54pm

re: #208 Obdicut

Meh. Messed up my tags-- my comments are the light gray ones.

210 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:21:59pm

re: #186 researchok


modern warfare has nothing to do with darwin

211 Jimmah  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:22:17pm

re: #186 researchok

The Jews who refused to resist or were unable to fight back during the Holocaust are indeed gone. The went up in smoke at Auschwitz, Dachau and Treblinka. Natural selection weeded out those weak Jews by way of centuries of pogroms, violence, racism and bigotry. Slowly but surely, thousands of years of of weak Jews have been exterminated, leaving only the those Jews now willing to defend themselves and their right to exist.

Darwin may not have been perfect, but he was no fool.

So you are saying that the 6 million jewish victims of the Nazis were in fact weaklings, whose 'removal' has made the Jewish people stronger?

WTF, researchok?

212 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:24:15pm

re: #207 CuriousLurker

As for my feeling of repugnance, it had nothing to do with what you said about Arabs. It had to do with the statement about Darwin and "weak" Jews being weeded out, as if the Nazi's performed some sort useful purification service. No doubt that was their intent, though obviously not as a method for strengthening the Jewish people. Nonetheless, I found the wording...well, I don't really have the words to describe how I felt on a visceral level, so I settled for "repugnant". I understand what you were trying to say, but the words you used were seriously disturbing, at least to me.

That is a fair criticism I can live with.

I wrote that more as a rhetorical response than as being truly representative.

I do need to be more careful and I'm glad you brought that to the fore. Henceforth, I will do my best to remember to be more literal.

Thank you for the constructive criticism. I am most grateful.

213 b_sharp  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:26:07pm

re: #195 Bob Levin

It's amazing how many of the disagreements here come from unspoken differences in methodology. For instance, Researchok takes a very macro viewpoint, and hence, you get generalities in language. That's the method, it's an established part of the social sciences.


I find it surprising that a 'social scientist' such as ResearchOK shows such a 'Macro' misunderstanding of evolution.

214 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:26:42pm

re: #211 Jimmah

So you are saying that the 6 million jewish victims of the Nazis were in fact weaklings, whose 'removal' has made the Jewish people stronger?

WTF, researchok?

No, my remarks were more rhetorical. What I am saying is that the Holocaust did 'create' a stronger Jewish identity. To be more precise, I would say the lesson of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising had a profound impact on the Jewish psyche.

215 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:27:31pm

re: #213 b_sharp

I find it surprising that a 'social scientist' such as ResearchOK shows such a 'Macro' misunderstanding of evolution.

As I noted, my remarks were more rhetorical than representative.

I will be more literal in the future.

216 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:28:40pm

re: #208 Obdicut

I will repeat again: My remarks were more rhetorical than literal.

217 iceweasel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:29:11pm

There's nothing 'natural'about selections on a train platform.

218 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:31:31pm

re: #216 researchok

Your comments were simply nuts on any level. And if you haven't read Survival in Auschwitz, it is absolutely a must-read.

219 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:31:48pm

re: #217 iceweasel

There's nothing 'natural'about selections on a train platform.

Actually, in a roundabout way there is something most natural.

That's what you get when evil is allowed to dominate.

Imagine Fred Phelps in charge.

That is why evil must be fought every step of the way.

220 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:32:59pm

re: #218 Obdicut

Your comments were simply nuts on any level. And if you haven't read Survival in Auschwitz, it is absolutely a must-read.

All of them?

221 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:34:21pm

re: #216 researchok

I will repeat again: My remarks were more rhetorical than literal.

R.o., you're a good man. I will tell you why I personally found that remark offensive - although I know you didn't mean anything negative by that. Because here's what was written in the Wannsee protocol:

Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)

222 iceweasel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:34:31pm

re: #219 researchok

Actually, in a roundabout way there is something most natural.

That's what you get when evil is allowed to dominate.

Imagine Fred Phelps in charge.

That is why evil must be fought every step of the way.

We're using both nature and selection in twp different ways here. You're talking about human nature, and conflating it with nature. I was snarking on the word selection.

223 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:34:37pm

re: #220 researchok

All of them?

I don't see anything very worthwhile in there, and the phrase 'weak Jews' is about as terribly-chosen, ill-thought, and creepy phrase as one could ever use about those, like so many in my family, who died in the camps.

224 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:35:36pm

re: #221 Sergey Romanov

R.o., you're a good man. I will tell you why I personally found that remark offensive - although I know you didn't mean anything negative by that. Because here's what was written in the Wannsee protocol:

Sergey, we are on the same page.

Comme d'habitude.

225 iceweasel  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:35:53pm

I'm out for the night. Take care folks and have a good time--

226 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:36:26pm

re: #223 Obdicut

I don't see anything very worthwhile in there, and the phrase 'weak Jews' is about as terribly-chosen, ill-thought, and creepy phrase as one could ever use about those, like so many in my family, who died in the camps.

I want to be clear- you find none of what I wrote of any value?

227 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:37:57pm

re: #221 Sergey Romanov

And you're a micrologist, like Foucault. I know that you understand this.

Folks, I'll tell you, macrology sounds offensive at first, and second. Some people never get around it, even in the social sciences.

228 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:41:10pm

re: #227 Bob Levin

And you're a micrologist, like Foucault. I know that you understand this.

Folks, I'll tell you, macrology sounds offensive at first, and second. Some people never get around it, even in the social sciences.

In my defense, I make a living at it!

229 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:41:34pm

re: #226 researchok

I want to be clear- you find none of what I wrote of any value?

In that particular post? Whatever there might be of 'worth' is completely overwhelmed by the insanity of suggesting those that died were weak in some fashion-- on a literal, figurative, or any other level.

The rest of what you wrote is what I've already disagreed with, in whole, this concept that Arabs are jealous of Israel, which I feel is a rather clunky contention that absolutely misses the roots of Arab anti-Semitism. Those thoughts aren't offensive, but I don't think they're in any way correct.

But please, please, please never, ever, ever say such things about the Holocaust again, or talk about weak Jews going up in smoke. It literally makes the bile rise in my throat.

230 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:42:54pm

re: #198 Bob Levin

It's not like that. It's too bad we can't see each other's faces and hear inflection. Like I said above, there's a sociological method that speaks in this kind of macro language. Also, I think the general language could also come from Jung--who speaks of a collective consciousness. You'd have to ask him, but I'm not hearing any kind of patronizing tone, just a disciplined method.

There was no patronizing tone in this particular, but there was contempt (I can point it out if necessary) I can understand & share contempt for dictators, terrorists, hypocrites, etc. but not for collective swaths of humanity.

As for sociological methods speaking a macro language, that's not good enough here. Researchok may be a behaviorist, but he's not speaking to a group of professional peers. You don't go to a forum filled with numerous types of people with differing professional backgrounds and varying levels of education & experience and expect them to understand your special "macro language", at least not unless you purposely want to be misunderstood.

I've seen people here pounce on the tiniest misstatement and/or insist on clarification when something is unclear. It has happened to me, so now instead of using words or phrases that have in the past been unclear, I'm now make a point of being being as specific as possible, even if it means being annoyingly verbose.

I agree with you about inflection & facial expressions. I have listened to researchok talk in interviews with his friend Fausta & others.

231 b_sharp  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:43:06pm

re: #229 Obdicut

In that particular post? Whatever there might be of 'worth' is completely overwhelmed by the insanity of suggesting those that died were weak in some fashion-- on a literal, figurative, or any other level.

The rest of what you wrote is what I've already disagreed with, in whole, this concept that Arabs are jealous of Israel, which I feel is a rather clunky contention that absolutely misses the roots of Arab anti-Semitism. Those thoughts aren't offensive, but I don't think they're in any way correct.

But please, please, please never, ever, ever say such things about the Holocaust again, or talk about weak Jews going up in smoke. It literally makes the bile rise in my throat.

But Obdi, you just don't understand. He's a macrologist and it was all rhetorical.

