Who Is Sheldon Richman, and Why Does He Hate the Constitution and American Greatness? and Why Does He Love Jihadis, French Communism, Godless Atheism, and Weird-Ass Epistemology?

In Part 1 of this 2-part interview, I chat with Sheldon Richman about his youthful enthusiasm for the Swamp Fox and his guerilla fighters; the Constitution as a betrayal of the American Revolution and the Articles of Confederation; defying YAF with Karl Hess at the March to the Arch; the positive externalities achievable by sitting next to Dave Barry; using Koch money to fight big business; Robert Bidinotto’s dark anarchist past; the perils of publishing Kevin Carson; going crazy for Thomas Szasz; the identity of Filthy Pierre; how to smoke like Gandalf; an atheist’s favourite Bishop; and which prominent Austrian economist experimented on Sheldon’s newborn infant.

In Part 2, we chat about the Israeli occupation of Palestine; u.s. intervention in the Middle East; the meaning of Jewish identity; the relation between libertarian individualism and social cooperation; the communistic theories of Frédéric Bastiat; the theologico-political merits of Spinoza; Nathaniel Branden and George H. Smith on atheism; Thomas Paine and Lysander Spooner on deism; the philosophical failings of the New Atheists; rehabilitating the cost-of-production theory of value; the uses of coherentist epistemology for both theists and atheists; reading Wittgenstein for relaxation; the advantages and disadvantages of Randian approaches to knowledge and concepts; the sordid truth behind the special effects in Roderick’s videos (and in particular, what the deal is with Roderick’s hair); Sheldon’s case against open Borders; and the shocking misuse of libertarian think tank resources to photocopy body parts (but who did it, Sheldon or Roderick? and which body parts? watch and learn!).

74 thoughts on “Who Is Sheldon Richman, and Why Does He Hate the Constitution and American Greatness? and Why Does He Love Jihadis, French Communism, Godless Atheism, and Weird-Ass Epistemology?

  1. I will do my best to get Sheldon attacked on Israel/Palestine here at PoT. Unfortunately, given my sympathy for his views, I can’t do the attacking myself, but every now and then, a Rabbi Bernhard Rosenberg shows up here to take….er, potshots at us, and I’m sure I can contrive a way to get Rabbi Rosenberg to declare Sheldon an anti-Semite and an apologist for terrorism, and to excommunicate him in the bargain.

    https://bernhardrosenberg.com/biography/

    Has Sheldon never gone head-to-head with David Bernstein, Eugene Kontorovich, or Fernando Teson? That seems like a good recipe for a discursive train wreck (of the kind Sheldon is seeking).

    Libertarians tend to ignore the Israel/Palestine issue. Cato’s annual Human Freedom Index doesn’t even make reference to Gaza or the West Bank. It refers to “Israel” minus Gaza or the West Bank, but doesn’t count Gaza or the West Bank under any other description. See the coy map on p. 46.

    Click to access cato-human-freedom-index-update-3.pdf

    So Sheldon is in good company.

    I’ve always found it interesting the Objectivists take the Israel/Palestine issue far more seriously than (most) libertarians. I think they see, correctly, that something of deep philosophical importance is at stake in the dispute.

    I thought that Peter Schwartz had attacked Sheldon on Palestine in his famous critique of libertarianism, but though he quotes Sheldon, the criticism involves Sheldon’s general hatred for the State (Voice of Reason, p. 319), rather than his (Sheldon’s) anti-Zionism or his nihilistic defense of the rights of Palestinians. Schwartz does attack Rothbard on Palestine, so perhaps counterfactually, we could construe that as an attack on Sheldon: Schwartz would have attacked Sheldon if Rothbard hadn’t been available.

    But this suggests a way for Sheldon to get attacked: go after Objectivists, not libertarians. Write a critique of Elan Journo’s book in a prominent place.

    A somewhat more costly way for Sheldon to get some heat would be to try to enter Israel via Ben Gurion International Airport, and upon being questioned by the border authorities, to hand his questioners a copy of his Palestine book, explaining it as he does in the video above. I guarantee that that will work.

    Even better would be for Sheldon to demand a speaking engagement with one of the “free market” think tanks in Israel. To the best of my knowledge, all without exception defend the occupation:

    https://www.jimsisrael.org/

    The next time Sheldon and I are in physical proximity, we should be sure to take a picture while I’m wearing some sort of pro-Palestinian paraphernalia. We can post it here and/or on Facebook, and see what happens.

    I suspect that it has occurred to Sheldon that ignoring him is much easier than refuting him.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks, Irfan. (I think.) As my dear old zayde might have said, “Be careful for what you ask for.” David Bernstein used to snipe at me on Facebook, but that’s it. Maybe I should stop complaining.

      I’d be honored to pose in a picture with you anytime, as long as we wear masks.

      Like

  2. Had I listened to this interview maybe seven or eight years ago, I probably would, with some reservations, have agreed with Sheldon’s rejection of the concept of a “secular Jew.” But I no longer do.

    I had both a Muslim and a Jewish upbringing. My parents were Muslim, and I was raised as a Muslim, but I attended Jewish day camp every summer, and spent a decade in a Jewish family by the functional equivalent of common law marriage. In fact, “a decade” might understate things, because I’m still in some sense a member of my Jewish ex’s family; we still celebrate Passover and other Jewish holidays together. So in an extended sense, I’ve spent more than two decades “in” a Jewish family.

    Sheldon expresses skepticism that a non-Jew can become a secular Jew. I disagree. A non-Jew can become Jewish (by degrees) by spending time in a practicing Jewish household, as I have. By “Jewish,” I mean “have an appreciation for or affinity with things Jewish.” And by “things Jewish,” I mean things specifically Jewish, not Yiddish. Passover, Sukkot, Tisha B’Av, Rosh Hashana, and Yom Kippur are Jewish, not Yiddish; they have resonance for all Jews everywhere, from India to San Francisco, and everywhere in between. (My Jewish family steered clear of Hannukah and Purim, but I suppose the same could be said of them.)

    The Passover seder is my favorite example. Anyone who looks forward to celebrating Passover every year is somewhat Jewish, and many otherwise non-Jewish people do. It shouldn’t be hard to imagine a non-Jew’s entering a Jewish household, say, by marriage, participating in Jewish rituals like the seder at first simply to please (or appease) a Jewish partner, but then to have it “grow” on one. (I’m not saying it couldn’t go the other way; I’m just saying, one could in principle have an increased appreciation over time.) Now imagine such a person eagerly participating not just in Passover, but in Sukkot, Tisha B’Ave, Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur. That seems more Jewish than the Judaism of a lot of Jews.

    As for being a secular Jew, it seems to me that all of the holidays in question have both a theological and a secular component. The two components are hard to disentangle, but with a little mental reservation, I think it can be done. An atheist can, after all, listen to the “Ode to Joy” in Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, and be (genuinely) moved by it despite the abundance of theistic references it contains. Some atheists might try, mentally, to censor those references out of their aesthetic experience, but one need not.

    “Secular Judaism,” it seems to me, names an aesthetic or quasi-aesthetic attitude toward Jewish ritual and celebratory life. People who can’t (or can’t quite) sign onto the “religious stuff” on a realist interpretation may nonetheless like the idea of participating in the rituals for their own sake, whether to cultivate a sense of nostalgia, or because there’s comfort to be had in going through the motions, or as a form of LARPing, or whatever. This view is closely related to what philosophers of religion now call “fictionalism” about religion.

    https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/religious-fictionalism/7EE38C3F263074337C713EA6ABED2B2E

    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religious-language/#Fict

    This may sound frivolous or even offensive to some, but the point is, if people can live (part time) in other sorts of fictional universes (Atlas Shrugged, Downton Abbey, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, PornHub), why not a religious one?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Pingback: Nightcap | Notes On Liberty

  4. I think this hypothetical secular Jew would better be described as a philo-Semite. That person’s mother still wouldn’t be Jewish–and, sorry, rules are rules. The cultural things you mention are all religion-based, So Shlomo Sand’s point stands, I believe. That Jews worldwide celebrate Yom Kippur is no indication of a global secular Jewish culture. Quite the contrary. Of course people are free to identify as they wish, and others are free to recognize that identity or not. But I still think its a restricted club.

    Like

      • More moderately, I don’t see why there needs to be a “global secular Jewish culture” in order for someone to be a secular Jew. Sheldon of all people, Wittgenstein fan that he is, should recognise the possibility that “Jewish” is a family-resemblance concept.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Another thing: “secular” Jews attach immense importance to the idea that it is global; that’s part of the appeal. For them to think otherwise would devalue the identity.

          Like

          • “What is secular about it?”

            Well, if one is not oneself religious, why doesn’t that make it secular?

            “attach immense importance to the idea that it is global; that’s part of the appeal.”

            Doesn’t a family-resemblance concept count as universal? If what makes something an X is its satisfying some subset of the relevant criteria, then in satisfying one subset don’t I thereby connect myself to all Xs, including those who are Xs through satisfying a different subset?

            Of course this assumes that a family-resemblance concept counts as a genuine unity in a way that a random-grab-bag concept doesn’t. (By a random-grab-bag concept I mean something like: a thing counts as a Y so long as it is EITHER a palm tree, or an elephant, or a radio, or a midwestern state, or a prime number.) But family-resemblance concepts don’t seem to me to be mere random-grab-bag concepts; there is a network of affiliation that ties the criteria together, other than just someone deciding to stipulate them as part of a big disjunction.

            Like

            • It’s not secular because the things the person in question does have their roots in a particular monotheism and history. On the other hand, if the person routinely eats gefilte fish and kishka, that would be not Jewish but Yiddish. I don’t think Yemeni or Moroccan Jews eat those things. (Maybe with globalization they do now; the goyim eat bagels after all–oy!) The Yiddish don’t eat the Arabic foods that Arab Jews regularly eat. They may be of the same religious group, but they are of different secular ethnic groups. (As I’ve personally witnessed, the Ashkenazi Jews look down on the Mizrahi Jews and vice versa.)

