Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Right Points, Wrong People

In the last few days, we have seen two awful tragedies - the murder of Shira Banki and Ali Dawabsha. In the aftermath, a lot of important points have been made. Unfortunately they have been made by the wrong people.

"The murder of Shira Banki should not be seen as expressing a murderous tendency in the charedi world. The killer was not a typical charedi person, not even a typical extremist charedi person. He was mentally deranged. The typical attitude of the charedim to the Gay parade was simply to ignore it."

That's an important argument - but one that should be left to non-charedim to voice. When charedim say it, it just gives the impression that they are more concerned about the respect they want than about a girl being murdered.

"There is a problem of dangerous rhetoric in the charedi world. Words like "Amalek" and "to'evah" are loaded terms that lead to wrong thoughts, words and even actions towards people. There needs to be a deliberate effort to counter this and increase respect of other people."

That is very true - but there is little point in non-charedim saying it to a non-charedi audience. It doesn't accomplish anything and it can lead to demonization.

"There no evidence that Ali Dawabsha was killed by Jews. The content of graffiti is atypical of right-wing nationalist zealots. Besides, Arabs have deliberately killed so many more Jewish civilians, and they praise the killers!"

All true, but right-wing Israelis should not be saying it. After all, there are certainly some Jews who do this kind of thing, and if we are going to claim any moral superiority over the Palestinians, we have to be vigilant about addressing it and uprooting it.

"There is serious problem of extremism in the fringe elements of the right wing of religious Zionism."

Yes, there is. However, there is great danger in left-wing Israelis saying this to a non-Jewish audience, since it is greatly exaggerated and taken as indicative of some kind of ridiculous parallel between religious Zionists and Palestinians.

Unfortunately, the more that the right points are made by the wrong people, the greater the problems become.

54 comments:

  1. We live in a society where people don't talk with each other, they talk AT each other. As a result, we talk "in defense".
    The first comment was made to head off the inevitable "all Chareidim are evil" articles that will come out of this. That and the "no true Scotsman" argument is the only one Chareidi PR folks seem to have in their armamentarium when something goes wrong like this. No one on the non-Chareidi side will say this but it still must be said.
    There are also precedents that must be brought into play. Yes, it looks like Ali Dawabsha was killed by Jewish zealots and if so, they should pay dearly. On the other hand, for years the official line was that Mohammed al Dura was killed by Israeli soldiers and look what happened there. If we too meekly say "Yes, it was Jewish zealots and boy, we're ashamed" we simply give our enemies fuel.
    If each side was prepared to give a benefit of the doubt to the other then defensive speech wouldn't be necessary. Thats not how the world works anymore though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We live in a great society. People talk to, through, past and with each other. We all vote and pay taxes. We don't pretend for a second we are all so mamash amazing and have no problems. We hire cops and build prisons because there is no pretending.

      The haredi world is an example of religious totalitarianism.

      Pretend thinking, suicidal gays, pretend perfection.

      It is a form of failed thinking. It would make for a failed state. The men are perpetual students. The families rely on programs for the neediest as their life long family planning plan. Rely on the work of others. Claim they make the state safe with their prayers they offer on planes ack to the U.S. during wars.

      Tuv

      Delete
  2. Well perhaps this is what right wing nationalists should say. If the perpetrators do turn out to be Jews then we know what kind of Jews they will be: spaced out kabbalah obsessives with a Breslev\Habad influenced theology and long dangling peyot hanging down the side of their face.

    These people lack any strategic sense whatsoever because foreign mysticsm has rotted their brain and every day they do untold damage to the settler movement, the single most important endeavour of the Jewish people.

    It is time for the great majority of non haredi Jews who know perfectly well that the Zohar is a forgery filled with pagan ideas to state so, publicly and unequivocally, and to start the process of draining the swamp.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rabbi Slifkin wrote "The content of graffiti is atypical of right-wing nationalist zealots." One of the pieces of graffiti says יחי המלך המשיח (with a little crown too), which is probably too sophisticated for the Arabs to counterfeit.
      At the same time, they said that the terrorists who threw the Molotov cocktails purposely didn't carry cellphones with them, to avoid being tracked. That rules out being spaced-out Kabbalists.