232 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:43:49pm

re: #229 Obdicut

In that particular post? Whatever there might be of 'worth' is completely overwhelmed by the insanity of suggesting those that died were weak in some fashion-- on a literal, figurative, or any other level.

The rest of what you wrote is what I've already disagreed with, in whole, this concept that Arabs are jealous of Israel, which I feel is a rather clunky contention that absolutely misses the roots of Arab anti-Semitism. Those thoughts aren't offensive, but I don't think they're in any way correct.

But please, please, please never, ever, ever say such things about the Holocaust again, or talk about weak Jews going up in smoke. It literally makes the bile rise in my throat.

Perhaps I wasn't clear.

My remarks about the Holocaust were rhetorical in nature.

As for my other remarks, I standby them, of course.

233 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:45:18pm

re: #231 b_sharp

But Obdi, you just don't understand. He's a macrologist and it was all rhetorical.

Yes, you are right of course.

Silly of me to think I might know more about my line of work than you.

234 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:46:09pm

re: #228 researchok

Well, you might want to buy a bigger tool belt. ;-) A screwdriver is not suitable for every job.

Darwin, for instance, is good for getting ball rolling on DNA research. Social Darwinism, not so much.

235 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:47:40pm

re: #232 researchok

I have no fucking clue how 'they were rhetorical' is supposed to make your comments appear any better in any way, shape, or form. They are incredibly goddamn offensive whether meant rhetorically, figuratively, literally, or allegorically. Those that died did not do so because of any form of weakness. Jews are not now all strong and able to resist; they are still vulnerable in many ways and places, and still second-class citizens in others.

236 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:47:41pm

re: #234 Bob Levin

Well, you might want to buy a bigger tool belt. ;-) A screwdriver is not suitable for every job.

Darwin, for instance, is good for getting ball rolling on DNA research. Social Darwinism, not so much.

Ain't that the truth.

237 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:47:51pm

re: #230 CuriousLurker

It boils down to this: when talking about ethnic, religious, racial groups all of us - sociologists included - should be very careful, especially in public forums. An inherently dangerous territory. "Think twice before entering."

238 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:51:15pm

re: #235 Obdicut

I'm just curious, I seems like you have an academic background. What's your specialty?

239 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:52:13pm

re: #40 researchok

What's a little exploitation?
//

Shame on her. Disgusting.

To be fair, I was told at a meeting today that the family has expressly asked that photos from the crime scene be circulated, so that people can see what happened.

That this happens to tie in nicely with Pam's liking for gore and pathos is another matter.

240 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:55:08pm

re: #235 Obdicut

I have no fucking clue how 'they were rhetorical' is supposed to make your comments appear any better in any way, shape, or form. They are incredibly goddamn offensive whether meant rhetorically, figuratively, literally, or allegorically. Those that died did not do so because of any form of weakness. Jews are not now all strong and able to resist; they are still vulnerable in many ways and places, and still second-class citizens in others.

OK, I'll explain it.

In fact, Jews were led to slaughter easily because they didn't fight back. Images of whole groups of Jews herded by one or two guards are legion. Jews. did not fight back because civilized people cannot fathom, much less predict, the actions of evil people. From a behavioral standpoint, this is a flaw. Human beings should have as priority, the ability to defend themselves. Through most of human existence that Darwinian instinct has been at the fore.

Yes it is true not all Jews now are strong. Not all of any one group is strong.

The Israelis have made 'Never Again' meaningful and real as a direct response to the Holocaust.

That is a most Darwinian response.

241 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:55:44pm

re: #239 SanFranciscoZionist

To be fair, I was told at a meeting today that the family has expressly asked that photos from the crime scene be circulated, so that people can see what happened.

That this happens to tie in nicely with Pam's liking for gore and pathos is another matter.

I submit the family doesn't know Pamela Geller.

242 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:57:05pm

re: #58 researchok

It never was about settlements or settlers, of course.

In a nutshell, it was because Jews did in 50 years what the Arab world could not do in 2000 years- they created a modern, functioning society in the region- and a free one at that.

For some shame societies, the only way to get rid of the shame is to eliminate the source of shame.

And because murdering Jews has been a hobby in the region for a long, long time.

243 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:57:45pm

re: #242 SanFranciscoZionist

And because murdering Jews has been a hobby in the region for a long, long time.

Be careful

That might put you on the wrong side of the fence.

244 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:58:12pm

re: #65 recusancy

Apprehend the murderer. Like every other civilized society would do.

Go into the PA to do that?

245 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 4:59:49pm

re: #238 Bob Levin

I'm just curious, I seems like you have an academic background. What's your specialty?

None. I'm a college dropout. I just read constantly, and am friends with a lot of nifty academics, thanks to my parents.

I'm happy to count among my friends such people as Robert Alter and Geoff Nunberg. I'm going back to school soon to finally get my BA-- and hopefully a masters as well-- in the philosophy of engineering, as expressed by Dennett.

246 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:00:58pm

re: #97 recusancy

Are they Israeli citizens? Jews can live in the west bank. They would just have to be Palestinian citizens.

Do you think that Jews will be given Palestinian citizenship? What would make you think this when the Palestinian Authority outlaws selling land to Jews?

247 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:01:05pm

re: #245 Obdicut

None. I'm a college dropout. I just read constantly, and am friends with a lot of nifty academics, thanks to my parents.

I'm happy to count among my friends such people as Robert Alter and Geoff Nunberg. I'm going back to school soon to finally get my BA-- and hopefully a masters as well-- in the philosophy of engineering, as expressed by Dennett.

Good for you.

Where are you going to attend?

248 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:01:36pm

re: #246 SanFranciscoZionist

Do you think that Jews will be given Palestinian citizenship? What would make you think this when the Palestinian Authority outlaws selling land to Jews?

Your digging deeper....
//

249 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:02:46pm

re: #237 Sergey Romanov

It boils down to this: when talking about ethnic, religious, racial groups all of us - sociologists included - should be very careful, especially in public forums. An inherently dangerous territory. "Think twice before entering."

Indeed. I'm try to be very careful about anything I say those topics because I know how easily they can be misinterpreted, and also because I feel like having made a public statement about being a practicing Muslim, my statements may be seen as representative of other Muslims (regardless of whether or not they are).

This is especially true when I go near—as marjoriemoon called it—That Subject (Israelis & Palestinians), which I mostly avoid except to express dismay when something like the horrible murder of this family occurs. I don't avoid it because I don't care or I don't think it's important, but because I don't really understand all the bits and pieces and also because it pains me to see Muslims committing horrible, unjust, inhumane acts.

OT: I'm glad you're here as I have a question I've been meaning to ask. Is there any way to get in touch with you by email (or however) outside of here? The reason I ask is because I'm doing some research & info gathering and would like to ask you opinions on a couple of things and get a little advice. Only if it wouldn't be an imposition, of course—I totally understand if you'd rather not.

250 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:03:03pm

re: #240 researchok

In fact, Jews were led to slaughter easily because they didn't fight back

What would have been the difference if they had fought back? I mean, even in this fantasy where somehow Jews understood the extremity of the situation-- what would have changed?

And how does that explain your use of the word 'weak'?

That is a most Darwinian response.

No, it's not. It's not the least bit Darwinian. It would only be Darwinian if those that survived were those that resisted.

251 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:05:18pm

re: #249 CuriousLurker

Click on my nick. (But it may take some hours before I reply).

252 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:05:59pm

re: #250 Obdicut

What would have been the difference if they had fought back? I mean, even in this fantasy where somehow Jews understood the extremity of the situation-- what would have changed?

And how does that explain your use of the word 'weak'?

No, it's not. It's not the least bit Darwinian. It would only be Darwinian if those that survived were those that resisted.

What the difference might have been is not the point.

In fact, they did not fight back for the most part. From a cultural/anthropological point, not fighting back is a weakness that has nothing to do with outcome.

And yes, we are here because our antecedents did fight back. Tribes and all that.