              Like

              • Well, I just repeat my original questions:

                If what connects secular Jews is a tradition with “roots in a particular monotheism and history,” but the people so connected do not themselves necessarily hold any religious belief, why isn’t that enough to make them “secular Jews”? Why can’t secular Jews be connected by a tradition with non-secular origins?

                As for Yemeni Jews not eating gefilte fish — again, if Jewishness is a legitimate family-resemblance concept, why can’t one be connected to all of it by being connected to part of it? (That’s how actual families work, so why not family-resemblance concepts too?)

                Like

                • I’ll take one last word: blood. As Sand and others note, “secular Jews” seem to realize that as atheists and nonpractitioners they have nothing solid to rest their identity on and for that reason are drawn to dubious genetic theories about why Jews everywhere constitute a single people or race. Secular Judaism and Jewish nationalism are thus combined into a blood-and-soil ideology. That’s tragic.

                  Like

                • But isn’t that just a symptom of their assumption that Jewishness can’t be a family-resemblance concept? Ditch that assumption, and neither common religiosity nor common blood is needed for common Jewishness.

                  Like

                • The 1st word of the Torah בראשית contains a רמז/hint. Meaning words within words. בראשית … אש ברית. The first Book of the Torah addresses the subject of the Avot cutting brit “alliances” with other nations. Brit does not mean “Covenant”. The noise new testament never once brings the Name of HaShem, the 1st commandment of Sinai. This fraud bases its religion upon a belief system, I believe that Jesus son of Zeus is the son of God like Hercules. In both mythical stories Zeus raped and impregnated married women!

                  Rape and adultery qualifies as a Capital Crime in Jewish law. Offering a sacrifice not fit to offer to a governor or king, likewise the Torah abhors. Jesus son of Zeus had the holy shit beaten out of him before his “cruxi-fiction”. Since when does the Torah permit a “sacrifice” by dedicating it upon a cross rather than an altar?

                  The Gemara of Sanhedrin asks the famous question: What caused the floods in the days of Noach? Answer: false oaths, another of the 10 commandments. Hence what qualifies as the fire of the brit (אש ברית)? Swearing an oath in the Name. The noise new testament never includes the Name of HaShem. This belief system does not stand upon the brit faith as does the Torah.

                  Like

                • Monotheism violates the 2nd Commandment of Sinai. If as the Muslims say their lives only one God, then its utterly absurd for the Torah to command: Do Not Worship Other Gods. The story of Egyptian slavery and Moshe centers upon the Egyptian worship of “other Gods”. No Torah commandment commands Israel to believe in this or that God(s)!

                  Like

                • It seems to me that the imperative “do not worship other gods” is neutral on the question of whether other gods exist or not. A Jew, Christian, or Muslim can says “the Vikings worshipped Thor, and we do not” without implying that Thor was real. An atheist can say “monotheists worship one god, and polytheists worship many, but I don’t worship any of these gods” without implying that those gods are real. “Worship” is not a success-term in the sense of requiring a real object.

                  In addition to thinking that others can worship beings that you take to be nonexistent, there’s also the possibility of thinking that others can worship beings that you take to be real entities, but not gods (and thus no conflict with monotheism). Thus many of the early Christians thought that the Greco-Roman gods — that is, the beings that the Greeks and Romans worshipped as gods — were real, but that they were fallen angels rather than gods. (There’s a passage from St. Paul that implies this view, though there’s another passage that conflicts with it.)

                  Like

                • As an atheist – praise God, I do not believe any any God. Who am I? Yet I, its the first word of all belief systems including: “I don’t worship any of these gods”. You have embraced a belief system called atheism.

                  Paul made a completely different reading of the Creation story, which he called Original Sin/the fall of Man from grace. This interpretation supported his thesis that the world needed Jesus son of Zeus to atone for the sins of Man!

                  Obviously Jewish interpretations of the Creation story do not accept the narishkeit of Paul’s interpretation. Judaism teaches that the story of Adam’s expulsion of Eden, goes in harmony with Noach’s expulsion from the land, to the unborn seed of Avram dwelling as refugee slaves in Egypt! Its a consistent theme of the Torah. Blessings vs Curses: ruling the land with righteous justice or existing under the harsh yoke of oppression as exiles in foreign lands. This interpretation defines the sum total of Jewish history.

                  Like

                • “Since when does the Torah permit a ‘sacrifice’ by dedicating it upon a cross rather than an altar?”

                  mosckerr,

                  I think you are barking up the wrong audience here. No one in the present conversation (apart from yourself) has any commitment to the sort of literalist theologico-legalistic minutiae that you’re trading in here. I’m not sure what your aim is in posting these arguments in this place.

                  Like

    • An opinion by a Beer Sheva Israeli of politics and Torah within the Jewish State.

      Israel’s 3 No’s:
      1. No to any negation of the Israeli victory of the 1967 6 Day War.
      2. No to any surrender of Israeli rule from all of Jerusalem.
      3. No to any 1967 alien Balestinian stateless refugees, much less their descendants, receiving Israeli citizenship.

      Ursula von der Leyen delivered her first State of the Union speech, but she made no mention of the recent peace treaties between UAE and Bahrain with Israel.. The EU talks about the absolute need for trust between member states in that Union, specifically in Eastern Europe. Yet demands the division of Israel in the face of total distrust!!! The EU has a hostile agenda in the Middle East.

      She said nothing about the vile Turkish continued occupation of Cyprus. The vile hypocrisy that EU rhetoric refers to as the ‘Rule of Law’, also popularly referred to as “international law”, specifically the EU condemnation based upon its evil support of UN/Obama 2334, by which foreign alien Powers declare that they have a mandate to determine the international borders of States in the Middle East.

      After the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel was — in Defense Minister Moshe Dayan’s famous phrase — “waiting for a telephone call” from Arab leaders. At a summit conference in Khartoum, Sudan from August 29 to September 1. There Arab governments pledged to continue their struggle against Israel. Influenced by Nasser, their conditions were quite specific: no peace with Israel, no negotiations with Israel, no recognition of Israel. Arabs fought and lost wars to throw the Jews into the Sea and complete the Nazi genocide which murdered 75% of all European Jewry in less than 4 years. Germany lost its land grab wars, and got its Capital of Berlin divided. The EU seeks to negate the Israeli victory of 1967. If they can succeed to negate that victory, then what’s to stop them from negating the Israeli 1948 Independence War victory?

      The problem centers not upon Arab rejection of their defeats in war. But rather Arab cowardice to repatriate their Arab refugee populations. Arab countries started both the 1948 and 1967 wars. In 1948, immediately after their defeat, Arab and Muslim states unilaterally expelled all Jews living in their countries. Israel repatriated all of these Jewish refugee populations – some 800,000 people which Arab and Muslim countries unilaterally expelled in their post war hysteria.

      A similar number of Arab stateless refugees fled the newly established Jewish state. To this very day, not a single Arab or Muslim country has agreed to repatriate their stateless Arab refugee populations. This problem the Arab states must address. The Balestinians refer to this problem – through the denial of their refugee status – as their ‘right of return’. Utter nonsense. Jews prior to the 1948 Independence War miracle, we lived as stateless refugee populations – scattered across North Africa, the Middle East, and all of Europe – for over 2000 years. Jewish stateless refugees had no rights. A basic lie, for Balestinians (Arabs can not pronounce the letter P) to declare that they have rights.

      Diplomacy has its windows of opportunity. Prior to the 1948 Israeli Independence War, the UN promoted a 2 State opportunity to both Arabs and Jews. After the victory the window permanently slammed shut for any 2 state solution. Immediately after the 1967 June War, Israeli leaders favored land for peace. But with almost 1 million Jews living in Samaria, this window too has permanently slammed shut.

      Yom HaDin judges the neshama, the Name E’l, as in Elul. The Book of שמות dedicates 4 Parshaot to the vessels of the Mishkan and garments. Two Parshaot prior to the sin of the Golden Calf and two Parshaot there after, which close the Book of שמות. An object casts its shadow. This idea explains סוד. A building stands upon a concealed יסוד. This method of scholarship, the opposite of רמז, words contained in other words, בראשית: ברית אש, ראש בית, ב’ ראשית. Herein the 6 letters of בראשית teach the discipline of רמז. The discipline of סוד works in the opposite way, it expands a concealed agenda through other metaphors like, for example יסוד. The foundation upon which a building stands – a סוד concealed from view.

      Check out the opening of 1st Kings. There the Order of king Shlomo’s administrators mentioned in both order and detail. Oral Torah logic works by making “measured” comparisons by which a person can judge the depth of an idea. A blueprint reads by having a front, side, top view of an designed object. Reading a blueprint gives a 3 dimensional view of that designed object, as read from a 2 dimensional blueprint. Just looked at some modern commentators who express their fervent belief in the new testament avoda zara. These writers, as a rule, parrot the written words from their Bible translations. They offer no depth analysis of the words which they quote. By stark contrast, rabbi Akiva handed over a kabbala known as פרדס unto his students. The entire works of Mishna and Gemara, both stand upon the יסוד of פרדס scholarship. A thousand years later, Reshon scholarship, debated sh’ittot on how to understand פשט. Scholarship on the Talmud, which lacks a working disciplined knowledge of פרדס, directly compares to Xtianity biblical commentators who quote directly from their bible translations, to preach their son of god noise.

      The Auchron sh’itta which teaches פלפול likewise fails to teach פרדס. The emptiness of this popular Yeshiva learning device … a child learns all week in Yeshiva, his rav teaches the פלפול method of scholarship. That child comes home for shabbot, and at the shabbot dinner table talks about all subjects – other than his learning in the Yeshiva. The problem with פלפול, this splitting of hairs between how one Reshon commentator learns a line of Gemara vs. how another Reshon comments – on that identical Gemara phrase – only a few of the boys actually follow the fission scholarship as taught by their Maggid shiur. Never met a child who possesses the skill to discuss his פלפול learning at the shabbot table! If for no other reason than this, this פלפול sh’itta of learning – its just plain wrong. Rabbis treat פרדס, in a similar wrong way – comparable to saying the 13 middot in the month of Elul. During prayers of selichot, Yidden open the doors revealing the Safer Torah within. Over and again Yidden repeats their 13 tohor middot prayer matras. Never once does any Rabbinic authority challenge the folk to discern/understand the distinction between a tohor midda from the other tohor middot. How can a person dedicate their דרך ארץ walk before HaShem, if that person never strives to define – from the Torah – tohor middot?!

