Tuesday, June 08, 2010



The recent attempt run the Gaza blockade was revealing

We read:
"The instantaneous worldwide condemnation of Israel by such stalwart defenders of humanitarian rights as Russia, Syria, Turkey and the UN itself, illustrates that hate speech against Israel and Jews has become pro forma and acceptable without question.

There was a brief respite from knee jerk anti-semitism after the Second World War exposed its horrifying consequences but following the declaration of Israel’s statehood, the mantle of Jew-hatred was assumed by the Muslim world and eventually by the radical left internationally. Now, in the 21rst century, after all the wars initiated against Israel by Arab forces, after all the world-wide massacres wrought by radical Islam, we still face the curious phenomenon of Israel being singled out as the world’s leading obstacle to peace in our time.

In the west, one of the formative reasons for the demonization of Israel in polite discourse is the leeway afforded to its enemies to express the most outrageous claims in our universities. We have raised a generation of students who have been manipulated by anti-Israel faculties, by craven attempts to boycott Israel economically and intellectually and by such phenomena as Israel Apartheid Week whose very title is not only a patent lie but an insidious attempt to delegitimize a democratic state.

Ironically, Israel has successfully integrated people from all over the globe and has afforded more rights to Palestinians than all of their Arab pseudo-supporters combined. Israel has continued to extend humanitarian aid to its self-avowed enemies who deny its right to exist and refuse to meet with its leaders face to face. The non–Muslim students who support Israel Apartheid Week would never participate in a week-long hate fest dedicated to the condemnation of radical jihadi violence against Hindus, African animists, Christians, Jews, gays and women, yet they feel sanctimoniously comfortable scapegoating the only democracy in the middle east and the only bona fide ally of the United States in that region.

Universities which have severely limiting speech codes that protect against offending the sensitivities of numerous sacred cows have no problem allowing the often violence-inducing rallies and speeches that constitute Israel Apartheid Week at the most prestigious campuses in America.

Source

All the Leftist and libertarian sites I have seen recently are just bubbling over with hatred of Israel. Very reminiscent of Der Stürmer

38 comments:

Anonymous said...

What has Israel ever done for the USA?

Bobby said...

Here's a list of what they have done.
http://www.factsandlogic.org/outstanding_accomp.html

They also have history of helping the US Military.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/Dore-Gold-Diplomatic-dispute-obscures-Israels-invaluable-help-to-US-military-88914752.html

Israel is THE only ally America has in the middle east.

Anonymous said...

2:31 - Coz it wouldn't even exist without the massive support from the US (militarily, economically, and politically).

Anonymous said...

Israel will always prevail regardless of current sentiment. It's in the Bible.

stinky said...

Libertarian sites bubbling with hatred for Israel? I regularly read a few myself and see no such thing, quite the opposite in fact. Might I ask which sites you refer to, JJR?

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with Stinky. I've seen no such anti-Isreali rants from Libertarians. Ironically, most of the hate-filled rants are coming from America's leftist jews who dominate the elitist "intelligencia". (ie: academia and the media)

There was a report this morning (6-7-10) that Iran has offered to "escort" the "peace" ships into Gaza. This is an attempt by Iran to goad Isreal into an action, then claim their response to that action is "self-defense". Our enemies are already aware of the incompetence and weakness in the White House, and see this as the right time to act. Isreal had better understand they have no friend in the Obummer administration, and take "whatever" action they see fit to protect themselves from Iran.

Anonymous said...

"Israel will always prevail regardless of current sentiment. It's in the Bible."

Only because THEY (i.e. Jews) wrote the thing.

Bobby said...

Israel had no American support during its independence war of 1948.

Also, just because you give a country money doesn't mean you make that country strong. America wastes BILLIONS of dollars supporting Africa, Egypt, South America South Korea, and what do they get in return? Nothing. What America spends on NATO dwarfs whatever aid Israel gets.

Also, the loans Israel gets are spent mostly on American goods, like construction trucks for example. Israel also provides tons of military intelligence and resources. With the arabs going crazy, you need a partner in the region with trained arab linguists and the excellence of the Mossad.

JR said...

I kept no track of it but one of the libertarian sites was this:

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/06/we-bought-bullets.html

JR said...

But libertarians are infinitely variable of course

There are as many versions of libertarianism as there are libertarians

Anonymous said...

Fact:
In the last five "major" espionage cases, where people were caught and convicted of spying (on) the US, it was proven that they were spying (for) Isreal. Not exactly the act of a greatful friend, is it.

Anonymous said...

Count about 98% of the Irish as Jew/Israel haters.

Someone opined that's because as a culture they were persecuted under the British rule and they see the Palestinians as the underdogs.

I say bulls**t. The Irish are a nation of busy-body bullies.