      Delete
    2. Yes, the solution to world peace is unequivocal rejection of the Zohar.

      Delete
    3. David Ohsie, the solution to 99% of problems in the Jewish world is, yes, rejection of pagan kabbalah because pagan kabbalah is involved in 99% of the problems in the Jewish world. You have never offered a word of proof to the contrary, but rather seem to believe that the mere fact that purging kabbalah from the people of Israel would be hard is proof that it is not necessary.

      On a side note, it is simply false to say that climate in the Haredi community led Schlissel to kill unless we are talking about the Haredi community 10 years ago. He has been in prison for a decade for the same crime and, apparently, was planning the whole time to reoffend as soon as he was released. As to his thought process, it is impossible to work out any rational explanation of how his actions could possibly help to resist the agenda of deviancy-normalisation. I submit that his actions can only be made sense of in the context of Kabbalah. David Ohsie will no doubt refute this suggestion with his usual logical rigour.

      Delete
    4. Talk about extremism!
      You believe the zohar is a forgery and you refuse anybody the right to disagree. You claim that if you could publicize your beliefs better, the world would be rid of the malaria causing mudpies who dare believe in the zohar.
      Belief in the zohar creates murderers!
      You really got to get it together. What really happened in Roswell?

      Delete
    5. Actually (unfortunately) the Zohar is very pacifist. It was written in the galut and actually as shown it encourages pacifism as a whole. From one side the (Religious) Jewish world is hit with pacifism from those sources and the other hand the "rationalists" are influenced by Western (false)/ Christian ideology of "turning the other cheek" which is also false and not in reality "rationalist" nor Torah. But motivated by FEAR and a lack of courage.

      Delete
    6. It has nothing to do with pacifism vs. war, it has to do with rational action versus irrational action. The activities of imbeciles like Meir Ettinger are the quintessence of irrational action and do nothing but harm the settlement project.

      The fact is that every single Jew arrested for the aimless and counterproductive terrorism has been a kabbalah fanatic. This is an empirical reality and there is really no point arguing about it. The most consistent offenders are products of the Yitzhar yeshiva, an offshoot of Habad. It is hardly over the top to suggest that their beliefs might have something to do with their, umm, beliefs.

      The only way, in the long term, to advance the settlement project is to win over the people of Israel that this is our land, and our land only, to annex it and to commence the process of moving the Arabs, in the most civilized way possible, somewhere else. Nothing is achieved by nutters who believe that a ten-part god forbade them to trim their beard like a mensch firebombing monasteries in the hope that the temple will fall on their head or something.

      Delete
    7. I left a longer comment, which did not make it up, perhaps because it included a reference to transfer (one can ask whether Rabbi Slifkin would nix a comment advocating transfer of Jews, but that's obviously supererogatory by this point).

      Nevertheless, briefly speaking:
      1) The issue has nothing to do with pacifism or belligerence, it has to do with rational action that advances certain goals, versus irrational action that harms those goals.
      2) It is a fact that every single time a Jew in Yehuda v'Shomron disgraces himself with an act of juvenile delinquency it always a talmid or associate of Yitzhar yeshiva or another neo-Hassidic mossad that places kabbalah at the centre of the curriculum. You can rant and scream against the facts all you want.

      Delete
    8. You've chosen Rav Ginzburgh's yeshiva as an example, and therefore concluded that it's Kabbalah that has made them so militant. There are numerous Sefardi institutions that study Kabbalah, but following Rav Ovadiah's rulings, they're dovish on שלימות הארץ issues, so we don't see any extremism amongst them. So clearly your conclusion is erroneous. We find you again shooting the arrow and drawing the target around it, because of your irrational hatred of the Chabad movement. What about all the Chabad yeshivot that don't produce extremists? They're not learning Kabbalah, but just putting tefillin on people the whole day?

      The things that have put Rav Ginzburgh in hot water (like defending Baruch Goldstein, an approbation to the book תורת המלך) in the past were NOT Kabbalah-based doctrines, but literal readings of the Rambam on laws of a מלחמת מצווה, or the permissibility of allowing non-Noachides residing in Israel. I don't see that connected to Kabbalah in any way.