      Throwing out names of revered authorities, like for example, the Maharal of Prague etc., appeals to authority fails to teach the required kabbala of פרדס, upon which the entire Talmud learns. The concealed common denominator that links the vessels of the Mishkan and garments of the Cohonim, with the appointments of the key Administrative posts made by king Shlomo’s Order of government, [compare and contrast]. This Torah/Prophets depth analysis, what common denominator do they share in common? Both Primary sources omit any and all reference to the establishment of a Federal lateral common law Court system. The basis of reference to Yetro’s mussar given unto Moshe, ‘prior’ to the revelation of the Torah at Sinai.

      Weigh the blessing within the Shemone Esri:
      ולירושלים עירך ברחמים תשוב ותשכן בתוכה כאשר דברת, ובנה לתוכה תכין: ברוך אתה ה’, בונה ירושלים.
      with the opening set of stories in the first Book of Kings compared to the last four closing Parshaot of the 2nd Book of the Torah, which address the vessels of the Mishkan and the Cohen garments. The k’vanna of these two comparative case studies shares a common root foundation, they both, as stated above, omit the key subject of Federal lateral common law courts.

      Justice through courts of lateral Common Law defines the Good Name of Jerusalem, rather than some grand Temple structure made of wood and stone. The learning of Talmud requires knowledge of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס kabbala. The study of Talmud, פרדס most essentially defines. The רמז\סוד compares to the roots of a tree, ever expanding in search of water and minerals, which the tree requires in order to live. Like the foundation upon which a building stands, so too and how much more so, the roots necessary for classic plant life, excluding mushrooms. To understand the halakic component of the Talmud also compares to the grammar of Hebrew verbs. Each and every Hebrew verb has a two or three letter שרש\root, upon which Hebrew grammar builds its language. To what do these 2 & 3 letter verb roots compare? To racism. The first word of the Torah, its 6 letters conceals, they hint a basic רמז of 2 beginnings/ב’ ראשית. Language opposed by actions; racism employs both the slander/perversion of words, together with violent crimes, committed by mass murder psycho-paths, together with their groupy (just following orders) followers.The Creation story establishes as its center stage prop, the metaphor of the Tree of Life and the Tree of Good and Evil. The kabbala of this story, most essentially defines Talmud through the tohor and tuma Yatzirot within our hearts. The symbol of life and death, expressed through the tohor and tuma Yatzirot, as expressed in the mitzva of kre’a shma. The Mishna understands this mitzva, Yidden have the opportunity to choose the yoke of Fear of Heaven; and live their lives for the purpose of building the reputation of their Good Name; which learns from the negative commandment which forbids mixtures of meat and milk. The language of this opening Torah story, a world full of chaos and anarchy, contrasts with the Order imposed by the 7 days of Creation.

      These two opposing powers of conflict, they mirror – they reflect – the two fundamentally opposed forces within Nature – life & death. The eternal conflict between these two opposing great powers, in their own odd manner, equally defines the laws of gravity; they create a magnetic field, which impacts human health.

      The kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s hints to a possible comparison to the basis of physics: gravity, electromagnetism, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force – the 4 fundamental forces of Physics. James Clark Maxwell through mathematical equations unified electric and magnetic forces in 1864. About 80 years thereafter, quantum physics consolidated electromagnetism with quantum physics. The interaction of these 4 primary forces, both פרדס and forces of physics, both tend to interact, so to speak, on a subatomic level.

      The kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס scholarship sh’itta, the דרוש\פשט roots search for, and seeks out the prophet mussar which the Aggadic/Midrash stories contain. To derive from either Aggadita or Midrash the essential “water and minerals” which the, so to speak, שורשים of the Tree of Life search. This ‘search’ requires the acquired, and repeated practiced wisdom of דרוש\פשט. Previously, an earlier metaphor employed to describe this wisdom of Torah scholarship, the reference to the warp and weft of a loom.

      Following the victory of the assimilated school of Talmudic scholarship, the rabbis that embrace with a passion Greek philosophy and logic; after the son of the Rosh and rabbi Karo embraced the assimilationist sh’itta of the Rambam, a violent “Civil War” erupted. A g’lut Civil War does not resemble a revolution or classic nation state Civil War. G’lut Jewry did not command their own armies. What the Rambam civil war did attract, hostile foreign States intervention. It began in Paris with the burning of the Talmud, and then spread to the expulsion of entire Jewish communities in France, Germany, and Spain. German authorities took advantage of the anarchy among g’lut Jewry and imposed crushing taxation which destroyed the Jewish economy. The Church followed this economic attack with a decree that forced Jews to live in ghetto imprisonment for something like 300 years. These cruel policies caused a massive population transfer of Jewish stateless refugee populations. Jews in their 100,000s fled from Western Europe unto Eastern Europe; something like the fork in the road leading to the Nazi death camps. A tried and true method of refugee population control. The haven of Eastern Europe proved itself as a mirage of water in the desert.

      Post Karo rabbinic Judaism shifted Torah scholarship away from the Talmud and directed the focus of its energies upon the Shulchan Aruch – the cliff notes of the בית יוסף. Then followed the canard that rabbi Karo based his halakic rulings, that he followed a majority opinion based upon the Rif, Rosh, Rambam disputes – as if the former two followed the same definition of the term halaka as did the heretic. The realities of ghetto life, its crushing poverty, uprooted originality of Torah scholarship. The best Jewish minds failed to grasp or simply forgot that the Rambam’s definition of halaka raped the kabbala of rabbi Akiva, and the framers of the Talmud and Midrashim.

      Had real difficulty distinguishing between the blessings:
      ולירושלים עירך ברחמים תשוב ותשכן בתוכה כאשר דברת, ובנה אותה בקרוב בימינו בנין עולם, וכסא דוד מהרה לתוכה תכין: ברוך אתה ה’, בונה ירושלים…. את צמח דוד עבדך מהרה תצמיח, וקרנו תרום בישועתך, כי לישועתך קוינו כל היום: ברוך אתה ה’, מצמיח קרן ישועה.
      For me, the Siddur shapes the k’vanna of the Yom Tov tefillah. Erev Yom Kippor placed tefillen of Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam, and remembered the sworn oaths which our forefathers swore at both Gilgal and Sh’Cem, under the leadership of Yehoshua the prophet. A person can not observe Avodat HaShem without striving to self actualize Torah defined tohor middot. For modern Israelis, the Yom Kippor War casts a powerful shadow. To discuss the ’73 war, it seems to me that this requires understanding US pressure which forced Golda not to repeat the ’67 precedent. Why? Posting an indictment against this or that Israeli general, based upon 20/20 hindsight, does not expose the conditions and causes for that war. Israeli war time political war decisions came under the shadow of Washington.

      Why did the Nixon Administration change the dollar from a gold/silver commodity based currency to a petro-dollar/fiat currency? This decision, how did it impact Nixon’s demand imposed upon Golda, not to make another ’67 surprise attack? Why would OPEC oil producing countries agree to US regulations which restricted and regulated the sale of their own natural resources? As if Saudi Arabia existed as a State within the US Republic?! For OPEC countries to agree to restrict the sales of their oil and gas, limited strictly and only unto US Dollar sales requires research. In 1971 France demanded gold or silver for their international dollars. OPEC oil/gas sales to countries abroad, which the Nixon/OPEC agreement limited purchase of OPEC oil/gas strictly to US Dollar purchases, this policy forced France to withdraw their demand upon the US, to supply them with gold or silver for their inter-national Dollar surplus.

      What preconditions did the king of Saudi Arabia place upon acceptance of the petro-dollar US monopoly? Perhaps, a demand that Nixon would pressure Golda not to initiate the coming war? Why? The logic seems simple to me, Israel started the ’67 war and won. If Egypt and Syria along with other Arab States achieve a similar surprise attack, perhaps they would win the approaching war. This assumption proved false. But Israel, with a population of less than 3 million at the time, suffered 2665 killed in the Yom Kippor War! The Syrian break through the Golan Heights terrified Golda into assuming that Israel would suffer a total defeat in the 3rd Arab States attempt, within the span of the latter half of the 20th century, to throw the Jews into the Sea.

      Another possible precondition placed by OPEC oil producing countries, by which OPEC submitted to US regulation of their own natural resources, a demand upon the US, that should OPEC impose an oil embargo against the West, that the US would not invade OPEC countries. Follow the money. How would the Nixon Administration profit from such a deal? Previously mentioned the hostile economic policy of Paris. The oil embargo exponentially increased the price of oil. All countries who bought OPEC oil had to now have international USD petro-dollars. This made Washington the money lender to the planet! Not only this, but Nixon imposed the ‘Windfall Profits tax’ upon domestic oil industries! Overnight the petro-dollar monopoly introduced more cash into the coffers of the US treasury than virtually any domestic private industry thus far taxed! Therefore Nixon had a stake in the action, an ax to grind, when he demanded from Golda not to initiate the ’73 War!

      The the Seven Noahide Laws, as enumerated in the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 56a:
      Carry out justice – prohibition of any miscarriage of justice.
      No blasphemy – Prohibits a curse directed at the Supreme Being.
      No idolatry – Prohibits the worship of any human or any created thing. Also prohibited is the making …of idols and involvement with the occult. This necessitates an understanding of the One G‑d of Israel and His nature.
      No illicit intercourse – Prohibits adultery, incest, homosexual intercourse and bestiality, according to …Torah definitions.
      No homicide – Prohibits murder and suicide. Causing injury is also forbidden.
      No theft – Prohibits the wrongful taking of another’s goods.
      Don’t eat a limb of a living creature – Promotes the kind treatment of animal life. It also encourages an appreciation for all kinds of life and respect for nature.