Here's a great site which explains the national anathema for Israel and adoration of Palistine.

http://markhumphrys.com/irish.left.israel.html

Anonymous said...

In the last five "major" espionage cases, where people were caught and convicted of spying (on) the US, it was proven that they were spying (for) Isreal. Not exactly the act of a greatful friend, is it.

I'm shocked, shocked, to find that friendly-nation-spying is going on here!

Anonymous said...

How many Americans have been caught spying on Isreal?

Clue: 0

Anonymous said...

"Israel is THE only ally America has in the middle east."

There would be a hell of a lot more allies in the middle east if we dumped Israel. We DO NOT need them.

Anonymous said...

How many Americans have been caught spying on Isreal?

Clue: 0


I bet we could convict on that evidence.

Anonymous said...

"Israel is THE only ally America has in the middle east."

There would be a hell of a lot more allies in the middle east if we dumped Israel. We DO NOT need them.


Brilliant, let's get in bed with even more maniacs that want us all dead.

Bobby said...

"Hey moron! They want us dead because of our support for Israel."

---Bullshit, that's the lie they want you to think, but the truth is in their quran which requires the spread of Islam by force.

Why do you think that Muslim student admitted to Horowitz that it would be better for all the Jews to be in Israel so they don't have to go all the the world hunting them?

Islam is a religion of hate, they hate Jews, they hate Christians, they even hate secular people. Muslim radicals are all over Europe spreading fear, you can't even publish a cartoon about Mohammad without facing death threats from these bastards.

I stand with Israel and with any country that's willing to stand up to radical Islam.

Anonymous said...

"Islam is a religion of hate"

All religions are religions of hate.

Use the Name, Luke said...

So how many people did the inquisition kill?

Short Answer: About 6,000 people over a period of 500 years.

…or… roughly twice the number killed by Muslims in a single day. (9/11 killed 2,976, not counting the hijackers.) How many people has Islam killed over any 500 year period of its existence?

Anonymous said...

It seems killing and religion go hand-in-hand!

Use the Name, Luke said...

Killing and humans go hand in hand:

The Soviet Union and Communist China were both officially atheist regimes. Between them, they murdered 90.3 million people over a 70 year period.

So 6,000 instances of wrongdoing in the name of Jesus (and condemned by his teachings) over a 500 year period vs. 90,300,000 instances of the same evil over a mere 70 year period committed by those whose worldview cannot say such actions are fundamentally wrong.

Atheism? No thanks. I'll take Christianity.

Anonymous said...

It was Communism that was the idealogy behind the killings in the USSR and China, not "atheism" which was only incidental to Communism and of itself is a non-position as in the meaning of "a-". Was Christianity driven by a-Islam? Maybe, but it was incidental to the principle beliefs of Christianity. Was Nazism Christian-based as most Nazis came from a Christian background, used Christian references and were anti-Communist.

Use the Name, Luke said...

Communism is not a system of morality. Atheism and religions are systems of morality. A system of morality defines what is right and what is wrong. Karl Marx made atheism the moral system of communism, and those two countries followed suit.

"Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions."
—Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

It seems you need to read some history and historical books. Hitler and Nazism were out to destroy Christianity.

"The individual may establish with pain today that with the appearance of Christianity the first spiritual terror entered into the far freer ancient world, but he will not be able to contest the fact that since then the world has been afflicted and dominated by this coercion, and that coercion is broken only by coercion, and terror only by terror. Only then can a new state of affairs be constructively created."
—Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf

Furthermore, those "Christians" who followed Nazism had to abandon the foundation of the Bible because the two are openly contradictory. Those who chose to abandon the Bible to follow Nazism were called "German Christians", while those who "clung to their Bibles" where called "Confessional Christians" and faced arrest and execution at the hands of the Gestapo.

Anonymous said...

Communism and Nazism were clearly opposed to each other, so whatever atheistic content they had was logically not the main issue. Both only opposed Christianity when it was in the form of institutional churches or their followers which represented a competing loyality.
What constitutes a "true" Christian is moot as all who claim to be one will try to defend it and there is no "court" to decide.
But clearly Luke you think it's quite Christian to suddenly be patronizing to another poster here and say he knows less history than you do! Oh well it's your religion - good luck!

Use the Name, Luke said...

"Communism and Nazism were clearly opposed to each other, so whatever atheistic content they had was logically not the main issue."

Yes Communists and National Socialists opposed each other. Both thought their version of socialism was best.

But how that somehow means atheism is not the main issue makes no logical sense! You may be thinking of an "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of logic, but that's not necessarily the case. And for these two ideologies, it definitely was not the case.

"What constitutes a "true" Christian is moot as all who claim to be one will try to defend it and there is no "court" to decide."

The Bible quite clearly disagrees with you:

"Then I saw a great white throne and One seated on it. Earth and heaven fled from His presence, and no place was found for them. I also saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life, and the dead were judged according to their works by what was written in the books.