      Delete
    9. Let me try one last time. The relevant distinction is not between extremism and moderation, or violence and non violence, the relevant distinction is between rational action and senseless action. Pulling random people of the street and getting them to strap magic boxes to their heads and mumble some transliterated Hebrew in the hope that you clock up some magic mitzvah points and fix some non-existent keli that broke 6,000 years ago because your deity couldn't figure out how to fit his non-existent sparks into a non-existent pot - is irrational action. Another form of irrational action is marching into an Arab village with a bunch of fellow doofuses and spraying graffiti around in order to fix a non existent keli that broke ....

      To take the example of Baruch Goldstein. Were his actions likely to
      a) advance the cause of settling the land of Israel.
      b) harm the cause of settling the land of Israel.
      ?

      Once you are capable of answering a no brainer question like that then it is obviously irrelevant to bring up the halachot of milhemet mitzvah because you don't fight wars by being a dumbass.

      The common theme of kabbala is that it creates foolishness. Specifically, it leads to the belief that mitzvot are integrated not as part of a comprehensible legal system, but as a system of occult cause and effect and that therefore performance of mitzvot in isolation can have positive consequences when five seconds of critical thought would demonstrate that what you are doing is idiotic. Peacenik Jews who study kabbala will engage in one form of foolishness, nationalist Jews who study kabbala will engage in another form of foolishness. It is wise for the members of any movement whatsoever to do whatever is in their power to decrease the amount of kabbala in their movement for the same reason that they are well advised to decrease the amount of crack smoking in their movement. However, it is particularly important for nationalist Jews because the actions of nationalist kabbala loons will likely be much more damaging than that of peacenik kabbala loons (which will probably be simply amusing).

      Delete
    10. A side-point: I remember that Rabbi Ginzburgh said that Baruch Goldstein performed 5 mitzvos in the Hebron massacre. I don't remember all of them, but one of them was "הכזונה יעשה את אחותינו"--the total impotence of the Israeli govt. at that time, in the face of drive-by shootings and other terrorist attacks, was mind-boggling and simply cheapened Jewish lives. Baruch Goldstein was a "response" to that. The Rabin/Peres govt that was engaging in such a foolish policy at the time, was not dabbling in Kabbalah. [Certainly after the Hebron Massacre, Hamas committed even more bloody attacks, and always claimed that they were a form of revenge against the Hebron Massacre. They don't need much of a reason to commit terror.]

      I have a book here by Rabbi Ginzburgh, entitled טיפול שורש--"Root Treatment", which consists of a sort of interview that he conducted during the Second Intifada. He ironically advocates the same method as you--transfer of the Arab population, and settling it by Jews. The grounds stated are pragmatic ones: Arabs are here because they have an economic interest in being here, not for nationalistic reasons. If they were given enough of an incentive to leave, they undoubtedly would. This is not Kabbalah-based, either. Rav Ginsburgh set up a yeshiva in Yamit, but not for Kabbalistic reasons, to try to liberate sparks of kedushah that remain in the Sinai Peninsula. The ideology was/is a nationalistic one. Rav Ginsburgh is a kabbalist, but that is not the driving force behind his nationalism.

      Delete
    11. Another point: you have written in the past that you think that you'll go with a pair of tefillin to the Kotel on Chol HaMoed and try to put tefillin on the people there. That's intriguing: for two weeks of the year, you'll say you're willing to put tefillin on people, because some opinions (not all) say to put tefillin on Chol HaMoed. But, if Chabad guys do it, the other 50 weeks of the year, [when all opinions say to put on tefillin] on people who possibly never put on tefillin their entire lives, you think it's foolishness. You don't think that perhaps it's still worthwhile, because this might be their start on fulfilling more mitzvos? They have to start somewhere. Who is the one being irrational here?