      Chabad loves the Rambam. This ‘halaka’ from the Rambam comes from the Gemara quoted, which teaches Aggaditah. Among the Reshonim scholars (peers of Rambam), the Rambam stands alone whereby he ruled a posok halaka from Aggadic sources! In matters of halaka, the general rule follows like this: individual vs. the majority … the halaka follows after the majority.

      Chabad which promoted for years their Rebbe false messiah, likewise advertises the Rambam “halaka” known as 7 mitzvot bnai Noach. A load of narishkeit. Why? Rabbi Akiva passed down a kabbala unto his five major talmidim/rabbis [these rabbis transmitted the Talmud as we know it today], a kabbala known as “פרדס”/Chariot mysticism. Rabbi Yechuda the Prince/leader of the Great Sanhedrin, employed the “פרדס” kabbalah in ALL his Case/Rule Mishnaot. Likewise the Gemara makes its famous Case/Rule analysis by bringing possible precedents [the יסוד of all Common Law systems of law]. To bring a similar case, from any of the 6 Orders of the Mishna, to make a depth analysis of the Case/Rule as stated in a specific Mishna. This sh’itta of Common Law which stands upon precedents requires logic. Order vs. Chaos … logic requires order. Oral Torah most essentially constitutes the expression of Oral Torah logic. A unique logic format totally different from ancient Greek philosophers whose opposing system of logic, Plato and Aristotle communicated.

      As a loom has its warp and weft opposing threads, so too the fabric of the Talmud holds to contrasting “threads”, known as halaka and aggadita. The halakic code which the Rambam compiled destroyed the halakic “fabric” produced from the halaka/aggadita “loom”. How? Rambam ripped the halakic Talmudic Primary Sources [the later commentators on the Talmud, collectively known as “Reshonim”, Jewish scholarship roughly from 950 CE unto Josef Karo – the 1st generation of “Auchronim” scholarship on the Talmud and Halaka], away from the Aggadic drosh upon the T’NaCH mussar. The Talmud, compiled centuries after the Romans forcibly exiled almost all Jewry from Judea. The Aggadita by means of דרוש examines the pre first Temple and first Temple Torah scholarship, as recorded in the T’NaCH. Chabad erroneously claims that rabbi Karo based his halakic rulings, as codified in the Shulchan Aruch, that he followed the majority opinions expressed by the 3 famous Reshon halakic codifiers – the Rif, the Rosh, and the Rambam. Utter superstitious narishkeit.

      Rabbi Karo’s famous code exists as the “Cliff Notes” of his primary commentary, which he wrote upon the Arba’ah Turim, a commentary known as the בית יוסף. The Arba’ah Turim, written by Jacob ben Asher, the son of the Rosh. The Rosh denounced the Rambam. Rabbi Asher abandoned the “sh’itta” of how his father learned the definition of halaka from the Talmud, and wrote his now famous Arba’ah Turim, based upon the Rambam “sh’itta” which destroyed the warp/weft/loom “fabric” of the Talmud!

      The Rambam did not know, much less understand the פרדס kabbala of Rabbi Akiva. His code of law “organized” halaka into subjects. This “alien” imposed Order upon halakic subjects within the pages of the Talmud, directly comparable to the Xtian verses and chapters imposed upon the T’NaCH, effectively changed the essences of the Talmudic concept known as halaka, by changing the “order” of how a person read the organized texts! Something like rearranging the letters of D O G & G O D.

      The Talmudic warp/weft fabric, as expressed through the kabbala of פרדס scholarship … דרוש ופשט a female/male couple. And רמז וסוד a female/male couple. The halakic rulings as found in the B’hag, Rif, Rosh legal codifications sharply contrasts with the ALL halakic rulings located within the Rambam legal codification. The latter code completely redefines the meaning of the term halaka. The warp/weft opposing/contrasting threads in the Talmudic loom, Aggadita requires דרוש\פשט, whereas Halaka requires רמז\סוד. The framers of the Talmud based the entire works of both Mishna and Gemara upon the פרדס kabbala taught by Rabbi Akiva.
      The Rambam code radically altered the meaning and k’vanna of all halakic rulings as found within the Talmud. For this reason Rabbeinu Yona, the cousin of the Ramban, the chief rabbi of Spain, placed the Rambam into נדוי/charem – about 15 years after the Rambam died. Have you ever wondered how millions of Yidden settled in Eastern Europe, Poland, the Ukraine, and Russia? What caused such a huge population transfer of Jews living in Western Europe to uproot their lives and move to Eastern Europe? Oppression, chaos, and social anarchy prevailed in Jewish communities after the Rambam code passed from Egypt to Spain, to Western Europe. A little known fact, the Baali Tosafot, grand children of Rashi, their famous commentaries upon the Talmud, the Baali Tosafot quote the Rambam on matters of halaka, all of 2 times! In both cases the Tosafot argue against the Rambam.

      About 60 years after the Goyim burned all the handwritten manuscripts of the Talmud in Paris 1242, the king of France expelled all Jews from France – this permanently destroyed the Rashi/Tosafot sh’itta, of how to learn the Talmud. Have you ever wondered how Rashi could employ one sh’itta of פשט, in how he learned the Chumash, and an entirely different sh’itta of פשט in how he learned the Talmud? Till Rashi, no scholar from either the sealed masoret of Mishna or Gemara, ever learned by employing two different sets of logic methodologies/sh’ittot!!

      How could a later secondary source ie Rashi, employ two opposing schools of פשט when no rabbinic authority within the Mishna and Gemara ever learned through such a strange/foreign sh’itta/method?! Post Talmudic commentators, like this author, while logic knows no monopoly by T’NaCH, Mishnaic, and Gemara scholars. Nonetheless, Rav Ashi sealed the Sha’s, thereby he established the Sha’s as the masoret of faith for all succeeding generations.

      Rashi has a simple set of reasoning, not so the Rambam, together with his assimilated rabbinic Spanish peers. The disaster of the 1st Crusades would explode upon Western European g’lut Jewry towards the end of Rashi’s lifetime. The Church, in the best of times, barely tolerated Jewish religious freedom, which Church dogma called ‘Free Will’. But the latter days of Rashi’s life witnessed the worst of times in Jewish refugee relations with Goyim authorities! Jewish scholarship on the Talmud, Church repression forced them to write in an obscure and obtuse style, in order to get the Goyim censors permission to publicly publish their commentaries which they made upon the Talmud.

      The Crusades would obliterate virtually all major exile Jewish communities across Germany. The Friars and Monks deeply despised the Talmud. Rashi’s commentary to the Chumash taught the פרדס kabbala of דרוש\פשט. The Rashi commentary to the Talmud, by contrast, taught a simple פשט, to assist young youthful scholarship, how to correctly read a page of Gemara. Most people erroneously separate the פשט learning on the Chumash from the פשט learning on the Talmud, just as most certainly did the Church censors. The Talmud, not easy to learn to read. Besides mixtures of Hebrew and Aramaic, it employs a warp\weft fabric of halaka\aggadita.

      Rashi’s פשט sh’itta on the Chumash taught the פרדס kabbala of how to study and learn the Talmud. The classic Talmudic halakic commentaries prior to publishment of the Rambam “counter” halaka, the B’hag and Rif, their halakic rulings bound themselves to the pages of the Sha’s (6 Orders of the Mishna – a name that refers to the entire works of the Talmud), as did the post Rambam halakic code written by the Rosh. פרדס kabbala weaves aggadita together with halaka; the one cannot exist without the other. Contrast the Rambam code whereby the halaka stands completely independent from the aggadita of the Talmud!! Under the Rambam Greek assimilation notions, halaka stands alone and independent from aggadita. This opinion of the Rambam, due to its gross ignorance of the kabbala of פרדס, destroyed the פרדס sh’itta of logic, transmitted by all the rabbis within the pages of both Mishna and Gemara! Most of Spain’s rabbinic authorities of the Rambam’s day, had equally assimilated and embraced the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophies. Published after Muslim armies invaded and conquered most of Spain.

      Over a 1000 years before the Reshonim scholarship upon the Talmud, Jews rebelled against the Syrian Greeks and won Jewish national Independence for the first time since the fall of Jerusalem to Babylonian armies. At that time, like the assimilated Spanish rabbinic authorities, the Tzeddukim sons of Aaron, they too assimilated and embraced the culture and customs practiced by the Greek Syrian empire. The assimilated Tzeddukim wanted Jerusalem to follow the model of a Greek polis City State; they embraced and accepted ancient Greek philosophy, specifically the Greek concepts of logic taught by Plato and Aristotle.

      After the burning of the Talmud in Paris in 1242, thereafter appeared the Zohar. This work, the kabbalist known as the Ramban, he did not know about the “kabbala” of the Zohar. The Zohar makes claims to the penmanship of rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, as the source for its supposed authority. Also known by his acronym Rashbi. A 2nd-century tannaitic scholar, active after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE. One of the most eminent disciples of Rabbi Akiva, and attributed by many Orthodox Jews with the authorship of the Zohar, the chief work of Kabbala.

      This narishkeit attempt to foist authorship of the Zohar upon the Rashbi, fails to grasp that the Zohar midrashic style commentary to the Chumash – does not teach פרדס. Therefore Shimon bar Yochai simply could not have authored the Zohar. The Rambam did not write the Zohar, but a theory of his authorship of the Zohar makes far better sense than that of bar Yochai! The latter understood the discipline of פרדס scholarship whereas the former did not understand פרדס scholarship at all. The Rambam code organized halaka into neat tidy subjects; this code stands upon Aristotelian logic. The Perushim placed the assimilated Cohonim Tzeddukim into נדוי\charem. How could assimilated Tzeddukim receive the classification of רשעים while assimilated Spanish rabbinic authorities, like the Rambam and a lot of others, enjoy the legal status as righteous Reshonim? 180 decree polar opposites! The lights of Hanukkah dedicate the commitment to HaShem to interpret the Written Torah strictly by and through Oral Torah (פרדס) logic. The Rambam interprets both Chumash and Talmud, he relied upon ancient Greek logic, the same logic format that significantly contributed to the blessing after meals description of רשעים who sought to cause Israel to forget the Torah. Which Torah? Not the Written Torah, but rather the Oral Torah logic system revealed to Moshe at Horev, 40 days following the sin of the Golden Calf on Yom Kippor.

