NOVANEWS
“Just like America is for the Americans, England is for the English, I want the Jewish state to be for the Jews.” [Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, below in Christian Science Monitor report re letter forbidding rental and sale of Jewish property to Arabs, item 3]
============
Dear Friends,
The above statement has a major flaw: Citizens and residents in America and England, just as in most Western countries, are not of any single race, religion, or ethnic group. That is an enormous difference from the Israel that the Rabbi wants. For an America to be for Americans means that he/she can be of and for any race, religion, and ethnicity, and be for people of any race, religion, and ethnicity, so long as they are citizens or residents of America, which indeed does include many if not most if not all races, religions, and ethnic groups. Someone should point out the flaw in the Rabbi’s argument. He wants Israel to be solely for one religious/ethnic group: Jews. Not so in America nor in England. America is not for Catholics only, or whites only, nor is England for Protestants only.
=============
As for the below, all except 1 of the 5 items relate directly or indirectly to the letter by the Israeli Rabbis forbidding rental and sales of property in Jewish communities to Arabs. That letter now numbers about 250 signatories, all Israeli Rabbis.
I begin with the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, because, as you read the item following the Nuremberg Laws I would like you to consider the question of how close is Israel today to the spirit of those laws?
Item 2 is the Arutz Sheva (Station 7) report on the law opposing sale and rental of Jewish property to Arabs. Arutz 7 is a far right-wing station. It’s opinions follow suit. Thus, it will be easy for you to ponder as you read it, how far is the spirit of the Rabbis letter from the Nuremberg Racist Laws.
Item 3 is a more balanced report of the letter by the Christian Science Monitor.
Item 4 is brief and to the point. Israel will make it more difficult for UNRWA and obviously also for Palestinians to enter Jerusalem from the West Bank. Ah yes, Israel does want peace, hmmmmmm? Actions, my friends, not words make deeds!
Item 5 is a longish article by that chief Nazi propagandist Joseph Gobbles. It contains not many more lies than does the Arutz 7 report about the causes that brought into being the Rabbis letter.
Still hoping for better times,
Dorothy
==============================================
1. Nazi Racial Legislation: The Nuremberg Laws
http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob14.html
One of the earliest statements of the Nazi party–the policy document of 1920 known as the Twenty-Five Points–explicitly foreshadowed the exclusion of Jews from German citizenship (Point 4).Thus, as soon as Hitler came to power in 1933, no time was lost in proceeding against Germany’s Jewish citizens. In the early months of the regime, they were prey to unbridled violence by Party activists during the so-called Brown Terror. Officially, steps were immediately taken to dismiss Jews from the civil service, reduce their number in the professions, and curtail the students in schools and colleges. Partly as a ploy to bring order to the shameless Party activism against inoffensive citizens and to clarify the regime’s attitude to German Jewry, the two measures outlined below were passed at a meeting of the Party Congress at Nuremberg on Sept. 15, 1935.
Two of the laws are outlined below. The third, the Reich Flag Act, decreed the new German national flag to be the Nazi swastika flag.
Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor
September 15, 1935
Firm in the knowledge that the purity of German blood is the basis for the survival of the German people and inspired by the unshakeable determination to safeguard the future of the German nation, the Reichstag has unanimously resolved upon the following law, which is promulgated herewith:
Section 1
Marriages between Jews and citizens of German or some related blood are forbidden.
Such marriages contracted despite the law are invalid, even if they take place abroad in order to avoid the law.
Section 2
Sexual relations outside marriage between Jews and citizens of German or related blood are forbidden.
Section 3
Jews will not be permitted to employ female citizens of German or related blood who are under 45 years as housekeepers.
Section 4
1. Jews are forbidden to raise the national flag or display the national colors.
2. However, they are allowed to display the Jewish colors. The exercise of this right is protected by the State.
Section 5
1. Anyone who disregards Section 1 is liable to penal servitude.
2. Anyone who disregards the prohibition of Section 2 will be punished with imprisonment or penal servitude.
3. Anyone who disregards the provisions of Sections 3 or 4 will be punished with imprisonment up to one year or with a fine, or with one of these penalties.