      Delete
  3. As a stubbornly loyal member of the Torah observant community, with strong credentials in the Chareidi world as well, I have been quite vocal from the moment the news broke from Yerushalayim, that the setting for this murderer to act was provided by the rhetoric commonly spoken and attitudes commonly held within the Chareidi world. This is a moment for introspection and for והתודו את עונם ואת עון אבותם.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well, good luck. but I am sure it won't happen, any more than introspection will happen in my religious zionist back yard. it's going to be 'backs to the wall' and 'the secular jews hate us all' and 'they are all leftists trying to attack us' and blah blah blah.


      the orthodox world needs to clean out its stables and fast. it's losing (lost?) it's credibility in the eyes of the rest of the jewish world very very quickly.

      Delete
  4. Curious: if he was in ramleh (or wherever) for ten years did they evaluate him psychologically? Is it / will it be made public? Or do we have to wait months for a trial, where it may / may not be made public?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rabbi Slifkin,

    You wrote: "...if we are going to claim any moral superiority over the Palestinians..."

    This attitude is at the heart of Israel's problem, in my opinion. Stop worrying about moral superiority and start worrying about winning. Was England morally superior to Germany in WWI? What matters in war is making sure you live and the other guy dies. Whether you are a nicer person or not is irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because might is not right.
      Well done machiavelli.

      But you are no longer being authentically Jewish.

      Winning at the cost of your morality is also to lose.

      The trick is to maintain both and so the means and the ends have to be different.

      Delete
  6. I do not understand why people argue that Shira Banki's horrific murder was not in accordance with halakha. Although homosexuals can only be executed after sentencing by a beth din, minim are to be killed extrajudicially if necessary (Yad: Mamarim ch 3) and it's difficult to see how people who take part in Pride events in Jerusalem are not minim.

    I'd greatly appreciate it if Rabbi Slifkin or others can let me know where I'm going wrong. (And I certainly hope I am wrong! But please don't claim 'darkheh shalom', as that must concede that the murder was justified in principle.)

    Moe Nomreste

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a matter of interpretation, both of what the pesukim say and of what the parade is about. IF one interprets the pasuk as forbidding a specific act, rather than condemning people for forming homosexual relationships, and if one sees the parade, and those who participate in it, as supporting the idea that all people should be given respect regardless of sexual orientation - rather than the RW interpretation that it supports an abominable averia - then those who participate are doing nothing wrong.

      Delete
    2. normative charedi judaism does not believe that there are any true minim anymore. this is because secular indoctrination has become so pervasive, the intellectual level of the generation is so low, chachmas hatorah is hardly in evidence anymore, and hashem's intervention in human affairs is more hidden than it used to be (although one may argue that recently that has not been so, but the other factors cause us not to appreciate hashem's intervention). therefor people who espouse minus are seen as either a tinok shenishba or simply as ignorant. there are some exceptions to this, but they are rare, and certainly don't apply to a 16 year old girl who was raised in a secular environment.
      ps. there are other reasons why there are very few true minim today, but they are beyond the purview of a brief talkback on a blog.

      Delete
    3. Moshe Dick writes:
      This is the most asinine comment yet, Go and learn your sugyos before you spout ignorant comments. First, female homosexual behavior is not forbidden. At most, it is frowned upon by the Rabbis but it is not an issur.
      Second, what does this have to do with the Rambam? As a matter of fact, the Rambam writes just the opposite of your quote. Only a "zokon mamreh" can be judged and condemned to death.No one else. The Rambam clearly writes that it does not apply to Jew who grew up without Torah, se mishne 3 . So,check your sources and don't make asinine statements.

      Delete
    4. Don't take my word for it; look up the sugya yourself.

      Rambam's Yad, Hilkhot Mamarim 3.1: 'One who does not believe in the Torah Shebaal Peh is not the "Zaken Mamreh" of scripture, but he is included among the "minim" and his death is in the hand of all people (mitato b'yad kol adam).... (3.2) All these are not included in Israel and they require neither witnesses nor warning and are not judged by Bet Din, but rather anyone who kills one of them has done a great Mitzvah'.