      The first face of avoda zara – assimilation. Expressed in the non specific commandments – after the ways of Egypt and Canaan, do not follow. These non specific commandments forbade assimilation to all foreign non Cohen cultures and customs, not just limited to ancient Egyptian and Canaanite cultures and customs. Assimilation to alien foreign cultures and customs represents a fundamental aspect of tuma, the Evil inclination within the bnai brit hearts. The first word of the Torah בראשית contains a powerful רמז\words within words – ב’ ראשית \ two beginnings; two Creation stories, and two Yatzirot within the heart.

      The word Canaanite refers to a merchant or trader. The Talmud in בבא קמא refers to Canaanites as stateless refugees temporarily living within the borders of Judea. By comparison, post war Confederate states called Canaanites – carpetbaggers. The 5th Book of the Torah acknowledges two types of Goyim living within the jurisdiction of the Great and small Sanhedrin Federal Courts: ger toshav and na’cra’im/Canaanites. The famous Aggadita of the Gemara of Sanhedrin refers to Gere Toshav folk. Keepers of the 7 mitzvot within the borders of Judea, if they suffered damages by an Israel, they could take the Israel to court and demand restitution for damages. The Na’cree/Canaanite stateless refugee enjoyed no such rights. If the ox of an Israel damaged the ox of a Na’cree/Canaanite, the Israel enjoyed legal exemption from paying damages to any foreign refugee temporarily residing within the borders of Judea! Stateless refugee Jewish population by comparison, likewise enjoyed little or no legal rights throughout our 2000+ years of g’lut.

      No Great Sanhedrin possess jurisdiction to try Capital Crimes murder cases outside of Judea. The error of Rambam’s assimilated Greek based logic code, his halaka attempts to impose the 7 mitzvot as Universal commandments applicable to all Goyim. Rubbish. The opening pages of the Gemara of Avoda Zara teaches that the Goyim rejected the brit of Sinai. No Sanhedrin court has jurisdiction to compel the police of foreign countries to enforce any Sanhedrin death sentence decreed upon a bnai noach who violates one of the 7 mitzvot, while living in their native countries. The 7 mitzvot Universal commandments of the Rambam, would require an absurd extension of Sanhedrin authority.

      Herein touches the two fundamental errors that brought g’lut upon Israel. King Shlomo failed to consult with Natan the prophet concerning construction of the Temple. Post second Temple period Jews assume that the definition of halaka, that all the halakic codes follow the same definition. The first error, king Shlomo aggrandized building a structure of wood and stone, rather than taking the mussar given by Yitro to Moshe, of the need to establish a Federal Sanhedrin Court System as the Temple. The 2nd error, Jewish rabbinic leadership failed to grasp the fundamental distinctions between the Talmudic פרדס definition of halaka from assimilated Rambam, and his Greek definition of halaka.
      To grasp the distinction which separates the ברכות between
      ולירושלים עירך ברחמים תשוב … לאת צמח דוד עבדך מהרה תצמיח, וכו’
      These two basic fault lines within the crust of Yiddishkeit, compares to the distinction between Pasach and Chag Sukkot. Moshiach kingdom of David prioritizes obedience unto the commandments, the mussar commanded by the prophets, as possessing greater importance over the commandments to sanctify korbanot. The Temple stands upon the יסוד of the rebuke which Yitro gaves to Moshe, according to some opinions – after the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. The difficulty to that opinion, 70 Sanhedrin elders went up ,together with Moshe, to receive the Torah. That Sanhedrin of judges, Israel murdered at the sin of the Golden Calf. Only Aaron survived the slaughter of the first Great Sanhedrin. This Jewish Civil War disaster, known as the Golden Calf, later generations confuse the form of the Golden Calf with the substance of the violent murder of the Sanhedrin court system. Later in the Book במדבר, Moshere-establish a 2nd Great Sanhedrin court system, by which he anointed the House of Aaron to rule. Two of the appointed Judges, of this 2nd Great Sanhedrin, experienced visions that Moshe would die in g’lut.

      The new testament Greek/Roman forgery that depicts the cruel torture and mutilation followed by human sacrifice as a valid Torah korban, serves to testify unto the mussar rebuke by which the prophet Shmuel denounced king Shaul; his actions of choosing sacrifice over obedience, they serve as eternal witness that the story of Jesus son of Zeus merits odium, utter and total contempt.

      King Shaul profaned the anointing of his Moshiach when he failed to obey the commandment of Shmuel to utterly destroy the people and property of Amelek – a משל to the Yatzir Ha’Ra נמשל within every generation of the brit Cohen people, as remembered in the mitzva of acceptance of the yoke of heaven within the mitzva of kre’a shma. This tragedy of Shaul, best depicts the dedication of David as Moshiach under the shadow which the kingdom of Shaul cast. Despite the fact that David viewed Shaul as his worst, most dangerous enemy! All who participated in the direct death of king Shaul, David ruled their evil actions as a Capital Crime which negated their “right” to live – he ordered their execution. The behavior of David to the רשע who proclaimed he killed king Shaul essentially separates
      את צמח דוד עבדך מהרה תצמיח, from ולירושלים עירך ברחמים תשוב ותשכן בתוכה.

      As previously introduced, the Yom Tov Chaggaim, they equally define the k’vanna of the Siddur tefillah. Chag Sukkot compares to Chag Pasach by means of the 4 species measured against the 4 questions. As such the two ברכות within the Shemone Esri merit close comparison:

      ברוך אתה ה’, אלהינו ואלהי אבותינו, אלהי אברהם, אלהי יצחק, ואלהי יעקב, האל הגדול הגבור והנורא, אל עליון, גומל חסדים טובים, וקונה הכל, וזוכר חסדי אבות, ומביא גואל לבני בניהם למען שמו באהבה: זכרנו לחיים, מלך חפץ בחיים, וכתבנו בספר החיים, למענך אלהים חיים, מלך עוזר ומושיע ומגן: ברוך אתה ה’, מגן אברהם.

      This blessing introduces the Nefesh Ya dedicated unto HaShem on Chag Pasach. Its dedication of כנוי מדות/pronouns in place of the Name HaShem closely resembles to Rosh HaShana davening which dedicates unto HaShem the Neshama El, as in אל מלך חנון ורחום. The language of מלך, a לאו דוקא rabbinic כנוי מדה. A similar example where in Torah faith dedicates tohor כנוי מדות unto HaShem, located in the opening ברכה of ברכת המזון.
      הזן את העולם כלו בטובו, בחן בחסד וברחמים…כי הוא אל זן ומפרנס לכל.

      This the opening ברכה of ברכת המזון, not only contains the major points of all blessings that thereafter follow, this ברכה teaches the אב\תולדות relationship of סמוכים which defines the k’vanna of the entire Shemone Esri tefilla. As such the dedication of the nefesh Ya on Pasach compares and resembles to the dedication of the nefesh Yechida on Chag Sukkot:מודים אנחנו לך, שאתה הוא ה’ אלהינו ואלהי אבותינו לעולם ועד, צור חיינות מגן ישענו אתה הוא לדור ודור, נודה לך ונספר תהלתך, על חיינו המסורים בידך, ועל נשמותענו הפקודות לך, ועל נסיך שבכל יום עמנו, ועל נפלאותיך וטובותיך שבכל עת ערב ובקר וצהרים, הטוב כי לא כלו רחמיך, והמרחם, כי לא תמו חסדיך, מעולם קוינו לך: ועל כלם יתברך ויתרומם שמך מלכנו תמיד לעוךם ועד.על הנסים ועל הפרקן ועל הגבורות ועל התשועות ועל המלחמות שעשית לאבותינו בימים ההם בזמן הזה: וכל החיים יודוך סלה, ויחללו את שמך באמת, האל ישועתנו ועזרתנו סלה: ברוך אתה ה’, הטוב שמך ולך נאה להודות.

      This year Chag Sukkot opens and concludes with a Shabbat/Yom Tov, the double portion of the first born Cohen. The משל wherein the Torah compares Israel to the first born son, refers to the chosen Cohen nation. The concluding blessing of שלום depends upon the Cohen nation doing avodat HaShem through tohor middot and tohor כינוי מדות\pronouns of the Name. Goyim know nothing of tohor. Jewish assimilation to the customs and manners practiced by Goyim, by definition – Yidden cease to value the dedication of tohor middot and tohor כינוי מדות unto HaShem. The dedication of tohor middot and tohor pronoun middot, they together define the k’vanna of avodat HaShem.

      As the Cohen House of Aaron can not do their avodat HaShem without tohor middot, so too the Moshiach House of Israel can not do their avodat HaShem – without the dedication of tohor middot; herein defines the k’vanna required in tefilla, which has replaced korbanot. The Torah commands: do not curse the ruler of your people. David throughout all the terror of king Shaul, who actively pursued to murder him, he kept this great commandment לשמה. A very powerful mussar when citizens who oppose their governments, should weigh and consider.

      Contrast the slaughter of all the Great Sanhedrin judges, except Aaron, at the sin of the Golden Calf. The nation of Israel behaved in the identical manner as did king Shaul who profaned the holy anointing as Moshiach. This יסוד tuma Yatzir, it lives and breathes within the hearts of the bnai brit Cohen nation for all generations unto eternity. T’shuva requires acknowledgement of the tuma middot within our hearts. Like racism, a confession of words, simply and totally inadequate; the baali t’shuva must practice extreme prejudice, and not return to the scene of his crimes.

      Racism as tuma requires both tuma words followed by tuma actions. For this very reason, the mitzva of tefilla does not depend upon speaking words written in the Siddur. The Shemone Esri, learns from the mother of Shmuel, whose lips while they moved, she communicated deep emotional struggles within her heart. Lips, while they can utter praise, praise does not qualify as making a ברכה. To make a ברכה requires the k’vanna, to make that ברכה prayed, a תולדה of the Torah oath britot individually sworn by the Avot, by which they cut an alliance\brit for their עולם הבא seed, to inherit the oath sworn brit lands.