. . . .
The Reich Citizenship Law, 1935
Article 1
Section 1
A German subject is one who is a member of the protective union of the German Reich and is bound to it by special obligations. . . .
Section 2
1. A Reich citizen is that subject who is of German or related blood only and who through his behavior demonstrates that he is ready and able to serve faithfully the German people and Reich.
2. The right to citizenship of the Reich is acquired by the grant of citizenship papers.
3. A citizen of the Reich is the sole bearer of full political rights as provided by the law.
In the subsequent clarifying regulation of Nov. 14, 1935, a Jew was defined as anyone who was descended from: (a) at least three racially full Jewish grandparents or (b) two full Jewish parents if he or she belonged to the Jewish religious community (i.e., an observing Jew); was married to a Jewish person; was the offspring of a full Jew (as defined in a.) or the offspring of an extramarital relationship with a full Jew. Neither could a Jew be a citizen of the Reich, vote or hold public office.
Incidentally, persons of mixed Jewish blood (i.e., half-Jews–with one or two Jewish grandparents) were absolved from these restrictions, though, again, Jewish observance tightened the restrictions.
==========================================
2. Arutz Sheva,
December 9 2010 2 Tevet,5771
Rabbis May Draft ‘Softer’ Decree Regarding Houses for Arabs
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/news.aspx/141075
by Gil Ronen
Follow Israel news on and .
Two hundred and fifty rabbis have reportedly joined fifty others who signed a Halachic (Jewish-legal) decree forbidding Jews to sell or rent out homes to Arabs. The signatories include dozens of city and community rabbis who are employed by the state.
The Halachic decree comes in the wake of years in which Arabs have flooded Jewish neighborhoods and towns, changing the demographic status quo and often terrorizing the local Jews, while violently expelling any Jew who attempts to live in Arab villages.
The Arab influx is accompanied by deliberate buy-ups of land by foreign Arabs. Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority broadcasts target Arab citizens of Israel and incite them against the state as part of the PA’s war on Israel.
Rabbi Chaim Druckman, Head of the Bnei Akiva Yeshivas, has expressed support for the spirit of the rabbis’ decree while not signing it himself. He reportedly is hammering out a softer version of the decree, that will refrain from explicitly forbidding sale to Arabs.
Liberal and leftist elements in Israel are in an uproar over the decree, and claim that it constitutes racism. Attorney-General Yehudah Weinstein said Thursday that he is looking into the possible ‘criminal aspects’ of the letter, after MK Ilan Gilon of Meretz asked him to. He is not expected to prosecute the rabbis, however.
President Shimon Peres attacked the rabbis for bringing about “a fundamental moral crisis in the State of Israel regarding the essence and content of the state as a Jewish and democratic one.”
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu also came out against the decree. “How would we feel if they said not to sell apartments to Jews?” he asked rhetorically.
About 20 residents of the community of Meitar in the Negev held a protest outside the home of Rabbi Moshe Bigel, the community’s rabbi, after he signed the decree. Their spokesman compared the decree to anti-Semitic decrees in foreign lands. Interviewed on Channel 1 TV, Bigel stood behind his decision to sign the decree. He noted, however, that it expressed his opinion as a rabbi, but was not intended to express the position of his community.
Rabbi Dov Shalom Wolpe of Our Land of Israel told the TV reporter that he would happily be “the first to go to jail” over the matter.
=======================
3. The Christian Science Monitor – CSMonitor.com Thursday,
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/news.aspx/141075
Rabbis tell Israeli Jews not to rent to Arabs; even Holocaust museum frowns
The call from hundreds of rabbis on Jews not to rent or sell real estate to Arabs, a 20 percent minority, has sparked a heated debate over Israel’s dual ideals of Judaism and democracy.
An apartment building is shown in the city of Tzfat in this June 1, 2009 file photo. The move to discourage transactions with Arabs began in October in the northern Israel city of Tzfat, where the chief rabbi, Shmuel Eliyahu, called on residents not to rent apartments to Arab students enrolled at a college in the city.