      Rambam goes on to write that those who have been raised as 'minim' are regarded as 'tinok shenishbah' and 'people should not rush to kill them (v'loh yemaher adam l'hargan)', but the Radbaz and Mishneh l'Melekh argue that this does not apply to those who have been repeatedly exposed to Torah and exhorted to return. Additionally, the Bet Yoseph quotes the Nimukii Yoseph who opines that 'minim' are never categorised as 'tinok shenishbah' and are always to be killed, but he disagrees with him and suggests that they can be 'tinok shenishbah', although he does not say whether this acquits them of the death penalty (Yoreh Deah 159).

      Long story short: there's plenty of support in Halakha for the notion that it's not only mutar but actually a 'great mitzvah' to murder non-believing Jews in Israel, and this seems to be the majority view.

      Moe Nomreste

      Delete
    5. Now that you bring it up it got me thinking. But 1 major problem why in this specific instance. This was a young girl. She wasn't even a lesbian but yes it was wrong that she supported the gays. Either way one cannot go and just kill them, and in regards to the minim, their are a lot more instances and openly people who actually do damage with their minut (and bogdim and mosrim as the Rambam writes) who are much more deserving. A young 16 year old doesn't think well enough and doesn't know enough to be judged this harshly. Certainly not an enemy of G-D as usually its from 20 +

      Delete
    6. Moshe Dik write:
      Anonymous: You and I must have different versions of the Rambam. Nowhere in my Rambam -I checked two different prints- does the phrase "MItato bekol adam" appears.Neither does the 'mishne" 3:2 appear as you suggest. Unless you have a new Rambam which includes possible censored mishnes, your quotes are incomprehensible.
      As far as the Ridvaz- please re-read his words- at best, they apply to a multiple recidivist-as there might have been hundred years ago in Europe- not the vast majority of Jews and Israelis who have barely been exposed to religion. Lastly, there is no "mishne lemelech- on this in my Rambam. I don't know where you found it.

      Delete
    7. This is literally an insane post. Aside from everything else, Schlissel knew exactly nothing about Banki that could have led him to conclude she was a min, and its not at all "difficult to see how people who take part in Pride events in Jerusalem are not minim." Taking part in a gay pride parade says nothing at all about whether you believe in Torah, or God. It also says nothing at all about whether you, personally, have been over any lav, mideoraysa or miderabanan. Gay pride parades are pushback against de jure discrimination in a secular society, which is a cause that all of us - gay or straight, jew or gentile, frum or fry - ought to be supporting.

      Delete
    8. Akiva M. Cohen wrote: "Gay pride parades are pushback against de jure discrimination in a secular society, which is a cause that all of us - gay or straight, jew or gentile, frum or fry - ought to be supporting."
      I wrote in a comment here that I don't understand this "discrimination"--a person's sexual preference is a private matter. No one can possibly know whether a person is homosexual or not, unless he/she somehow divulges it. This is not like the Civil Rights movement in America, where blacks were segregated or denied the vote. This is only an issue because the LGBT community makes it an issue, and forces it on people to "accept" their lifestyle, or else be branded as a religious fanatic. [I've heard the opinion expressed that it's even a form of "proselytizing".]

      Delete
    9. Moshe Dick - this is the text of the Rambam as I have it: מי שאינו מאמין בתורה שבעל פה, אינו זקן ממרא האמור בתורה, אלא הרי הוא בכלל המינים, ומיתתו ביד כל אדם. [ב] מאחר שנתפרסם שהוא כופר בתורה שבעל פה--מורידין ולא מעלין, כשאר המינים והאפיקורוסין והאומרין אין תורה מן השמיים והמוסרים והמשומדים: כל אלו אינן בכלל ישראל, ואינן צריכין לא עדים ולא התראה ולא דיינין; אלא כל ההורג אחד מהן, עשה מצוה גדולה והסיר מכשול.

      ב [ג] במה דברים אמורים, באיש שכפר בתורה שבעל פה ממחשבתו, ובדברים שנראו לו, והלך אחר דעתו הקלה, ואחר שרירות ליבו, וכפר בתורה שבעל פה תחילה; וכן כל הטועים אחריו.