253 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:07:34pm

re: #230 CuriousLurker

FYI, Fausta and I are longer on the3 same page.

Evolution and so on.

254 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:07:38pm

re: #240 researchok

Vayz meir.

I'm not sure that it's possible to explain collective Jewish behavior or history using any kind of rationality, especially Darwin. We knew what was happening--that was the theme of the play The Man in the Glass Booth. At this point, there's no explaining it. There's no explaining the aftermath, that many of these survivors migrated to Israel, that the country was even formed in the first place. There is explaining the immediate declaration of war by the surrounding nations, but there is no explaining how the survivors survived again. That is, unless you're willing to go deeper into human consciousness than Western science is willing to go.

255 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:08:10pm

re: #251 Sergey Romanov

Click on my nick. (But it may take some hours before I reply).

Done, getting ready to email you now. Take your time replying as I'm in no rush.

256 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:08:15pm

re: #252 researchok

What the difference might have been is not the point.

Your point seems to be shifting and disappearing into rhetorical nothingness.

And yes, we are here because our antecedents did fight back. Tribes and all that.

Nope. I'm here because my ancestors fled, survived, let themselves be enslaved, claimed to have converted, etc. etc. etc. My antecedents didn't fight back. And I'm perfectly okay with that.

257 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:08:26pm

re: #245 Obdicut

That's good. All the best.

258 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:09:07pm

re: #256 Obdicut

Your point seems to be shifting and disappearing into rhetorical nothingness.

Nope. I'm here because my ancestors fled, survived, let themselves be enslaved, claimed to have converted, etc. etc. etc. My antecedents didn't fight back. And I'm perfectly okay with that.

Everything they did is fighting back.

Whatever it takes to survive is fighting back.

259 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:09:26pm

re: #201 skidancer

Does anyone remember the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony for Rabin, Peres, and Arafat? I do because I was watching it on TV in a bar in the mideast. The basics are the following:
1. Rabin spoke about peace and building a society together
2. Peres spoke about technology and science being the basis for a shared partnership going into the future.
2. Arafat spoke about (in the future) spilling rivers of Jewish blood on the way to Jerusalem. The only amusing part of that was that the speech was long and rambling, and Peres, who was seated in the front row along with Rabin, seemed to nod off to sleep. I wonder if that was the way he handled cognitive dissonance.

'Nuff said. Nothing's changed.

--David

I am not exactly a big supporter of the late Yasser Arafat, but I cannot find any reference to spilling rivers of Jewish blood in his Nobel lecture. Can you help with links or references?

260 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:09:50pm

re: #254 Bob Levin

And reading The Drowned and the Saved and Survival in Auschwitz paints a very harrowing picture of what surviving the camps entailed.

God damn, those books rip me apart.

261 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:09:52pm

re: #253 researchok

FYI, Fausta and I are longer on the3 same page.

Evolution and so on.

That's a good to know.

262 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:10:51pm

re: #230 CuriousLurker

By the way, I have evolved in my opinions.

I realize you might want to throw some of my earlier posts at me.

Feel free.

263 Obdicut  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:11:01pm

re: #258 researchok

Oh for god's sake. No, fleeing is not fighting back.

Just please never write anything as offensive as that again. Especially the phrase 'weak Jews'.

Good night.

264 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:11:10pm

re: #261 CuriousLurker

That's a good to know.

Been a few years now.

265 b_sharp  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:11:11pm

re: #233 researchok

Yes, you are right of course.

Silly of me to think I might know more about my line of work than you.

Claiming it was all rhetorical is part of your job? Cool beans.

266 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:11:34pm

re: #265 b_sharp

Claiming it was all rhetorical is part of your job? Cool beans.

That was deep.

267 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:11:44pm

re: #240 researchok

OK, I'll explain it.

In fact, Jews were led to slaughter easily because they didn't fight back. Images of whole groups of Jews herded by one or two guards are legion. Jews. did not fight back because civilized people cannot fathom, much less predict, the actions of evil people.

1. Many did fight back.

2. Jews were a small minority in a region completely controlled by their enemies.

I think the 'led to slaughter' thing simply doesn't hold up.

268 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:12:04pm

re: #241 researchok

I submit the family doesn't know Pamela Geller.

They've suffered enough already.

///serious bad gallows humor

269 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:12:53pm

re: #267 SanFranciscoZionist

1. Many did fight back.

2. Jews were a small minority in a region completely controlled by their enemies.

I think the 'led to slaughter' thing simply doesn't hold up.

Elie Wiesel might disagree.

270 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:13:22pm

re: #262 researchok

By the way, I have evolved in my opinions.

I realize you might want to throw some of my earlier posts at me.

Feel free.

OK, CL's ref got me interested. I googled and found a 2007 comment at GoV by some bigot condemning you and your blog for being apparently an appeaser because you wouldn't condemn Muslims as a whole. That's a good recommendation in my book :P

271 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:13:49pm

re: #268 SanFranciscoZionist

They've suffered enough already.

///serious bad gallows humor

Yes.

That's why I hang on your every word.

272 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:16:49pm

re: #270 Sergey Romanov

OK, CL's ref got me interested. I googled and found a 2007 comment at GoV by some bigot condemning you and your blog for being apparently an appeaser because you wouldn't condemn Muslims as a whole. That's a good recommendation in my book :P

My evolution occurred when the 'mob mentality' claimed common sense, that most individual endeavor. Bad stuff that is.

273 jea62  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:17:18pm

So let me get this straight...

A country conquers land in war, illegally annexes it, expropriates property belonging to the residents there, throws them out, razes their houses and groves and builds houses on it for their people, then builds walls to keep the "undesirables" who've been living there out.

Which wasn't okay when Germany did it. Wasn't okay when Japan did it. When the Soviets did it. Wasn't when the Rwandans did it. Or Hussein. Or when Serbia did it.

But because this country is Israel, they get a pass.

Then, when Palestinians react violently to all of this, conservatives are "morally outraged."

274 b_sharp  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:17:51pm

re: #266 researchok

That was deep.

Touche! I have been stabbed through the heart.

275 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:17:53pm

re: #273 jea62

So let me get this straight...

A country conquers land in war, illegally annexes it, expropriates property belonging to the residents there, throws them out, razes their houses and groves and builds houses on it for their people, then builds walls to keep the "undesirables" who've been living there out.

Which wasn't okay when Germany did it. Wasn't okay when Japan did it. When the Soviets did it. Wasn't when the Rwandans did it. Or Hussein. Or when Serbia did it.

But because this country is Israel, they get a pass.

Then, when Palestinians react violently to all of this, conservatives are "morally outraged."

Are you for real?

276 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:19:16pm

re: #273 jea62

That's just not the history of Israel. That's the mythology of the last decade, but it's not the history.

277 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:19:58pm

re: #269 researchok

Elie Wiesel might disagree.

He might. Mordechai Anielowicz might disagree with him. Historically speaking, armed resistance by civilian populations within the Reich was not a viable option. The absolute best that can be said for the partisan efforts was that they were at times helpful to the Allies, and that they managed to keep some of their fighters alive through the war. This takes away none of their honor, but no Jewish children lived through the war because their fathers chose to fight rather than get on the trains.

278 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:22:25pm

re: #273 jea62

Excuse me, did you just justify the murder?

279 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:22:33pm

re: #277 SanFranciscoZionist

He might. Mordechai Anielowicz might disagree with him. Historically speaking, armed resistance by civilian populations within the Reich was not a viable option. The absolute best that can be said for the partisan efforts was that they were at times helpful to the Allies, and that they managed to keep some of their fighters alive through the war. This takes away none of their honor, but no Jewish children lived through the war because their fathers chose to fight rather than get on the trains.

Armed resistance is one kind of fighting back.

Having the stones to pick up and leave everything behind is another kind of fighting back,

280 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:24:33pm

re: #279 researchok

Armed resistance is one kind of fighting back.