(Linda D. Epstein/MCT/Newscom/File)
——————————————————————————–
By Joshua Mitnick, Correspondent
posted December 9, 2010
Tel Aviv —
Hundreds of prominent Israeli rabbis have signed a religious opinion calling on Jews not to rent or sell real estate to Arabs, sparking public uproar and debate over the essence of Judaism and its place in Israel’s democracy.
The statement, supported by many state-employed municipal chief rabbis, insists there is a Torah ban on land transactions with “foreigners” in the Land of Israel. Peppered with biblical citations, it includes a passage warning of a negative impact on property values from selling to non-Jews. “Their way of life is different from ours, and our oppressors are among them,” the statement says.
The religious opinion reflects a confluence of several related trends: growing alienation between Jews and the country’s one-fifth Arab minority, a shift of public sentiment toward ultra-nationalist political parties, and growing radicalization among the leaders of Israel’s nationalist religious movement who challenge the secular foundations of the government.
RELATED: Q&A: Why only 51 percent of Israelis support equal rights for Arab minority
“These things in the past wouldn’t be acceptable in Israeli society,” says Yair Ettinger, a reporter for the liberal Haaretz newspaper who covers the Orthodox religious community. “But now even though it’s not politically correct, people allow themselves to say things in public that you wouldn’t even dare to say in a private synagogue. It’s a big change.”
Holocaust memorial denounces the letter
Publication of the opinion sparked denunciations from leading Jewish institutions such as the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial authority and top functionaries, while philosophers and jurists have taken to the airwaves to argue that the rabbis were perpetuating discrimination while ignoring many of more universal concepts in Jewish tradition.
“Their statement shames the Jewish people,” said parliament speaker Reuven Rivlin. “A person cannot say that, in the name of the Jewish state, he is permitted to discriminate or set up a dividing line between one citizen and another, or between a citizen and a resident, or even between a citizen and a guest.”
Israeli Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein on Thursday launched a legal assessment to determine whether the letter is criminal, while Yad Vashem criticized it as a “severe blow” to Jewish values.
“We know that the Jewish people, that knew suffering and persecution and experienced ostracism and the revocation of basic rights, has expressed its stance on matters such as these with voices different than those we have heard today with this [ruling],” said Yad Vashem, also on Thursday.
How the letter began
The move to discourage transactions with Arabs began in October in the northern Israel city of Tzfat, where the chief rabbi, Shmuel Eliyahu, called on residents not to rent apartments to Arab students enrolled at a college in the city. That call was formalized into a religious ruling distributed among clerics in public positions.
Rabbinic signatories to the letter insisted that the legal opinion does not promote discrimination, but rather aims to protect Jews’ hold on cities and the country from non-Jewish encroachment. They argued that in a case of a clash between the religious law and secular laws of the state, the former should prevail.
“I have a vision that there will be a Jewish state. There can be non-Jews and we need to treat them nicely, but we need to maintain a big Jewish majority,” says Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, a signatory who rejects allegations of racism. “We don’t need to strengthen their hold on the land. It’s not a secret that they want to annex our state. Just like America is for the Americans, REngland is for the English, I want the Jewish state to be for the Jews.”
Rabbi Yuval Sherlow, the head of a religious seminary, criticizes the letter, saying it reflects a drive to challenge Israel’s secular democratic principles while emphasizing the religious character of the state. “One of the ways to do that is to isolate non-Jews.”
Only a limited number of prominent rabbis have come out against the letter.
Mining Jewish tradition
The theological debate is rooted in the vast canon of texts and rabbinic commentary that can be employed in support of both universalist and chauvinistic values, says Yossi Klein Halevi, a fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, which promotes pluralistic Jewish thought in Israel.
“The job for Jewish spiritual leaders in Israel,” he says, “is to mine Jewish tradition and find a stream of thought that will substantiate a modern Israeli Judaism that is worthy of a people with sovereignty and power rather than a helpless ghettoized people sustaining itself on fantasies of revenge against the Gentiles.”