      ג אבל בני אותן הטועים ובני בניהם, שהדיחו אותם אבותם ונולדו במינות, וגידלו אותן עליו--הרי הן כתינוק שנשבה לבין הגויים וגידלוהו הגויים על דתם, שהוא אנוס; ואף על פי ששמע אחר כך שהיה יהודי, וראה היהודיים ודתם--הרי הוא כאנוס, שהרי גידלוהו על טעותם. כך אלו האוחזים בדרכי אבותיהם שתעו. לפיכך ראוי להחזירן בתשובה, ולמשוך אותם בדרכי שלום, עד שיחזרו לאיתן התורה; ולא ימהר אדם להורגן.

      Delete
  7. Part of the problem lies in the Charedi world isolating and elevating itself from the rest of the Jewish world. Many truly believe that their chinuch, tzniyus, kashrus, learning, shmitta , etc. are of yhe highest level and beyond reproach. If so better make certain that your bein adam l'chevairo mitzvos are equally mehadrin. The fact that there are charedi run chesed organizations is wonderful. They are not to the exclusion of non Charedi ones nor should that fact allow a wholesale disregard of proper derech eretz for ALL people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's often been said that both chareidim and MO emphasize one class of mitzvos over the other.

      I have one brother-in-law who lives in Lakewood in an illegal garage apartment that his yeshivish landlords deliberately made sure still looks like a garage on the outside, fake door and all, so that they wouldn't have to pay taxes on the income from his rent. He holds by the strictest kashrus standards, and his wife wouldn't dream of dressing in anything but the most stringently tznius clothes.

      I have another brother-in-law who lives in a MO neighborhood whose wife wears pants, short sleeves, and doesn't cover her hair, but who wouldn't dream of trying to cheat the government or anyone else.

      Who is more frum?

      Delete
    2. Yes, I have DL family members who will not leave Eretz Yisroel, even for close family simchas or to visit their parents, but the girls were pants, short sleeves and all that sort of clothes. And they see nothing wrong with a boy and girl meeting and being friends for years before marriage. Yishuv Eretz Yisroel has been elevated above all else. Don't understand it myself.

      Delete
  8. "That is very true - but there is little point in non-charedim saying it to a non-charedi audience. It doesn't accomplish anything and it can lead to demonization."

    So when you say things with the same basic thrust one can only presume that as a (self professed) non-charedi yourself you mean to say them to a charedi audience. Is this the case?

    ReplyDelete
  9. So who gets to complain that if the police had bothered to worry about the criminal just released from jail for the exact same crime rather than harrassing non violent protesters this young girl would be alive

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am infuriated when government leaders say things like "I, as a Jew, am ashamed of what happened", or as some say "this shows how rotten our society it. IT DOES NOTHING OF THE SORT. No one teaches that it is permitted to carry out murder. The educators and prominent people in our society teach no such thing. There are bad Jews and we are not responsible for what they do any more than we are responsible for what wife beaters or armed robbers do. Of course, the educators have a responsibility to make clear to the young that these acts are reprehensible and even more important, it is vital to eradicate feelings like "the perpetrators meant well, they just went too far (something we see a lot of Muslims who do not carry out terrorist attacks say, for instance). However I strongly object when certain "leaders" go around saying this show how bad a society we have.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm not agreeing with the thrust of this blog. Individuals and community representatives need to freely air critiques and complaints and respond to the same.

    In particular, I'm thinking that the religious community is guilty of fostering an environment that Yishai Schlissel sprouted from. As Prime Minister David Cameron recently said

    "you don’t have to support violence to subscribe to certain intolerant ideas which create a climate in which extremists can flourish."

    There are many Haredim that agree with everything Schlissel says about gays, with the exception of knifing them. This type of ideology needs to be opposed and it the opposition is not going to come from the inside.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't condone in any way resorting to violence or any of Schlissel's opinions, but I don't really understand the rationale behind having a Gay Pride Parade (in Jerusalem, no less), nor demanding "rights" for gay people. I don't think Haredim are interested in other people's sexual orientation. If homosexuals wouldn't publicize it, they could go through their entire lives and no one would really care about whether they're homosexual or not. The insistance in having a Gay Pride Parade in Jerusalem is, in my opinion, needlessly provocative (especially since they just had one in Tel Aviv).