Having the stones to pick up and leave everything behind is another kind of fighting back,

Sure, and many people did, and many people loaded their kids onto the Kindertransport.

But the idea that there was a viable option for most of the millions of Jews of Europe, aside from doing their best to live, doesn't hold up.

281 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:24:40pm

re: #249 CuriousLurker

Do you guys all hang out at the same place after everyone is done typing?

282 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:36:50pm

re: #262 researchok

By the way, I have evolved in my opinions.

I realize you might want to throw some of my earlier posts at me.

Feel free.

My point in mentioning Fausta was just to indicate that I'm aware of the past, even though I'm still relatively new here.

I don't have any interest in throwing things at you. I realize it's been a few years and there are others here who say they've evolved as well. I'll take you at your word.

283 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:38:15pm

re: #282 CuriousLurker

I'm more curious than you. How do you know these things? ;-)

284 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:44:10pm

re: #281 Bob Levin

Do you guys all hang out at the same place after everyone is done typing?

Seems that way sometimes, doesn't it?

re: #283 Bob Levin

I'm more curious than you. How do you know these things? ;-)

Heh, you wouldn't believe how much time I spend poking around. Not just about politics and religion, about everything. I've lost entire days to Wikipedia and archive.org.

285 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 5:48:10pm

re: #282 CuriousLurker

My point in mentioning Fausta was just to indicate that I'm aware of the past, even though I'm still relatively new here.

I don't have any interest in throwing things at you. I realize it's been a few years and there are others here who say they've evolved as well. I'll take you at your word.

Yes, it's been 3 plus years. As I said, I have evolved and matured in many, many ways.

In the interest of full disclosure, my politics are still right of center but I really have evolved to a more centrist position.

My position on Middle East politics has refined. My work has always focused on cultural/societal matters and that has not changed. My belief that political change in the region is necessary has only been reinforced. Without it, I strongly believe there will be more heartache and grief.

There is no way out until the regimes are replaced with more real democratic institutions that will replace the dysfunctional state sponsored one that exist today.

Lastly, there is no magic bullet. This will be a long and drawn out process.

I wish that were not so, but it is true.

286 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:00:29pm

Here's a blast from the past-

Welcome To the Age of Psychopathy

Some early Siggy...

287 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:04:06pm

re: #286 researchok

Chistopher Lasch squared (to the second power)?

288 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:11:04pm

re: #287 Bob Levin

Chistopher Lasch squared (to the second power)?

That's a bit more 'real writing' than seen here.

289 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:19:30pm

re: #286 researchok

Do you still agree with it?

290 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:23:43pm

Most of it, I do still agree with, but my reasoning now would be different.

If I were to write that now, I would probably be less didactic.

291 abolitionist  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:32:02pm

re: #273 jea62

So let me get this straight...

A country conquers land in war, illegally annexes it, expropriates property belonging to the residents there, throws them out, razes their houses and groves and builds houses on it for their people, then builds walls to keep the "undesirables" who've been living there out.

Which wasn't okay when Germany did it. Wasn't okay when Japan did it. When the Soviets did it. Wasn't when the Rwandans did it. Or Hussein. Or when Serbia did it.

But because this country is Israel, they get a pass.

Then, when Palestinians react violently to all of this, conservatives are "morally outraged."

I'm not usually one to advance an argument by an appeal to an "authority", but the testimony in this case might make rethink your position.
Evidence of Haj Amin al-Husseini1 Before the Royal Commission, January 12, 1937

SIR L. HAMMOND: His Eminence gave us a picture of the Arabs being evicted from their land and villages being wiped out. What I want to know is, did the Government of Palestine, the Administration, acquire the land and then hand it over to the Jews?

MUFTI: In most cases the lands were acquired.

SIR L. HAMMOND: I mean forcibly acquired-compulsory acquisition as land would be acquired for public purposes?

MUFTI: No, it wasn't.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Not taken by compulsory acquisition?

MUFTI: No.

SIR L. HAMMOND: But these lands amounting to some 700,000 dunams were actually sold?

MUFTI: Yes, they were sold, but the country was placed in such conditions as would facilitate such purchases.

SIR I HAMMOND: I don't quite understand what you mean by that. They were sold Who iold them?

MUFTI: Land owners.

SIR I HAMMOND: Arabs?

MUFTI: In most cases they were Arabs.

292 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:32:28pm

re: #285 researchok

Yes, it's been 3 plus years. As I said, I have evolved and matured in many, many ways.

In the interest of full disclosure, my politics are still right of center but I really have evolved to a more centrist position.

My position on Middle East politics has refined. My work has always focused on cultural/societal matters and that has not changed. My belief that political change in the region is necessary has only been reinforced. Without it, I strongly believe there will be more heartache and grief.

There is no way out until the regimes are replaced with more real democratic institutions that will replace the dysfunctional state sponsored one that exist today.

Lastly, there is no magic bullet. This will be a long and drawn out process.

I wish that were not so, but it is true.

I don't disagree with any of that. It's just that sometimes the way you say things irks me (and I'm equally sure that I irk some people too—I'm not under the illusion that everyone here loves me, heh).

As a behaviorist with a background in psychology, you'll also understand that my upbringing as a brown-skinned child in a (largely) WASP family—combined with my experiences as a hijab-wearing Muslim and the current climate of politically induced Islamophobia—have combined to make me keenly sensitive to and mistrustful of certain types of language or statements that seem overly broad (regardless of how they were intended, because you never know who's silently lurking and absorbing every word).

Wow, talk about a run-on sentence. Ugh. Maybe I should just shut up and go make some dinner now...

293 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:32:29pm

re: #290 researchok

I'm curious, because we've been talking about methodology. Do you find that an historical method, such as that of Foucault or James Burke is of use, or would be of use in terms of gaining insight?

In other words, where you say many cultures have gone beyond an overriding narcissism into psychopathology, are you limited to a purely psycho-dynamic engine, or do you use a historical engine, such as the presence or lack of an industrial revolution?

294 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:38:28pm

re: #292 CuriousLurker

I use the coffee test. If I feel I can sit and have a pleasant cup of coffee with another person, they're not racist, although we may have issues we have to work through. ;-)

295 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:41:45pm

I'll be off for a while, too. I'll check back later. Thanks again everyone.

296 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:42:51pm

re: #293 Bob Levin

I'm curious, because we've been talking about methodology. Do you find that an historical method, such as that of Foucault or James Burke is of use, or would be of use in terms of gaining insight?

In other words, where you say many cultures have gone beyond an overriding narcissism into psychopathology, are you limited to a purely psycho-dynamic engine, or do you use a historical engine, such as the presence or lack of an industrial revolution?

Good question- really, really good.

I will say it depends on the insight you are trying to acquire. Also, people- and cultures/societies are different and they learn differently, understand differently and perceive differently.

There is no one size fits all.

Onwards.

Each society/culture evolves differently, even when sharing the same technology, for example. Many societies/cultures have 'overridden narcissism into psychopathology' for very different reasons. Sometimes that happens because of abundance, sometimes because of poverty. Sometimes the reasons are political, sometimes the reasons are religious and sometimes the reasons are many and nuanced.

Historical engines are useful as markers, but not more than that. Consider what we tell our kids- 'When I was your age...'

'But dad, things are different now...'

They are- and they aren't.

297 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:54:46pm

re: #292 CuriousLurker

I don't disagree with any of that. It's just that sometimes the way you say things irks me (and I'm equally sure that I irk some people too—I'm not under the illusion that everyone here loves me, heh).

As a behaviorist with a background in psychology, you'll also understand that my upbringing as a brown-skinned child in a (largely) WASP family—combined with my experiences as a hijab-wearing Muslim and the current climate of politically induced Islamophobia—have combined to make me keenly sensitive to and mistrustful of certain types of language or statements that seem overly broad (regardless of how they were intended, because you never know who's silently lurking and absorbing every word).

Wow, talk about a run-on sentence. Ugh. Maybe I should just shut up and go make some dinner now...