Then the sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead; all were judged according to their works. Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And anyone not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
"
(Revelation 20:11–15 HCSB)

So the question once again comes down to this: Is the Bible true or not? Given its claims and supporting evidence (which has withstood 2,000 years of determined attacks), I would think you would want to be dead certain of the truth.

I spend a lot of time examining the evidence for and against Christianity, as well as the arguments by atheists and others. I also spend quite a bit of time examining the techniques used by experts in various fields to reach conclusions are the same techniques I use when examining that evidence. I have to say that the more I learn, the larger the chasm grows between Christianity and "everything else". You are free to gainsay the evidence all you like, but you are the one on the hook for your decisions, not me.

Anonymous said...

The folly of imagined certainty!

Anonymous said...

Luke - despite your claimed extensive researches you clearly make your conclusions through a biased "Christian" prism.
If what a "true" Christian was is so clear from the Bible or elsewhere, there would be no schisms, sects or denominations. Almost everyone who calls him/herself a Christian have their own ideas about it, including YOU.
You quote-mine what seems to support your own views. You also quote Hitler's anti-religious views but not his pro-Christian comments, because he supported christianity when it suited his anti-jewish and anti-communist views but criticized religion when it opposed his political views, and of course he persecuted anyone, including christians, who opposed him, but not christians who were compliant. Even the Soviets allowed the Russian Orthodox Church so long as it complied with the State.

Use the Name, Luke said...

"If what a "true" Christian was is so clear from the Bible or elsewhere, there would be no schisms, sects or denominations."

I'm curious. What do you see as the reason for these various divisions? Which groups claim others are not Christian, and why? Do all groups say all other groups are not Christian? Why not?

BTW, The Bible is crystal clear on what is a "true" Christian.

"If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."
(Romans 10:9 HCSB)

Do you suppose that there are people who claim to be Christians, but don't fit this simple qualification?

Use the Name, Luke said...

One more thing…

"despite your claimed extensive researches you clearly make your conclusions through a biased "Christian" prism."

Everyone has biases. An honest person recognizes that and works to prevent his biases from coloring his conclusions.

I challenge you. If Christianity actually isn't true, then you should be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it's false. Examine the evidence for yourself. Look into the techniques scientists, historians, archaeologists and other experts use to reach reasonable conclusions and eliminate biases in their respective fields. Be sure to avoid logical fallacies, special pleading or any other invalid form of reasoning. Don't rely on your assumptions about what is true. Check it out carefully. Dig back to original sources as often as you can.

Go for it.

I'll even help you out by pointing you to a starting point:

The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell. (One of those guys who tried to prove Christianity was false.)

But don't stop there. This is a reference book listing tons of source materials. It focuses primarily on history and reliability of the Bible, and more information has been discovered since it was last updated. You will also need to read up on cosmology, physics, biology, philosophy, logic, etc. And don't just read one side of the argument. Read all sides. Watch out for hidden assumptions (by the authors and your own.) Take it seriously.

Go ahead. Prove Christianity is false. I dare you.

Anonymous said...

Prove Christianity is true. I dare you.

Use the Name, Luke said...

First of all, it is not possible to prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt. But it is possible to make the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

I don't have enough time to write a whole book for you myself. (Would you even read it?) Fortunately, I don't have to.

Here is a good overview written at a layman level:

I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Frank Turek and Norman Geisler.

For the hard core academic treatment:

The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, edited by William Lane Craig and J.P. Moreland.

Or if your time is limited, you could just focus on THE central claim of Christianity: Jesus' resurrection from the dead.

The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary Habermas.

Any evidence I would present would generally include information from these three books. So just go ahead and bypass me to get closer to the sources.

Anonymous said...

It's usually not what people believe but why they believe it. Religion, whether Christianity, Islam, etc. offers a "certainty" in an uncertain world; comfort in an uncomfortable unloving world; a reason for being alive in a world of random events and accidents; and most of all it offers "eternal life" when there is a fear of death.
Those who resort to religion are just like children in the dark when mommy or daddy have switched off the lights!

Anonymous said...

and they suck their security blanket.

Anonymous said...

"I don't have enough time to write a whole book for you myself. (Would you even read it?)"

Such a book would be found in the science fiction / fantasy section of a book store.

Use the Name, Luke said...

In other words, you refuse to examine the evidence. That's your choice.

Have you really thought about why you don't even want to look at the evidence?

(I don't need an answer, though I think you should think about it.)

Anonymous said...

Hmm - who is convinced by whose books? - guess it entirely depends on the quality of the books/evidence in question!

Anonymous said...

Some weak minded people are convinced by evidence put forth by the likes of Palin and Beck and ancient scripture. Too bad Luke is part of that group.