      Delete
  12. I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the attitude in this blog. It is hardly rationale to state some nonsense 'absolving' Jews from blame in the murder of an Arab infant and would-be murder of his family with the only qualification being that such sentiments should not come from 'right-wing Israelis'. As if it would not be nonsense if coming from other sources. The defense of Jews living in the shetachim is not going to be obtained by whitewashing acts of terror, but by cooperating with authorities to help eradicate them. The militant groups, including the one led by Kahane's grandson, represent a danger to Jews in Israel in that they seek ways of inciting hatred in order to create a chaotic and dangerous situation that they believe will lead to a messianic resolution. The murder by arson can be reasonably attributed to one such group.

    Y. Aharon

    ReplyDelete
  13. The biggest mistake is to think that either of these atrocious crimes are representative of anything other than the deranged people who committed them.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The juxtaposition of the above comments is remarkable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right, you're going to get diverse reactions from different people. The question is to what version do you subscribe? Is the arson and murder the act of 'deranged' people, or is it an act of political terror? In the former case, it is sufficient to apprehend the miscreant and lock him away in a prison or asylum for the criminally insane; in the latter case, you have a movement that needs to be suppressed by infiltration, exposure, and long jail sentences.

      Y. Aharon

      Delete
  15. That most Haredim don't stab gay people is obviously true, but that argument is neither important nor relevant. Actual violence is almost always the province of the deranged and irrational, but it is rooted in the hateful attitudes and rhetoric of the majority and its leaders.
    Haredi self-criticism would be a wonderful thing, but I'm not holding my breath. And that cannot be a reason for others to refrain from criticizing them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haaa? Self criticism for what? For barely saying or believing what the Torah says? (not to kill homosexuals but to oppose those actions). What continual Bolshevism we are seeing by leftists these days (always but now its amplified and its not even November yet.

      Delete
  16. The argument David is important. You can't argue that one person killing is significant but all the others not killing isn't. Further actual violence is not as you say almost always the province of the deranged and irrational. If such would be the case we could bring peace to the peace to the Middle East by putting countless people under psychiatric care.

    YA (The usual YA, I have to see again what my Google account is)

    ReplyDelete
  17. If they were no cages at the zoos, the wild animals would maim and kill the people.
    Where there's no law and law enforcement, people would rob and kill one another just like wild animals. (sounds familiar?)
    Israel to a degree, has this problem. I don't know of any country other than Israel, where a citizen can get away with being disrespectful to a Police Officer. I have seen charedim yell at and push Israeli Police Officers and nothing is done. The response is one of being afraid of the charedim. I read of many crimes being committed by the charedim and the laws are not enforced. And worst of all, the charedim and their leaders know it. Too much tolerance is shown for the settlers with the long payos as well. More respect must be demanded for the law and its enforcers and there will be less crime.
    It must be understood that there will be some riots and disturbing rhetoric at first, but that is a small price to pay when compared to people getting stabbed and killed and other notorious crimes being committed.
    What objective is there for a country based on Torah if there is no respect for its laws???
    o

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. > Where there's no law and law enforcement, people would rob and kill one another just like wild animals. (sounds familiar?)

      Would you rob and kill people if there were no laws against it?

      Neither would most people.

      Delete
    2. This brings up some associated points regarding "law enforcement".
      (1) I was in school during the Vietnam war and I remember the teachers telling us "The US can't be the world's policeman". Obama's people are repeating this. My question is "who would want to live in a town without policemen?". The same applies to the international stage.
      (2) One of the big excuses for blaming the Americans for the mutual slaughter in Iraq is that the US disbanded the Iraqi military when they took control of the country. The implication is that Iraqis "can't help it" and they just have to kill each other , even people who have been neighbors for years, and the US is guilty for not stopping them. My question is "suppose the police didn't show up in your town one morning. Would you neighbors start killing each other once the word got around? (I am not talking about regular criminal elements taking advantage of the situation, but of regular citizens who also joined in the mayhem - In Iraq and Syria for that matter, entire towns of have emptied out of minority groups who have lived for generations in them).