LOL@ 'Wow, talk about a run-on sentence. Ugh. Maybe I should just shut up and go make some dinner now'.

I do understand I miscommunicate at times. I suppose most of that is my own fault, but I also realize sometimes people will focus on that as opposed to argue a point (as in attack the messenger. Occupational hazard!).

I was not aware of your upbringing. Certainly, I can understand your sensitivities (and no doubt my oafish attempts at presenting an argument from time to time can really be infuriating). That said, I would hope we have had enough exchanges for you to chalk up my 'huh?' remarks to communication failure.

Nevertheless, based on observations, you are one hell of a well adjusted human being. Really. I guess that's why I responded to you the other day the way I did. You don't ever need to be on the defensive. Period.

Keep me on point if I'm not coming across clearly.

Like I said, constructive criticism that comes from a good place is always a good thing

298 researchok  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 6:56:51pm

CL, could you email me at my nic at g mail.

Something I'd like to communicate.

299 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 7:10:14pm

re: #297 researchok

LOL@ 'Wow, talk about a run-on sentence. Ugh. Maybe I should just shut up and go make some dinner now'.

I do understand I miscommunicate at times. I suppose most of that is my own fault, but I also realize sometimes people will focus on that as opposed to argue a point (as in attack the messenger. Occupational hazard!).

True. I don't do Israeli/Palestinian arguments. Don't know enough about it to avoid making a fool of myself.

I was not aware of your upbringing. Certainly, I can understand your sensitivities (and no doubt my oafish attempts at presenting an argument from time to time can really be infuriating). That said, I would hope we have had enough exchanges for you to chalk up my 'huh?' remarks to communication failure.

Nevertheless, based on observations, you are one hell of a well adjusted human being. Really. I guess that's why I responded to you the other day the way I did. You don't ever need to be on the defensive. Period.

Keep me on point if I'm not coming across clearly.

Like I said, constructive criticism that comes from a good place is always a good thing

Thanks. I'll do my part and try not to be so twitchy. ;o)

300 CuriousLurker  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 7:10:30pm

re: #298 researchok

CL, could you email me at my nic at g mail.

Something I'd like to communicate.

Will do.

301 boxhead  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 11:17:35pm

The Israeli Palestine conflict is one that baffles me. Logic tells me one way to solve this problem, but logic has left town and doesn't seem to be coming back. Emotion, pride, and vengeance are the words sponsoring the current events. If I was a betting man, I'd put money down on this dispute never being solved.

302 Bob Levin  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 11:42:56pm

re: #301 boxhead

If you were to really study antisemitism, you would see that this is what you're looking at. It's classic, but with added bits of technology.

Here's the shortcut. The next time the conflict escalates into a short war (it's been a long, ongoing war since 1947--which sometimes actually looks like a war--tanks, cannons, troops, etc.), watch how quickly the world and UN jump all over it. Then, compare that to how quickly the world is reacting to Qaddafi. (By the way, nothing is happening to Qaddafi, nothing.)

What Qaddafi is doing right now is far worse than what Israel will do in the next escalation.

Then, watch the protests all over the world. Notice how the chants and screams of the protesters, how their signs will not be confined to Israel, but will be generalized to all Jews.

Some of these protests will be in the US. And make sure to notice the variation on the phrase that Hitler was stopped too soon.

This won't make you feel better, but at least you'll have some clarity.

303 boxhead  Sun, Mar 13, 2011 11:53:40pm

Being kind of old, I do know a thing or two about how the world has treated Jewish folk, as well as many other groups that are not part of the group in the position of power. It will always be us against them no matter who the "us" and "them" are. If I were king, Qaddafi would have been retired long ago. The home land for Palestine is much more difficult. Addressing the land that was left when Israel was first created is beyond me. Having the neighboring countries as part of the solution is a must. But none of the countries that border Israel want to be part of the solution. It is like a bunch of high school girls arguing over Homecoming but with real consequences. Real solutions are possible but no one wants to take the hard path.

I just wish the Middle East was not so important to USA.

304 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:22:42am

re: #303 boxhead

Being kind of old, I do know a thing or two about how the world has treated Jewish folk, as well as many other groups that are not part of the group in the position of power.

Could you clarify that sentence, please? Especially the part in italics.

Addressing the land that was left when Israel was first created is beyond me.

Are you talking BCE, 70 CE, 1947? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Real solutions are possible but no one wants to take the hard path.

Again, if you'd care to elaborate, that would be helpful.

I'm not exactly a youngster either. The idea is to see antisemitism with foresight, not hindsight. You're looking at antisemitism.

305 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:33:01am

re: #273 jea62

You really drank the kool aid, didn't you?

306 Westward Ho  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:33:02am

As if Israel needed an excuse to go ahead with expanding its illegal settlements.

307 Eclectic Infidel  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:33:40am

re: #306 Westward Ho


What rock did you crawl out from under?

308 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:39:25am

re: #304 Bob Levin


Being kind of old, I do know a thing or two about how the world has treated Jewish folk, as well as many other groups that are not part of the group in the position of power.


Could you clarify that sentence, please? Especially the part in italics.


Sure... I was reading a paper discussing why we have wars. Basically it all boiled down to tribalism. Humans instinctively group together. There is a natural distrust of anyone not part of the group. The group that is in power tends to dominate the lesser group. I guess we act like our closest animal relatives in that fashion.

Are you talking BCE, 70 CE, 1947? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Again, if you'd care to elaborate, that would be helpful.


I submit tribalism has and always will be part of our natural instinct. Sure we can choose to over come it, but it is against our nature.


I'm not exactly a youngster either. The idea is to see antisemitism with foresight, not hindsight. You're looking at antisemitism.

Agreed, foresight with all potential conflicts. Understanding human nature is necessary as well as being able to transcend it.

309 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:53:51am

re: #304 Bob Levin


Real solutions are possible but no one wants to take the hard path.


Again, if you'd care to elaborate, that would be helpful.

I appear to left off one of your questions... I would seriously remove the solution from the affected parties and hand it over to a entity skilled in conflict resolution provided they can be honest and unbiased. I know that may sound absurd, but if honest people are willing to have real discussions leaving pride, anger, etc at the door, things can be resolved. From my very far window, I don't see honest discussion in current negotiations.

310 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:08:01am

re: #304 Bob Levin

damn I wish I could edit posts....

I was referring to 1947, but there will always be another example just a few years back and thus the hopelessness in honest solutions.

And just to clarify, they way I look at the way the Jewish people have been treated is the same as all other peoples who have had to submit to a stronger force. The Jewish story has been well documented and thus we know lots about it. But the sad thing is humans are dicks and those that can always screw those that can't. yep... sad

311 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:33:18am

re: #308 boxhead

I would dispute that paper. For many years, yes, tribalism was a cause of war. But since the industrial revolution, wars have been fought over natural resources and the smooth flow of those resources. There are areas of the world that are non-industrial and have no natural resources of use to the developed world, but their fights do not make the news.

I also think it's pretty tricky business trying to pinpoint the nature of human nature. However, I think I can be certain that the Jewish people wish for peace. I know this because we pray for peace three times a day.

Unfortunately, I do consider your solution to be...not a solution. That impartial body, the organization tasked with stopping genocide, is the UN. However, the UN has turned into the most corrupt organization in the world. Again, if you look at the UN, you should see a very antisemitic organization.

312 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:40:45am

re: #306 Westward Ho

First, the cities are not illegal. And second, Jewish people have families with babies and need a place to live. That's the reason to build houses. It's about that simple.

re: #308 boxhead

Do you see it with this guy? A family murdered in cold blood and this is his reaction. This is what it looks like.

313 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:45:14am

re: #311 Bob Levin

I would dispute that paper. For many years, yes, tribalism was a cause of war. But since the industrial revolution, wars have been fought over natural resources and the smooth flow of those resources.