===================================
4. Forwarded by Sam Bahour
“The Israeli authorities have informed us to expect from next year a further tightening of access restrictions between East Jerusalem and the West Bank. This will affect the work of UNRWA and other agencies, but it is the Palestinians who will, as always, pay the highest price in human and material terms, as the bonds of commerce, residence, kinship and culture that have been nurtured over the centuries are placed under unbearable strain. Many refugees – 70,000 in East Jerusalem alone – will be once again among those affected by this perpetuation of injustice.”
http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=858 ___
=======================================
5. http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb18.htm
Background: This is Goebbel’s lead article from Das Reich, dated 20 July 1941, shortly after the invasion of the Soviet Union began. It is one of his more vehemt anti-Semitic tirades.
The source: Die Zeit ohne Beispiel (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1941).
Mimicry
by Joseph Goebbels
The Jews are masters at fitting in to their surroundings, without in any way changing their nature. They are mimics. They have a natural instinct that senses danger, and their drive for self-preservation usually gives them the proper ways and means to escape danger at no risk to their lives or need for courage. It is difficult to detect their sly and slippery ways. One has to be an experienced student of the Jews to recognize what is happening. Their response when they have been uncovered is simple and primitive. It displays a perfidious shamelessness that is successful because one usually does not think it possible to be so shameless. Schopenauer once said that the Jew is the master of the lie. He is such an expert on twisting the truth that he can tell his innocent opponent the exact opposite of the truth even on the plainest matter in the world. He does this with such astonishing impudence that the listener becomes uncertain, at which point the Jew has usually won.
The Jews call this chutzpah. Chutzpah is a typically Jewish expression that really cannot be translated into any other language, since chutzpah is a concept found only among the Jews. Other languages have not needed to invent such a word, since they do not know the phenomenon. Basically, it means unlimited, impertinent and unbelievable impudence and shamelessness.
As long as we had the doubtful pleasure of having to put up with Jews, we had more then enough examples of the typical Jewish characteristic they call chutzpah. Cowards became heroes and decent, industrious and brave men became contemptible idiots or fools. Fat and sweaty stockbrokers presented themselves as communists saving the world, and decent soldiers were characterized as beasts. Normal families were mocked as breeding pens, while group marriages were praised as the highest form of human development. The most disgusting junk the human mind could create was presented as great art while real art was ridiculed as Kitsch. The murderer was not guilty, but rather his victim.
It was a system of public deception that, when applied long enough, lames a people both culturally and spiritually and over time strangles any kind of defense. Before National Socialism, Germany was in the midst of such deadly danger. Had our people not come to its senses at the last possible moment, our country would have been ripe for Bolshevism, the most devilish infection the Jews can bring upon a people.
Bolshevism too is an expression of Jewish chutzpah. Turbulent Jewish party leaders and clever Jewish capitalists managed the most shameless coup one can imagine. They mobilized the so-called proletariat to class struggle by ruthlessly exploiting real or imagined problems. Their goal was total Jewish domination. The crassest plutocracy used socialism to establish the crassest financial dictatorship. A world revolution was to expand this experiment from the Soviet Union to the rest of the world. The result would have been Jewish world domination.
The National Socialist revolution was a death blow to this attempt. Once international Jewry realized that agitation was no longer sufficient to take over the various European nations, they decided to wait for a war. They wanted it to last as long as possible, so that at its end they could institute Bolshevist terror and force on a weakened, drained and impotent Europe. This had been the goal of Moscow’s Bolshevists from the beginning of the war. They wanted to join in only when easy and safe victory was assured, meanwhile holding down sufficient German forces to keep Germany from a decisive victory in the West. One can imagine the howls of rage in the Kremlin as they realized one Sunday morning that the Führer’s sword had cut through their web of lies and intrigues.