      Delete
    3. G*3: "Would you rob and kill people if there were no laws against it?

      Neither would most people."

      Your comment is implausible and fanciful. And I suggest that you rethink your assessment for the following reasonings. Firstly, God did not give us His Torah, i.e. halachos, because we are all good natured, but because with His moral guidance, we all have the potential to be so.
      As it is now, with the laws and law enforcement, i.e. Police Officers and the Court systems, the world is no paradise. Now imagine the world without laws and law enforcement. What do you think people would do, and what would you do, if and when (God forbid) confronted with one of the following?
      Organized crime, Crimes by Palestinians, drug-related crimes, juvenile crimes, street crime, far-right and hate crimes, murder, arson, defamation of character, property damages, automobile accidents and fender benders, personal and business partnerships disputes, divorces, laws governing business transactions, landlord and tenant disputes, buyer and seller disputes, Financial laws, laws governing Banks and the stock market, assault and battery, rape, discrimination laws against women, gays and others. And I could sit here all day and go on and on with this seemingly endless list.
      Without laws everyone would have their own homemade justice and take matters into their own hands, i.e. writing their own laws. Criminals will take over in many if not all areas of our society. Many law-abiding people themselves will be forced to become criminals, even killers, for It will be, do or die for them, and it would mean back to "Survival of the fittest". How do you think that would look like?
      o

      Delete
    4. You grew up with law enforcement and informal proxies for law enforcement. Don't underestimate the power of behavior modification.

      Delete
    5. Isaac, laws and social order don't exist in and of themselves. They aren't something forced upon otherwise immoral and murderous people. Laws exist *because* most people regard murder, and the chaos the lack of rules about all the things you mention would cause, as bad things, and so people create laws to help society function.

      If law enforcement disappeared, the result wouldn't be criminals controlling everything. It would be people forming groups and creating rules that minimize criminal behavior, just as people have always done.

      Delete
    6. G*3: So in other words you are saying, the people would have to form some types of groups to enforce laws that you had suggested were not necessary to prevent crimes such as robbing and killing. Is that not the same difference ?
      A rose by any other name; is still a rose.

      Delete
  18. " any moral superiority over the Palestinians," What type of galuti non-sense is this?! For example Moshe Rabbeinu was superior to the Midianites, that didn't men that he shouldn't have gone to war against them and taken take of them like the Torah says (the examples are numerous to list).

    ReplyDelete
  19. Note that It is the (late) Priestly extension of the Torah, in particular the Holiness code, which contains the Issur of homosexuality. The treatment of Midianites is in the same Priestly extension of Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  20. G*3: "Would you rob and kill people if there were no laws against it?

    Neither would most people."

    I suggest that you rethink your assessment for the following reasonings. Firstly, God did not give us His Torah, i.e. halachos, because we are all good natured, but because with His moral guidance, we all have the potential to be so.
    As it is now, with the laws and law enforcement, i.e. Police Officers and the Court systems, the world is no paradise. Now imagine the world without laws and law enforcement. What do you think people would do, and what would you do, if and when (God forbid) confronted with one of the following?
    Organized crime, Crimes by Palestinians, drug-related crimes, juvenile crimes, street crime, far-right and hate crimes, murder, arson, defamation of character, property damages, automobile accidents and fender benders, personal and business partnerships disputes, divorces, laws governing business transactions, landlord and tenant disputes, buyer and seller disputes, Financial laws, laws governing Banks and the stock market, assault and battery, rape, discrimination laws against women, gays and others. And I could sit here all day and go on and on with this seemingly endless list.
    Without laws everyone would have their own homemade justice and take matters into their own hands, i.e. writing their own laws. Criminals will take over in many if not all areas of our society. Many law-abiding people themselves will be forced to become criminals, even killers, for It will be, do or die for them, and it would mean back to "Survival of the fittest". How do you think that would look like?
    o

    ReplyDelete

Comments for this blog are moderated. Please see this post about the comments policy for details. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED - please use either your real name or a pseudonym.