Yes... as long as those resources stay within the set group. The "tribe" does not have to be large or based on race. It is based upon people who think alike that want to protect what they have.


There are areas of the world that are non-industrial and have no natural resources of use to the developed world, but their fights do not make the news.

I also think it's pretty tricky business trying to pinpoint the nature of human nature. However, I think I can be certain that the Jewish people wish for peace. I know this because we pray for peace three times a day.


The other part is that I also believe most people do want peace. Most do care for others. But there are enough who just want more and use whatever to strive for it. Even though people may want peace, history has shown those same people can be mislead. yep... Human nature is very hard to define because we are operating on ourselves.


Unfortunately, I do consider your solution to be...not a solution. That impartial body, the organization tasked with stopping genocide, is the UN. However, the UN has turned into the most corrupt organization in the world. Again, if you look at the UN, you should see a very antisemitic organization.

I will agree that the UN cannot solve this because they are neither honest nor unbiased. That is why I did not mention them. But..... if such a person/group/etc could be found, would my solution work then?

314 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:51:59am

re: #313 boxhead

But... if such a person/group/etc could be found, would my solution work then?

They would die very quickly because there is no oxygen in a vacuum.

That is to say, the corrupting forces in the world are very strong. I would give them...maybe ten seconds of impartiality before they turn sour.

315 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:53:43am

re: #313 boxhead

Did you see it in comment 306?

316 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:55:28am

re: #312 Bob Levin

First, the cities are not illegal. And second, Jewish people have families with babies and need a place to live. That's the reason to build houses. It's about that simple.

re: #308 boxhead

Do you see it with this guy? A family murdered in cold blood and this is his reaction. This is what it looks like.

The murders are horrible to the point of making me feel ill when I was reading about it. Ill and furious. ANY sane person should feel the same. As to the building, all should build.

I am from a mixed marriage family, and thus have probably different views on my heritage versus others who have long history. I don't have history. I have family in Hawaii and Germany and USA. My son is even more mixed. I really don't have a ethnic group to call my own so I embrace family and friends and Country. I just wish people can actually be real enough to solve their problems. I better look for Aladdin's Lamp for that wish.

317 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:56:56am

re: #314 Bob Levin

They would die very quickly because there is no oxygen in a vacuum.

That is to say, the corrupting forces in the world are very strong. I would give them...maybe ten seconds of impartiality before they turn sour.

Really? Then how can any problem be solved? dang, and I thought I was too cynical.

318 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:01:16am

re: #315 Bob Levin

Did you see it in comment 306?

yes... he is tossing controversial comments without any interest in honest debate. I tend to have self filters on posts like that cause it serves no purpose to reply if there is no desire to learn.

BTW, who decides what is legal and illegal with regards to Israel and Palestine? Not me....

319 Westward Ho  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:03:16am

re: #312 Bob Levin

The Settlements are illegal under international law. The relentless expansion of the settlements has made the two state solution which all parties want almost impossible.

320 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:10:49am

re: #319 Westward Ho

The Settlements are illegal under international law. The relentless expansion of the settlements has made the two state solution which all parties want almost impossible.

yes... but since when has international law become binding? The UN is supposed to be the place where countries can come together and talk. And hopefully solve problems. As a Citizen of USA, I would NEVER want to have USA and thus me, submit to a vote in the UN. NEVER!

321 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:13:23am

re: #317 boxhead

I am the world's champeen cynic.

Actually, Obdicut had it right way up near the top. The Arab nations have to make the decision to grow their own food and work to create potable water. To do this, they've got to drop the antisemitic junk. Israel will help them to grow food, find water, and develop new renewable energy resources. The Saudis would be up for the first two, not so much the third.

322 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:17:52am

re: #319 Westward Ho

Where is it written that Jews can't build houses? Chapter and verse please.

Point two, you're really upset about the murders, eh? Or are the lives cheap?

323 Westward Ho  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:19:18am

re: #320 boxhead

Are you against the concept of International Law? Should powerful nations be allowed to commit crimes with impunity? I realize that a powerful nation would not like to circumscribe its freedom of action by submitting to international law. But international law is a blessing for weaker nations.

324 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:30:46am

re: #323 Westward Ho

Are you against the concept of International Law?

Ah, so since you can't actually cite a real law, we're down to the concept of law. Yeah, law is a great concept.

How do feel about laws against murder? Kind of selective about those laws, aren't you?

The relentless expansion of the settlements

My goodness we must suck. 60 years of relentlessness, and we've only progressed a few miles. Of course, Israel has built a thriving economy that is now considered fully developed, produced Nobel prize winners, developed many pieces of technology and medicine that are essential to our lives--it doesn't make sense. If we were relentless, we should be three quarters of the way through Jordan by now. What is wrong with us?

I'm writing an angry letter to the international conspiracy division.

325 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:33:39am

re: #323 Westward Ho

Are you against the concept of International Law? Should powerful nations be allowed to commit crimes with impunity? I realize that a powerful nation would not like to circumscribe its freedom of action by submitting to international law. But international law is a blessing for weaker nations.

yep.... While I understand how International law could be a good thing if all parties engaged are honorable and honest, I do not recognize other countries power over me.

326 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:36:08am

re: #321 Bob Levin

I am the world's champeen cynic.

Actually, Obdicut had it right way up near the top. The Arab nations have to make the decision to grow their own food and work to create potable water. To do this, they've got to drop the antisemitic junk. Israel will help them to grow food, find water, and develop new renewable energy resources. The Saudis would be up for the first two, not so much the third.

In the end, it is their problem.... I don't have a stake and I don't want one. Too many people whit too foreign beliefs for me. I wish them success.

327 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:36:53am

re: #326 boxhead

I appreciate your honesty.

328 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:38:44am

re: #327 Bob Levin

I appreciate your honesty.

thanks... yours as well.... This is a difficult problem and I cannot help unless they need some routers installed... :p

329 boxhead  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:45:24am

nite Bob... great talking with you....

330 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:51:23am

re: #329 boxhead

Good night, and thank you.

331 Westward Ho  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:52:52am

re: #324 Bob Levin


Your text to link...

Your text to link...


In 1967, Theodor Meron, legal counsel to the Israeli Foreign Ministry stated in a legal opinion to Adi Yafeh, the Political Secretary of the Prime Minister, "My conclusion is that civilian settlement in the administered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention."[60] The legal opinion, forwarded to Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, was not made public at the time, and the Labor cabinet progressively sanctioned settlements anyway; this action paved the way for future settlement growth. In 2007, Meron stated that "I believe that I would have given the same opinion today."[61]
332 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 3:22:40am

re: #331 Westward Ho

You might want to carefully read your own links, including the footnotes.

Nice quote, too bad the next paragraph contradicts it.

The idea, if you're going to try to fool me with citations, is to make sure I can't see all of the evidence supporting my position.

333 jea62  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 8:44:48am

re: #278 Sergey Romanov

No, I'm indicting the moral equivalency of Israeli supporters who have little or no outrage when it's Palestinians who are killed.

And I also might point out that the vast majority of these settlers are strident Zionists who can also become violent against Palestinians at the drop of a hat.

334 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 8:47:01am

re: #333 jea62

No, I'm indicting the moral equivalency of Israeli supporters who have little or no outrage when it's Palestinians who are killed.

And I also might point out that the vast majority of these settlers are strident Zionists who can also become violent against Palestinians at the drop of a hat.

Why would you need to "indict" here and now?

335 Kronocide  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 9:10:11am

re: #334 Sergey Romanov

Why would you need to "indict" here and now?

Dogma. Why else would one find a way to rhetorically dance around brutal murder?

336 treasured people  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 9:30:59am

re: #319 Westward Ho

The relentless expansion of America into Indian territories was illegal. Give America back to the Indians! Jews were living in Palestine long before the Palestinians. Give Palestine back to the Jews!

337 Claudia  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 9:47:34am

# 35 Charles,

It saddens me when you write something like "Geller thing". I don't like Pamela Geller either but... you have always had a lot of class & I have admired you for it.