Until then the Jewish Bolshevist leaders had cleverly kept in the background, probably in the mistaken belief they could fool us. Litwinov and Kaganowitsch were hardly seen in public. Behind the scenes, however, they were about their dastardly work. They tried to persuade us that the Jewish Bolshevists in Moscow and the Jewish plutocrats in London and Washington were enemies. Secretly, however, they were planning to strangle us. That is proven by the fact that they made up with each other the moment their devilish game was revealed. The ignorant peoples on both sides who surely were astonished at such a sight were calmed down by tactful measures.
In Moscow, for example, the Jews abolished the Atheist Federation, even though it had been a matter of honor only a few days earlier for leading Soviet bigwigs to belong to it. Religious freedom was now guaranteed in the entire Soviet Union. Lying news items were spread in the world press announcing that praying was once more allowed in the churches, among other swindles. The English could not quite bring themselves to play the Internationale on the radio every night, since in Mr. Eden’s interesting distinction the Bolshevists were not allies, only fellow combatants. The Internationale would have been a bit too strong for the British people at the moment, but they are hard at work presenting Stalin as a great statesman and wonderful social reformer who can be compared only to Churchill. They are doing their best to find other similarities as well between the glorious democracies in Moscow and London.
Remarkably, they are not all that far from the truth in this regard. They look different only to those who do not know much. To experts, they are as alike as two peas in a pod. The same Jews are at work, whether on stage or behind the scenes. When they pray in Moscow and sing the Internationale in Moscow, they are doing what Jews have always done. They are practicing mimicry. They adjust to the conditions around them, slowly, step by step, so as not to unsettle or awaken others. They are angry at us for uncovering them. They know we recognize them for what they are.
The Jew is secure only when he can remain hidden. He loses his balance when he senses that someone sees through him. The experienced Jewish expert immediately sees in the insults and complaints the familiar Old Testament outbursts of hate. They have come our way so often that they have lost every element of originality. They are only of psychological interest to us. We wait calmly until Jewish rage has reached its epitome. Then they start falling apart. They spout nonsense, and suddenly betray themselves
The material on Radio Moscow or Radio London and the articles that appear in the Bolshevist and plutocratic organs are simply indescribable. London always gives priority to Moscow, which allows it to preserve good manners and blend into the landscape. Moscow’s Jews invent lies and atrocities, the London Jews cite them and blend them into stories suitable for the innocent bourgeois. They do it only from professional obligation, naturally. The dreadful crimes in Lembert that horrified the entire world were of course not committed by the Bolshevists, but rather were an invention of the Propaganda Ministry. It is quite irrelevant that German newsreels made the proof available to the entire world. Obviously we suppress the arts and sciences, whereas Bolshevism is a true center of culture, civilization and humanity. We personally were pleased at a recent statement by Radio Moscow. It was so absurd and despicable that it was almost flattering.
We assume the Jewish speaker recalls the good old days in Berlin. Unless they have a very short memory, they must recall that all their insults will only lead to a thrashing at the end. Every evening they announce that they want punch our nose, us and all the other Nazi pigs. Sure, you want to, but doing it is something rather different, gentlemen! The whole affair has a certain tragicomic tone. The Jews talk as if they were really strong, but soon they have to move their tents and run like rabbits from the approaching German soldiers. Qui mange du juif, en meurt!
One could almost say that anyone with the Jews on their side has already lost. They are the best pillar of the coming defeat. They carry the seed of destruction. They hoped this war would bring the last desperate blow against National Socialist Germany and an awakening Europe. They will collapse. Already today we begin to hear the cries of the desperate and seduced peoples throughout the world”
“The Jews are guilty! The Jews are guilty!”
The court that will pronounce judgment on them will be fearful. We do not need to do anything ourselves. It will come because it must come.
Just as the fist of an awakened Germany has struck this racial filth, the fist of an awakened Europe will surely follow. Mimicry will not help the Jews then. They will have to face their accusers. The court of the nations will judge their oppressor.
Without pity or forgiveness, the blow will strike. The world enemy will fall, and Europe will have peace.
[Page copyright © 1998 by Randall Bytwerk. No unauthorized reproduction. My email address is available on theFAQ page.]