      What pre-conditions does the Torah set, as guarantee to dwell securely and prosperously within the oath sworn lands? That the seed of the Avot rule the land with righteous tohor justice. Hence the private altars at the 6 cities of refugees – the spokes of the wheel, so to speak, of the Great Sanhedrin Federal Court system of the Republic. It functions as the center of that metaphor – the legal wheels of פרדס chariot mysticism. The Cohen, head of the small Sanhedrin Court, dedicates a korban upon an altar, outside of Jerusalem. This korban, serves as a public witness. That the small Sanhedrin judges, that these justices ruled the דיני נפשות case before their court, on condition that the justices sanctified tohor middot unto HaShem throughout the hearing of that specific Capital Crime case. These small Sanhedrin justices weighed to impose a capital punishment upon tuma actions of premeditated murder, that defiled the sanctify of the tohor Cohen nation. Chag Rosh HaShanna dedicates the Divine Name of El within our hearts unto HaShem. It weighs between the wisdom of Torah, from the Canaanite wisdom, the tuma Yatzir, to acquire wealth, as a priority over the dedication to pursue justice among our brit allied people. What does Israel prioritize when we dedicate our Neshama to HaShem, as expressed in the ברכה:
      אתה קדוש ושמך קדוש, קדושים בכל יום יהללוך סלה, ברוך אתה ה’, האל המלך הקדוש?

      Yom Kippor seals the distinction between wisdom and wisdom, between Israel and Canaan. The Nefesh Chyyah, called, within the heart, Elohim, this ברכה seals the din upon the brit faith.רצה ה’ אלהינו בעמך ישראל ובתפלתם והשב את העבודה לדביר ביתך, ואשי ישראל ותפלתם, באהבה תקבל ברצון, ותהי לרצון תמיד עבודת ישראל עמך: אלהינו ואלהיאבותינו,יעלה ויבוא ויגיע, ויראה וירצה וישמע, ויפקד ויזכר זכרוננו ופקדוננו וזכרון אבותינו, וזכרון משיח בן דוד עבדך, וזכרון ירושלים עיר קדשך, וזכרון כל עמך בית ישראל, וכו’ ותחזינה עינינו בשובך לציון ברחמים. ברוך אתה ה’, המחזיר שכינתו לציון.

      The repetition of אלהינו ואלהי אבותינו, serves to cause the generations of Israel to remember the oaths sworn at brit Gilgal and brit Sh’Cem. The annual reading of the Torah concludes with ברכות which remember the avodat HaShem which Yaacov swore as his personal dedication and mussar commandment inheritance which he blessed his children before he passed. To command the avodah of ברכות, with fear of heaven, requires that a person restricts his religious customs and practices, limited to times that tohor spirits rule within his heart. During times when tuma spirits prevail within the heart, fear of heaven demands that a Man acknowledges the dominance of tuma spirits within his heart. This concept learns from the Torah commandment for a woman to separate herself during her period of נדה. The concept of Shekina, this kabbalist term, distinguishes fundamentals.

      Tohor and tuma spirits reside in the heart, not the mind. These spirits cause the internal organs, within the body, to produce powerful emotions, which directly influence how the mind reacts to them. The repetition and struggle within our hearts between tohor and tuma middot defines Torah wisdom. Previously differentiated between the wisdom of a tradesman from the knowledge of a PhD. Wrestling with the Yatzir within us occurs throughout our lives For this reason the Torah cannot become antiquated. Just as king David tripped in the matter of Bathsheba, so too we all experience personal failures in our walk before HaShem to live moral lives.

      Torah faith stands upon the יסוד of justice. During the terrible g’lut that culminated in the Shoah, did any Court under Goyim governments ever condemn the Church for its blood libel tuma words which produced pogroms and expulsion of entire Jewish communities from countries across Europe? Compensation for damages requires judicial courts of law dedicated to justice as Divine rather than kings as Divine. Europe for many centuries favored the divine right of kings to rule. But never did any of these kings ever demand that the courts of his nation uphold justice. Both Church and State viewed Jews as pawns or serfs or slaves. Never did the Goyim validate the refugee status of g’lut Jewry, temporarily residing in tuma g’lut lands.

      Justice weighs between tohor and tuma spirits; tohor and tuma middot within the heart of man. Spirits do not exist as words. The only way, as in racism, that a judge can weigh tohor or tuma – strictly and only through actions. Animals have signs which determine the tohor or tuma status of an animal. Man does not have fins and scales, which expose the prevailing spirit which dominates within the heart of a man. Justice requires an examination of the actions taken by the man who stands in judgment before the Court. Hence when an Israel observes commandments, mitzvot, and halakot, these “signs” serve as witnesses that that man, before the Court, strives to dedicate unto HaShem tohor middot.

      Confusion arises when rabbinic leadership fails to understand the absolute supremacy of tohor and tuma middot in Torah faith. If the distinction between the two – utterly irrelevant, whether a person today, has either tohor or tuma middot dominant within his heart. Then either way, a person can do mitzvot, as such, how can commandments exist as a sign? To what does this tohor/tuma parameter compare? To a homosexual man keeping mitzvot. The Torah assigns observance of commandments as signs of tohor spirits within the heart, comparable to a beast chewing its cud, and having cloven hoofs. A homosexual man keeping mitzvot compares to a woman, experiencing her period, and called up to read from the Torah on shabbot.

      The essence of Torah faith breathes and lives through tohor middot. If Yidden fails to study and distinguish between tohor and tuma middot, then Yidden abandons the faith of being the chosen Cohen nation. Blessings or Curses: rule through Courts dedicated to righteous justice or struggling to survive as exiles in foreign lands whose judicial justices serve the governments which pay their salaries. The issue of national interests, primarily determines government policy. Governments do not primarily consider the plight of stateless refugees and minorities, who have no country of their own, as equal to their most essential political calculations by which these leaders determine the strategic national interests of the State.

      The modern State of Israel, does not stop and weigh the needs of Balestinian refugees – they have no rights, just as Jews in g’lut had no rights. Justice requires that the term refugee does not have one definition for Jews and an entirely different definition for Balestinians by which the racist antisemites condemn Israel as an Apartheid state.

      Chag שמיני עתזרת concludes the yearly reading of the Torah. It aligns the ברכות:
      שים שלום טובה וברכה, חן וחסד ורחמים, עלינו ועל כל ישראל עמך, ברכנו אבינו כלנו כאחד באור פניך, כי באור פניך נתת לנו ה אלהינו תורת חיים ואהבת חסד, וצדקה וברכה ורחמים וחיים ושלום, וטוב בעיניך לברך את עמך ישראל בכל עת ובכל שעה בשלומך: (בספר חיים ברכה ושלום, פרנסה טובה, נשכר ונכתב לפניך, אנחנו וכל עמך בית ישראל, לחיים טובים ולשלום:) ברוך אתה ה’, (עשה השלום) המברך את עמו ישראל בשלום ….. כנגד ….. שמע קולנו ה’ אלהינו, חוס ורחם עלינו, וקבל ברחמים וברצון את תפלתנו, כי אל שומע תפלות ותחנונים אתה, ומלפניך מלכנו, ריקם אל תשיבנו, כי אתה שומע תפלת עמך ישראל ברחמים: ברוך אתה ה’, שומע תפלה. Shalom requires trust that your allied brit partner shall honor and keep the preconditions of the oath brit alliance. How do the ברכות that Moshe gave the Tribes of Israel amplify the ברכות that Yaacov gave the Tribes of Israel? The latter prepare Israel for the dark night of g’lut. The former by contrast prepares Israel for our Torah obligations to rule the oath sworn brit lands. The opening בראשית story of the viper in the Garden compares to the hardened heart of Par’o. In both cases the Yatzir Ha’Ra existed as an external temptation. The g’lut of Adam from the Garden likewise compares to Israel ruling the oath sworn lands, in both cases the Yatzir Ha’Ra had become internalized within the hearts of our people. How does HaShem, the God of War, bring destruction? Spirits and Forces – the latter, like gravity, occurs naturally. The sending of Spirits of life and death into the hearts of Men, by contrast, requires an exertion of Will. The mussar of the prophet מיכה merits close analysis: מיכה ב:א וכו’. הוי חשבי און ופעלי רע על משכבותם באור הבקר יעשוה כי יש לאל ידם.
      The explanation of יש לאל ידם? The Yidden who abandon the brit faith pursue the model of king Shlomo. This man possessed great wisdom. His skill brought great wealth into his possessions. But the wisdom of Sanhedrin lateral courts justice, such a man never pursues. The language of יש לאל ידם, this mussar most essentially defines the mussar rebukes given by all the T’NaCH prophets.
      ב:ב. וחמדו שדות וגזלו ובתים ונשאו ועשקו גבר וביתו ואיש נחלתו… ג:א. ואמר שמעו נא ראשי יעקב וקציני בית ישראל, הלוא לכם לדעת את המשפט?
      No spirituality of truth exists without justice. Justice accepts the yoke of responsibility to compensate other bnai brit allies who suffer damages, which they suffer as a result of the tuma Yatzir within the hearts of their bnai brit חברים/brothers. The social fabric of society rips apart and torn to shreds when bnai brit חברים view their people as נכרים/strangers, on par with Canaanim stateless refugees who have no legal rights or protections. The corrupt trial of the Chicago 7, and their anti-war protests which the criminal Johnson & Nixon Administrations totally ignored. War comes upon a people when the leaders of that people betray their obligation to pursue justice above all other causes as most holy unto HaShem. Mighty America, the great super power lost its Vietnam war under both Johnson & Nixon. The former notoriously declared concerning the Gulf of Tonkin, “I don’t know what they shot at, perhaps whales.” The Tonkin incident Johnson employed as an excuse, like the false flag attack on 9/11, to justify the US illegal Vietnam invasion; like and similar to Lincoln’s illegal invasion of the Confederate States of America, Congress did not declare war in either case. Both defeats brought ruin upon the American people, worse than either WW1 or WW2. Vietnam soldiers returned home in disgrace. In the case of Vietnam, Nixon would illegally bomb Cambodia. This crime promoted the rise of Pol Pot. Rivers of bloodshed defiled the humanity of man because leaders despised justice. No European court of law ever condemned the Church blood libels which promoted pogroms, and the unilateral expulsion of Jewish stateless refugee populations from virtually all European countries. Europeans have never paid war crimes compensation to the Jewish people. Yet these arrogant barbarians assume they possess the moral mandate of the “white man’s burden” to determine the borders of Arab and Muslim countries? Post Shoah, “Never Again” directly refers to the presumption of European arrogance wherein they assume an imaginary mantle of some ‘mandate from heaven’ to judge peoples and countries outside of Europe.