338 [deleted]  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 9:54:05am
339 Kronocide  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 9:56:21am

re: #338 Grim Reaper

All kinds of fallacy-fu and wu-thought on this scat warrior.

340 Obdicut  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 9:58:01am

re: #338 Grim Reaper

Weird that you haven't noticed abortion clinic bombings, the shooting at the Unitarian church.

It's even weirder you think that they're not important, given the huge number of anti-abortion and science-rejecting laws they're getting passed.

Whatever. You're not actually thinking about this anyway.

341 Claudia  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:15:23am

#134 Charles

I'm trying to point out, though, that it's not correct to say there's something unique about European Caucasians that makes them more prone to enslave other people. Practically every race of humankind has engaged in slavery.


Judaism never allowed slavery. A "master" was obliged to free his bonded servant after 7 years.

342 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:17:18am

re: #341 Claudia

#134 Charles


Judaism never allowed slavery. A "master" was obliged to free his bonded servant after 7 years.

Your sentence is self-contradictory.

343 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:18:46am

re: #341 Claudia

#134 Charles


Judaism never allowed slavery. A "master" was obliged to free his bonded servant after 7 years.

Also the "obliged" part only pertained to other Hebrews.

344 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:29:39am

re: #341 Claudia

#134 Charles


Judaism never allowed slavery. A "master" was obliged to free his bonded servant after 7 years.

NIV Leviticus 25:

44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

Pfft.

345 JEA62  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:31:45am

re: #334 Sergey Romanov

Because I see "outrage" only when Israelis are murdered.

Of course, I realize Palestinians lives aren't worth a whole hell of a lot to conservatives, but since the ratio of deaths of Palestinians to Israelis has been so high over the years I might have expected some small discomfort to accumulate.

346 Kronocide  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:32:00am

re: #342 Sergey Romanov

Your sentence is self-contradictory.

'They never allowed slavery because they could only keep slaves for 7 years."

LOL

347 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:34:35am

re: #345 JEA62

Because I see "outrage" only when Israelis are murdered.

Of course, I realize Palestinians lives aren't worth a whole hell of a lot to conservatives, but since the ratio of deaths of Palestinians to Israelis has been so high over the years I might have expected some small discomfort to accumulate.

1. You realize that this is no longer a conservative blog?

2. Whatever truth is there in your points is lost because you decide to be an asshole and make this points on the occasion of a brutal murder.

348 Kronocide  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 12:43:38pm

I guess the facts and event do not matter, only that this is an opportunity to share a perspective, real or imagined.

Let me take this opportunity provided by the brutal murder of the Fogel family to state you are a partisan asshole, ill prepared to have any rational debate on Israel. You don't even understand this blog.

349 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:08:32pm

re: #344 Sergey Romanov

Of course I have to chime in on this. First, we are talking about two different situations, one I know about, the second, I would have to go to the Talmud to learn more. That's the thing if you pick up a Bible, the English isn't exactly accurate, and the commentary and ensuing discussion gives meaning to the words.

I know about the conditions for a Hebrew slave. Basically, someone owes someone money but can't pay it back. In Europe, there were debtors prisons. Not here. The person in debt has to work off the debt. It's translated as 'slave'. But that's the closest word in English, and it's still not accurate.

So this guy is now working off the debt. There are rules, general principles, such as--if there is only one pillow between the two men, the guy working off the debt gets the pillow. Second, you can't boss him around like a jerk and tell him to do menial work. If the guy makes shoes, then he's going to be making shoes for as long as the debt exists. And there are provisions that once the debt is gone, or once he must be released from his debt, after seven years, he might want to stay with the family. So there are laws for how he can stay with the family.

Regarding the non-Jewish slave. I don't know much about this, but I will say that the simple quote from the lousy translation isn't enough for understanding. The problem (some would call it feature) with the Talmud is that the information isn't strictly categorized, so I wouldn't know where to find all the information I need. And I don't recall reading much about this.

Also, there isn't any provision in the Torah for a central bank, or any guarantee that paper would be invented--and therefore, no guarantee of currency. In fact, there are numerous discussions about value and payment, then the discussions quickly go to how payment can be made--and they're not talking about cash, check, or plastic. More like, how about a scarf? How can we determine how much the scarf is worth? And so on. So how do you compensate people who work for you? It's not that easy. And they can't get on the bus and go home, or get in the car and drive for twenty minutes. You work from sun up until dark, and dark is dangerous. Not much choice, but that person is going to live with you and eat with you. I don't have a noun for this.

But you cannot abuse this person.

Now, why is the Jewish 'slave' freed and the non-Jewish 'slave' someone who can be with the family for generations? Because the Jew has quite a few other religious obligations that take up most of the day, and you can't keep him or her from those obligations. However, like I said, they can choose to stay with the family.

350 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:16:56pm

re: #349 Bob Levin

Regarding the non-Jewish slave. I don't know much about this, but I will say that the simple quote from the lousy translation isn't enough for understanding.

Sorry, that's just the usual religious apologetics. You have not shown anything wrong with the translation and plain meaning. Pick your translation. JPS is the same except for using the more politically correct "bondsman".

351 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:27:21pm

re: #350 Sergey Romanov

Sorry, that's just the usual religious apologetics.

I was explaining the situation. Did you already know those details? If not, I think the information is relevant, especially to make the point the the English translation doesn't accurately describe the reality. So, did you know the details? That's the key question. It's about a guy who owes money.

You have not shown anything wrong with the translation and plain meaning.

Is your definition of 'slave' a guy who owes you money? Remind me not to borrow money from you.

Pick your translation.

No translation. Learn some Hebrew and study some Talmud.

JPS is the same except for using the more politically correct "bondsman".

No translation. I'm sticking to it.

352 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 1:40:48pm

re: #351 Bob Levin

I was explaining the situation. Did you already know those details? If not, I think the information is relevant, especially to make the point the the English translation doesn't accurately describe the reality.

The claims that this or that translation doesn't accurately describe the reality are the staple of religious apologetics. Sorry, you haven't shown that there is anything wrong with the translation.

Is your definition of 'slave' a guy who owes you money? Remind me not to borrow money from you.

Slave is not someone who merely owes you money and there is nothing in the text about that. Moreover, even if there was anything about that, that's still slavery, with the slave being a property (which can be sold), with physical punishment and whatnot, with slaves being forced to marry and the wife and children staying the property of the master ("If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free."). Etc. etc. etc. I don't see how "debt" would change anything. And even if this explanation were true for Hebrew slaves, it would still not apply to non-Hebrew slaves who were simply bought from foreign nations.

No translation. Learn some Hebrew and study some Talmud.

No translation. I'm sticking to it.

Meh. You're just stalling.

353 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:12:10pm

re: #352 Sergey Romanov

We're going in circles. But let me underline that point.

The claims that this or that translation doesn't accurately describe the reality are the staple of religious apologetics.

I don't have to apologize for being religious. Second, I'm not them, whoever them are. Please do not lump me with anyone else you've spoken too on this subject. I'm saying that the conventional understanding of the English words is not the meaning of the Hebrew words and does not convey the context of those words.

Slave is not someone who merely owes you money

And they don't have the--whatever, barter, whatever--to pay you back. But yeah, that's basically it.

there is nothing in the text about that.

That's my point. That's the main difference between Christians and Jews (it's not Jesus). We feel that the Torah is like a tag cloud, that the whole of the understanding is in the Mishnah, Midrash, and Talmud. Christians feel that the translation is complete. I've had this discussion when Jehovah's Witnesses come to the door. "Can I show you this passage from the Bible?" "Actually, can I show you what the Bible really looks like?" And then I get a Tikkun (a book with photocopies of the actual Torah in one column, compared to how that column appears in standard Hebrew editions of the Torah--huge difference by the way). And then the Jehovah's Witnesses realize that they are really pressed for time, and they have to go.