      Like

      • Apologies for the delay in approving your comment, mosckerr. Your comment went into our spam filters, and since I work 8:30-5 without access to the Internet, I can only approve comments at 24 hour intervals.

        NOTE: Anyone with editorial privileges at PoT should feel free to approve comments at their discretion. Given my new job, I will rarely be able to do so in a timely way.

        Liked by 1 person

            • Prayer involves more than simply reading words in a prayer book. My rav taught me that as the post Mishnaic scholars focused upon interpreting the Mishna, that the post sealing of the Talmud scholarship should focus upon employing the Talmud to interpret the k’vanna (roughly poorly translated as “Intent”) of the Siddur/prayer book.

              Hence when I bring a blessing of the Shemone Esri it follows with an interpretation of its “intent”.

              Like

          • Palestine has its origins from the Greko-Roman European empires. The name Balestine makes about as much sense as the opportunist Arafat claim that these Arab stateless refugees originated from the Philistine boat people who originally came from Greece! Arabs come from Saudi Arabia through the Mohammedan wars of conquest in the 8th Century CE! Arabs do not originate from Europe. During the period of the British mandate the only people who referred to themselves as “Palestinians” ( Jews can pronounce the letter P ), the Jewish people. Today’s Jerusalem Post went by the name Palestine Post during the years of the British mandate. For Arabs to refer to themselves as “Palestinians”, during the period of the British Mandate (the Ottoman empire referred to its Middle East territories comprising of Syria Lebanon, Israel, and Jordan – as Greater Syria, these Arabs would have effectively recognized the Balfour Declaration wherein Britain took control by League of Nations rubber stamp of “Palestine”. Such bogus revisionist history – utter and complete non sense! Not till early 1964 did Yasser Arafat opportunism embrace and accept the name “Palestine” and Palestinian people as referring to the Arab stateless refugee populations scattered across the Middle East.

            Like

            • When you say that Arabs cannot pronounce the letter P, you mean (or should mean) that Arabic speakers generally pronounce P the same way we pronounce B. It’s not as though the pronunciation of a letter is inherent to it. And I don’t see how precise choice of name or pronunciation is relevant to assessing the claims of people dispossessed from their homes.

              Like

              • No. They pronounce it like P was an F. The point being that the word – not native to the Arabic language. By pronouncing it as “Balestine” it mocks the foreign European etymology of this non Arabic word. The Ottomans ruled the Middle East for multiple centuries, the Turks while Muslims, similar to the Persians, both not Arabic people.

                The Arabs initiated the ’48, 67′ & ’73 wars. The Arabs lost these wars of Jewish extermination. In point of fact, no nation state of Palestine has ever existed in human history. The “their land” canard … both a lie and empty propaganda. Name the Capital of Palestine? Name a currency of Palestine? Both never existed. The problem which confronts supporters of Arab stateless refugees … I have my religion don’t confuse me with the facts. Non Arabs who buy into the Palestinian lies, treat these lies as their personal belief system. On par with Jesus son of Zeus.

                Like

                • As an anarchist I don’t care about nation-states one way or ‘tother, so the question of whether there was a historical Palestinian nation-state is one on which I don’t see much turning. I care about *individual* people and families who’ve been dispossessed of their homes, or who are currently being oppressed. “Palestinian” seems a handy way to refer to these people, since that’s how they’re generally referred to, but whatever. Call them Group 22LN16, and my concerns on their behalf would remain the same. (Likewise the “state of Israel” as an artificial authoritarian collectivity means nothing to me, though many individual Israelis mean a great deal to me. Ditto, mutatis mutandis, for the “United States,” the “United Kingdom,” the “United Nations,” or any other such dubious enterprise.)

                  Like

                • The founding fathers of America limited the voting franchise to White land owning males. Roderick your personal political tastes do not give you Israeli citizenship any more than you can vote in Russia b/c of your socialist leanings.

                  Israel won our national independence through war, just as did the US. “Artificial authoritarian collectivity” … your quite correct “means nothing to me” Making an abracodabra declaration does not pull rabbits out of hats nor makes virtually all the nation states in existence across the planet cease to exist.

                  Like

                • That seems a very long-winded and implausible way of expressing a great deal of disrespect, along with revisionist history in the worst sense of that term.

                  The question was, why do you refer to Palestinians as “Balestinians”? One answer you give is that Palestinians “cannot” pronounce the “P” sound. That’s actually pretty stupid–not stubid, but stupid. I know plenty of Palestinians, and they all have the capacity to pronounce the “p” sound. So it’s not a matter of ability.

                  The point is that there is no “p” sound in standard, traditional Arabic. There’s a “b” sound and an “f” sound. In Arabic, the relevant word is “Falastin” (not “Balestine”) which preceded the English word “Palestine” by centuries. (Contemporary Arabic is now starting to introduce the “p” sound, with a special letter for it.)

                  The Arabic “Falastin” does have a non-Arabic etymology, just as “America” has a non-English etymology. In and of itself, these facts prove next to nothing of historiographical, ethical, or political substance.

                  I have an Arabic name, “Irfan.” Non-Arabic speakers have trouble with the first vowel, the Arabic ‘ayn, which they (strictly speaking) mispronounce as “IRR fahn,” “URR fahn,” and “AIR fahn.” All three are as correct as they are wrong in English, which is why, when people ask me how my name is pronounced, I ask them how they think it’s pronounced, and then (odd cases aside) tell them that they’re right. I don’t dwell on their “inability” to pronounce ‘ayn. It isn’t an “inability.” It’s lack of habituation. At work, where speed is at a premium, I give my workmates permission to call me “Vic.” But nothing follows about my rights or about what I’m owed in justice follows from the pronunciation of my name. The same might be said, with appropriate changes, about Palestinians.

                  Your actual reason for referring to Palestinians as “Balestinians” is that you want to mock them and in doing so, deny that they have rights to just treatment as human beings. I find it sad that you’d waste so much space on trying to defend so retrograde a claim in so unpersuasive a fashion. But at least you have the chutzpah to come out and say so.

                  Like

                • We Jews, meaning myself in this conversation, endured g’lut/exile as a people for well over 2000 years. Prior to 1948, the Israeli Independence War victory over 5 invading Arab armies, Jews endured the stateless refugee status as a people who had no country of our own. During this refugee status, the Jewish people had little or no rights that culminated in the systematic murder of 75% of European Jewry in the time span of about 3 to 4 years!

                  From this perspective – stateless refugees have no rights. Ya can not have one set of rules applied to Jews and a completely different set of rules applied to non Jews – that’s outright racism. During the latter years of the British mandate, after Britain returned this mandate back to the UN, established a year or so prior to Israeli national independence, the new UN post WW2 replacement of the defunct League of Nations, established by Wilson’s 17th point in his otherwise totally rejected post WW1 peace plan, (Senator Long rejected US participation in the League of Nations, and the Senate rejected the League of Nations treaty), Germany withdrew from the League in 1938.

                  The UN in 1947 by a 2/3rd majority recognized the Jewish right to self determination within the borders of the old British mandate, based upon the Balfour Declaration of 1917. All Arab countries unilaterally rejected Jewish self determination; on the day following the UN 2/3rd vote, David Ben Gurion issued the declaration of the new nations national Independence. On that same day, 5 Arab armies from different countries invaded the newly declared state named Israel, with the intent to complete the Nazi Holocaust. Arab leaders instructed the civilian Arabs to withdrawal from the lands of Israel, to get out of the way of the victorious Arab armies.

                  The Arabs failed to throw the Jews into the Sea, but not without trying. The Arabs who obeyed their Arab leaders and fled, became stateless refugees, which the UN offered assistance that extends to this very moment and day! Post Israeli Independence victory, in hysteria virtually all Arab and Muslim countries unilaterally expelled all Jews living in their countries. The difference between Israel and Arab/Muslim countries, Israel not only repatriated these, some 800,000 Jews expelled from Arab and Muslim countries, but it equally repatriated Arabs who remained within the Jewish state and gave this Arab minority population citizen rights! Not any other Arab or Muslim country repatriated their Arab refugee populations! Not Lebanon, Not Syria, Not Jordan, Not Egypt, Not Iraq, the 5 Arab countries who invaded the Jewish state on the same day as Ben Gurion declared Jewish independence and named the new nation – Israel.

                  The Arab countries have yet to repatriate their Arab refugee populations. UN refugee camps for Balestinians exist across the Middle East to this very day!

                  Like

                • From this perspective – stateless refugees have no rights.

                  It seems to have escaped you that the “perspective” in question is that of the Nazis, and that it’s the perspective on which all of your comments here are based. From that Orwellian “perspective,” the slogan “Never Again” actually means, “Encore!”

                  Like

                • Now the church like the Balestinians, exists as stateless refugees. We Jews have reconquered our ancient homelands. Xtians rot in exile/g’lut waiting for the 2nd coming of Jesus son of Zeus.

                  Like

                • “I have an Arabic name, ‘Irfan.’”

                  “Irfan”? Holy cannoli! All this time I thought your name was “Irving.”

                  But the fact that your Arabic name begins with ” ‘ayn” does lend support to the theory that It Usually Begins With ‘ayn.

                  Liked by 2 people

                • Dave Schmidtz did once refer to me, in a seminar, as “Irving Khawaja.” The trouble it would have saved if that had actually been my name…

                  The last line of your comment wins the PoT Prize for Blog Comment Humor for 2020.

                  Like

                • Germany initiated to European Civil Wars. Prussia no longer exists as a German state. Today Prussia, its part of Poland. Post WW2 the Allies unilaterally expelled some 15 to 18 million Germans from Poland and the Czech state. Berlin they divided.

                  The Jewish state, its about the size of the State of New Jersey! Germany about the size of a 1/3rd of the US other than Alaska. Ever here of the post Shoah Jewish declaration — Never Again? It refers to the European ‘Final Solution’. The EU seeks to negate the Israeli victory of the 1967 Six Day war. If their “2 State solution” can negate the 1967 victory whose to say that these Holocaust perpetrator States would not then attempt to negate the 1948 Israeli victory. Never Again – Europeans States have no say in determining the borders of the Jewish State any more that post WW2 Britain and France have the authority to again divide the Czech state as Chamberlain unilaterally did in 1938, waiving his scrap of papers declaring “Peace in our times”.

                  Like

              • “Roderick your personal political tastes do not give you Israeli citizenship any more than you can vote in Russia b/c of your socialist leanings. … Making an abracodabra declaration does not pull rabbits out of hats nor makes virtually all the nation states in existence across the planet cease to exist.”

                Um … okay. I’m aware that I’m not an Israeli citizen. I’m aware that I cannot make nation-states cease to exist by reciting abra cadabra. I literally have no clue what your point is in reciting these obvious, but not obviously relevant, facts.

                Like

                • From this perspective – stateless refugees have no rights.

                  That sounds like a pretty awful perspective. Certainly it’s one that had catastrophically lethal consequences in the 20th century. So it seems like a perspective that nobody should adopt, or promote, or tolerate in political movements or regimes.

                  Ya can not have one set of rules applied to Jews and a completely different set of rules applied to non Jews – that’s outright racism.

                  Sure. As with any inconsitency, this one can be resolved in either of two ways: if you have the same principle in two different cases, to be consistent you could deny it twice. Or you could affirm it twice. So, in the interest of consistency, why not adopt an ethical perspective that universalizes respect for the human rights of stateless refugees, whether Jews or Gentiles? Rather than adopting the (admittedly consistent) perspective that no stateless refugees have any rights that Might is bound to respect? Robbery and enslavement and mass murder are injustices; as a rule, I do not generally think that if one group of people is robbed or enslaved or murdered en masse, then other groups of people ought to endure the same later. (You know, just to be fair.) Do you? If so, why in the world do you believe that?

                  Like

                • Respect for human rights etc. Unlike the sub human European barbarians who have committed war crimes throughout their bloody history against minority groups, Google what the vile king of Belgium did in Africa, how the British initiated concentration camps during the Boer War, how Europeans treat gypsies in Europe today in the 21st century! Israel places no restrictions upon Arab attendance to Israeli Universities. Arabs have sat in Israeli Knesset Cabinets, they have a justice on the Israeli Supreme Court, they have citizenship. Such respect Arab countries never showed Jewish refugees in their countries.

                  Like

                • I agree that King Leopold’s conduct in the Congo Free State, the conduct of the British in the Anglo-Boer Wars (as well as the conduct of the both the British colonists and the Dutch/Afrikaaner settlers in South Africa more generally), and the widespread treatment of Romani peoples in many European countries are all pretty awful, and all of them violations of the human rights of their respective victims. (I don’t need to “google” these things to know or form a judgment about them.) I don’t think these crimes were committed by “sub humans” (they were done by human beings who could and should have been held morally responsible for their crimes against humanity), nor by “barbarians” (they were committed by people in power within affluent, highly urbanized nation-states and global empires; if you just meant “barbarian” loosely, to mean that they were violent thugs, — or I guess if you meant it classically, to mean that they were not Hellenes — then that much is certainly true). Nor were they committed by “the Europeans” collectively, either one at a time or all of them together at once. They were committed by specific, identifiable European individuals and political institutions. The folks who did these things merit condemnation for doing them, and should have been stopped from doing them at the time.

                  That seems like a pretty good reason to say that some European people and political institutions have been very bad at respecting the human rights of both (a) stateless refugees and migrants and also (b) settled indigenous peoples. Their victims had human rights that should have been respected but were not — to the infamy of those who violated those rights. It’s not much of a reason for any righteous person to conclude that Palestinian Arabs (either Arab citizens of Israel, or Palestinians living under occupation in the West Bank or Gaza) ought to be treated as having less human rights (let alone no rights) against the political might of a victorious state. You can resolve a double standard by defining standards of decency and humanity down to the lowest level, and excusing violence in one group because others have gotten away with it. Or you can resolve it by defining standards up for everyone, and rejecting the excuses for unjust violence on all sides. A righteous person would do the latter, not help themselves to excuses based on the former.

                  Liked by 1 person

        • Worked with Arabs in Beer Sheva. At that place of employment, we had a Jewish worker by the name of Pennie. Arabs can not pronounce the letter P, so everyone referred to Pennie by the name Bennie.

          Like

          • My father once had an appointment with a Palestinian colleague who, when he arrived, called to say that he was waiting in the “barking lot.” (My father, ever the wit, asked him what he was doing. A: “Barking.”) So yes, I’m more than familiar with the phenomenon. But I have plenty of Palestinian friends who refer without the slightest difficulty to “Pakistan,” “Paris,” Pepsi,” and “Dave Chappelle.” You’re trafficking in mythology. Arabs don’t lack the “ability” to pronounce the “p” sound, as though they suffered from some genetic quirk that rendered them incapable of doing so.

            Like

              • In other words, you’re now disavowing your own first reason for referring to Palestinians as “Balestinians.” The reason was that “Arabs can not pronounce the letter P.” Now, it turns out that they can, but only when they have a reason to do so. The Palestinians I was referring to live in Jerusalem and the West Bank. They didn’t have scatter very far to do what you said they couldn’t.

                We’re left with your other reason for referring to them as “Balestinians”: you want to mock them as rightless persons. So one reason was pseudo-linguistic, the other authentically nihilistic. Thanks for putting it on the record–whoever you are.

                Like

  5. I’ve come to the conclusion that “mosckerr” is either unwilling or unable to engage in consequent discourse here, since every attempt at engagement is met with a flurry of cryptic irrelevancies and evasions. I shall feed this troll no longer.

    Like

        • No. You have refused to address the issues which my comments have introduced. If you do not wish to discuss the issue, that’s your choice, but its dishonest to simply declare Quote/UnQuote: “He’s full of shit”, without bringing specifics as to what you disagree with.

          Like

          • Already did raise specifics on a relatively trivial issue, and your arguments are pure nonsense even there. A person who starts out by denying on blatantly fallacious grounds that people have equal rights isn’t worth arguing with. Your views internalize Nazi principles under the cover of opposing them. It’s too late in human history to waste time arguing with such people. I don’t “wish” to discuss the issue with you because your arguments are not worth discussing.

            Like

      • The problem with these ignorant reactionary Goyim, they fail (F) to differentiate between external event of foreign nations with their internal reactionary emotions and feelings. Irfan, for example, suffers from indigestion: “full of shit”, and projects his feelings of bloating upon me. Dude take some Pepto-Bismol, and directly address the issues which I raised. Making personal attacks upon me, this non logic has a name: Ad hominem.

        Like

        • Note: Ad hominem is a fallacy only if it’s part of an argument. Irfan wasn’t offering mosckerr an *argument* for anything, he was simply making a judgment, and he was addressing me, not mosckerr. And he didn’t need to justify his judgment to me because I’d already made clear that, and why, I agreed with it.

          Like

            • “Policy of Truth”. A nice declaration of rhetoric. What distinguishes truth from accuracy? We Jews, some of us – at least, 2 Jews 3 opinions and 4 synagogues – define the term truth as path. Path translates into the Hebrew term Halachah. After Napoleon freed European Jewry from the criminal Catholic church imposed ghettos, a crime imposed upon European Jewry for some 3 centuries, notice no Goy ever condemned the Catholic church for this vile war crime committed against humanity! So much for European “justice” as truth.

              We can all perhaps agree that Xtianity has no connection what so ever with truth. So how do ya’ll secular Goyim define truth? This particular Jew, an atheist praise God – the Gods i cannot at all comprehend any more than an ant can communicate in English. I simply do not know. Not a chemist or a physic major but my ignorance of these fields does not give me the authority to negate what they say. To do so equals hubris arrogance. Therefore “Halachah” defines truth as a path. You Roderick T. Long walk down a path of life as do I. But its hubris arrogance for you to negate the path of life which I walk upon and visa versa.

              Like

              • “notice no Goy ever condemned the Catholic church for this vile war crime committed against humanity”

                LOL. Condemnation of the Jews is pretty standard on all sides. “No Goy,” indeed. And you wonder why people think you’re full of shit.

                But I’m letting myself succumb to feeding the troll. Time to stop.

                “its hubris arrogance for you to negate the path of life which I walk upon and visa versa.”

                You are free to walk down your path of life. Enjoy your journey. Good-bye.

                Like

    • Roderick, by your own admission, my posting upon your blog, quite extensive and detailed. To date never received any substantive discussion upon my long response, other than you said you looked forward to read it. How can peoples from different countries address complex issues if foreigners like yourself don’t even take the time to read responses given in precise detail?

      Like

      • Talking about others, you point out correctly that Irfan addressed you with his ‘judgment’ that i was full of shit. Some Yidden, the Yiddish word for Jews, define talking to others with intent to degrade some third party other, myself in this particular case, as slander. Slander and hubris arrogance they go together. Tick Tock.

        Like

        • Don’t stop.

          I’ve blocked you, but with persistence like yours, who knows? Maybe you’ll break through. Your namesake Moses made it through the Red Sea, after all. No doubt you were put on this Earth for equally miraculous deeds. B’ezrat HaShem.

          Like

Leave a Reply to Irfan Khawaja Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s