The rest of what you said is basically that you're sticking to your understanding, and the translation is all you need to get that understanding. That's where we disagree. So, whenever you meet someone who thinks the translations are good and complete, you're ready to argue, and you are prepared.

But you're not prepared for this. It's taken me over twenty years of study to learn what little I know. I could show you that every sentence of your second paragraph is in some way a misunderstanding, but I'm not going into detail here.

However, I must make special mention that you are wrong about your notion of physical punishment--no. No no no. It's not there. You can't do it. I'll leave it at that. Just know that there is another opinion on this that is grounded in text and historical discussion. In other words, I got footnotes.

354 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 2:32:53pm

re: #353 Bob Levin

"I don't have to apologize for being religious."

I never wrote or implied that you should. Religious apologetics is not apologizing for being religious. It's a system of a defence of faith/religion. I simply indicated one of the typical methods of defence used by apologetes (mostly Christian) - saying that allegedly the "original text" changes everything, despite there being dozens of independent translations by qualified scholars that more or less agree with each other. In such a case a good and concrete evidence is needed that the translations are wrong, not simply "learn Hebrew". The translators knew Hebrew very well. I'm not saying any translation by itself is fully correct. But we can check as many as we want, including the translation made by Jews for Jews (JPS).

You have not addressed my points about slaves in Leviticus and Exodus being just that - slaves, property that can be sold, punished, etc. You only said that I'm wrong about punishment. Here it is:

Exodus 21:
20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.

As for your point about the Talmud - it is just an interpretation/tradition that is later than the Torah. Judaism existed before the Talmud/Mishna/Gemara/Oral Torah were formulated, just as Christianity existed before the Church Fathers and canons and even before the New Testament. The "naked" Torah gives us a glimpse into this early form of Judaism. Of course modern Judaism is against slavery, but that is besides the point.

355 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 3:08:57pm

re: #354 Sergey Romanov

I never wrote or implied that you should.

You're right. I shouldn't have said that. I tried to qualify it as quickly as I could by...requesting that you not lump me in with anyone else with which you've had this discussion.

The translators knew Hebrew very well.

There's an interesting story about this. Evidently the Greek ruler wanted, oh, about 70 rabbis to translate the Torah into Greek. He locked them in separate rooms, and they began. This is discussed as one of those invisible miracles, not a headline grabber. The problem for the Rabbis was that translating the Torah was, not a sin, but a thing that will have very bad consequences and shouldn't be done. So, they were in a quandary since not doing so would kick in option 2--death. They began their work, trying to mistranslate several key words. And here's the little miracle--they all mistranslated the same words, and so no death penalty.

You have not addressed my points about slaves in Leviticus and Exodus being just that - slaves, property that can be sold, punished, etc. You only said that I'm wrong about punishment.

You might really dig Talmud. Start that section by inferring--if the slave owner is an asshole...

There is no commandment, thou must not be an asshole--it's just sort of understood. Again, because there is really no money, many discussions revolve around assessing value and monetary compensation. So, how do you assess damages and compensation when there isn't any actionable damages? And how do you define an actionable damage? And if the damage is actionable, who do you pay it to? The state? Don't think so. There is more analysis of the passage, again, it would take a while.

Regarding the timetable. The tradition is that the Oral Torah was also given with the written Torah. And many people could remember it all, and cross-reference like a computer. However, when it became obvious that our mental faculties were in serious decline, these things were written down.

One of the reasons that modern Judaism is against slavery is because we have money, and a central bank, and transportation and all sorts of things that make the whole enterprise completely unnecessary. Cruelty was never a part of the deal, so it was never a factor in getting rid of it.

If you look at the history of slavery, and apply the perspective of the Torah, you will ask 'what are these insane people doing?' Because it's wrong.

Remember, we left that kind of insane slavery. We know it's wrong. That's why we have Passover.

356 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 5:08:46pm

re: #355 Bob Levin

Bob, I enjoy your postings because you tell a story here, an anecdote there, or offer an interesting explanation. BUT. This is all going around the main issue. I will skip over the fact that you did not really address the reliability of translations issue or the Talmud/Torah chronology issue except by pointing to what the tradition says (rather than what history says).

The main issue is that the contextual Torah verses really leave no doubt as to what kind of "servants" these ebedim were, Hebrew or non-Hebrew. They could have become such for many reasons - poverty, debt, theft, being a captive, being sold by parents etc. (to say that it was simply someone owing money is plain incorrect). There's still no way around the fact that the Torah permitted and thus sanctified slavery and some of its abuses. This could be argued to still have been a step forward in those circumstances compared to other nations , whatever. But it happened. And history suggests that in practice (rather than in theoretical laws) the slaves in Jewish society in antiquity were very literal slaves. E.g. see a recent Oxford U book Jewish Slavery in Antiquity, intro in PDF here: [Link: www.thedivineconspiracy.org...]
Thus Claudia's comment is incorrect.

357 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 5:49:37pm

re: #356 Sergey Romanov

I don't have a lot of time right now--so, I don't feel that any translations are reliable.

They could have become such for many reasons - poverty, debt, theft, being a captive, being sold by parents etc. (to say that it was simply someone owing money is plain incorrect).

Poverty=no money. Debt=no money. Theft=payback item plus 20%=no money. Captive=different story, see above. Being sold by parents=no money. It's pretty much about owing money.

Yes, it sanctified slavery, but I don't have time to get into it, in a rush. No, it did not sanctify any abuses. (We'll have to finish this another time.)

As for the British source material about Jewish history--you can understand if I have trouble with those.

I'm not asking you to change your mind about slavery--but the evils that occurred did not come from the Torah. Got to run. Later dude.

358 Bob Levin  Mon, Mar 14, 2011 10:34:48pm

re: #357 Bob Levin

Not that anyone is going to see this, but to set the record straight, I used the phrase 'sanctified slavery'. Wrong words. But it's English, and so there are no right words to describe the situation.

The Hebrew word 'eved' does not have an English equivalent. It describes the social relationship between someone who owes another person money and is working to pay off the debt by living with the person the to whom the money is owed. There are many details describing this relationship, usually described using law. In western civilization, there are no relationships that resemble this, and historically no relationships that have resembled this--certainly not slavery. But that's how it gets translated, mistranslated, and mistranslated again and again.

359 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Mar 15, 2011 7:11:28am

re: #358 Bob Levin

I also have nothing to add at this time except that dismissal of the scholarly book because it is "British" (no matter that the author is a respected Jewish scholar (and a Professor of Jewish Studies, no less, highly qualified to deal with both the Talmudic issues and the history of Jews in antiquity), the academic publisher is top-notch, the book is positively reviewed in peer-reviewed specialist journals, including Jewish ones) does not really amount to strong argument.

360 Bob Levin  Tue, Mar 15, 2011 12:28:53pm

re: #359 Sergey Romanov

That's true, except that the there is always a difference in Jewish history between the concept as described in the Torah and our ability to execute the concept properly. So, if someone tells me...but the Jews didn't do it well...yes, nu?

I believe (I might be wrong) there are even sections of the Haftarah where a prophet is chastising the Jewish people for doing such a poor job of dealing with....(language problem, no noun) this. Such warnings, analyses, are very common in the Tanach.

You understand that I'm handing you gold here, right? If you take an anti-religion stance, what better argument is there than 'your holy translation is so bad, that it bears almost no relationship to the original source. Got a wobbly table?'

361 Bob Levin  Tue, Mar 15, 2011 12:54:31pm

re: #359 Sergey Romanov

Also, just a note here, but my extreme skepticism of western scholarship didn't begin as I became religious. It started when Piccone wanted me to begin editing articles for Telos. I was young and didn't quite get the hang of it (to do it correctly, your expertise had to tower over the conventional level of scholarship). In class (I took them all), he would regularly take the bible in a particular field of philosophy or social science and take it apart so completely that even the commas were screaming.

And then when it came to the tenure fight, well, that was pretty much it for my respect for academics. I'm--very jaded.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh