Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Israel approves settlement growth
news.bbc.co.uk — Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has approved a plan to build up to 750 new homes in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Oh yeah, Israel wants peace...
Kizilbash- 25 diggs
- digg it
- yellowcakewalk, on 03/09/2008, -3/+6They have been stealing land from Palestinians since they first arrived in Palestine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho
And killing Palestinians - Zionist4U, on 03/09/2008, -4/+2The Mandate for Palestine granted Jews the irrevocable right to settle anywhere in Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, a right unaltered in international law and valid to this day. Jewish settlements in Judea, Samaria (i.e., the West Bank), Gaza and the whole of Jerusalem are legal.
- Kizilbash, on 03/09/2008, -3/+3The Mandate for Palestine blah blah blah, Palestine was a British colony, there is nothing legal about his *****.
- DeepState, on 03/10/2008, -2/+2nutty zionists
- Tangaroa, on 03/10/2008, -1/+1How many homes have the stateless Arabs built? Does anyone track these numbers? There sure doesn't seem to be much complaining about them.
- caferrell, on 03/10/2008, -0/+3How many have they built in Israel? How many Palestinian homes have the Israelis bulldozed?
You are very adept at using half truths and ***** to decieve, but you find people a little more wordly than the average American here on digg, although the Zionist gang is very adept at organizing the bury brigade to stifle any discussion that might show the conflict in the light of reality. For evidence note that zionist4u had his cute little website kicked off of digg last week.
By the way, althought it has not gotten any play in the media it is interesting that the seminary that was attacked last week is the Mercaz Harav yeshiva in the Kiryat Moshe quarter at the entrance of Jerusalem, a well-known center of Jewish studies identified with the leadership of the Jewish settlement movement in the West Bank.
What would you all say if Israeli soldiers shot up a Hamas educational facility. They would have been terminating terrorists, right?
- caferrell, on 03/10/2008, -0/+3How many have they built in Israel? How many Palestinian homes have the Israelis bulldozed?
- qazima, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2TOLERANT ISLAM
There is a very general and very deep-rooted misconception that the Holy Qur’an preaches intolerance, and that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) preached his faith with the sword in one hand and the Holy Qur’an in the other. Misrepresentation could go no further. The basic principle of Islam, a faith in all the Prophets of the world, is enough to give the lie to this allegation.
The great and liberal mind that preached not only love and respect for the founders of the great religions of the world, but much more than that-faith in them-could not shrink down to the narrowness of intolerance for those very religions. Tolerance is not in fact the word that can sufficiently indicate the breadth of the attitude of Islam to other religions. It preaches equal love for all, equal respect for all, and equal faith in all.
Again, intolerance could not be ascribed to a book which excludes compulsion from the sphere of religion altogether. “Let there be no compulsion in religion,” (2:256), it lays down in the clearest words. In fact, the Holy Qur’an is full of statements showing that belief in this
or that religion is a person’s own concern, and that he is given the choice to adopt one way or another: that if he accepts truth, it is for his own good and that if he sticks to error, it is to his own detriment.
Given below are a few of these quotations:
“We showed him the Way: whether he be grateful or ungrateful (rests on his will).” (76:3)
“...The Truth is from your Lord: let him who will, believe, and let him who will, reject (it)...” (18:29)
“Now have come to you, from your Lord, proofs (to open your eyes): If any will see, it will be for (the good of) his own soul; if any will be blind, it will be to his own (harm)...” (6:104)
“If ye did well, ye did well for yourselves; if ye did evil, (ye did it) against yourselves....” (17:7).
The Muslims were allowed to fight indeed, but what was the object? Not to compel the unbelievers to accept Islam, for it was against all the broad principles in which they had been hitherto brought up. No, it was to establish religious freedom, to stop all religious persecution, to protect the houses of worship of all religions, mosques among them. Here are a few quotations:
“...Had not Allah checked one set of people by means of another there would surely have been pulled won monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure....” (22:40)
“And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah” (2:193)
“And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevails justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere...” (8:39)
Under what conditions was the permission to fight given to the Muslims? Every student of Islamic history knows that the Holy Prophet and his companions were subjected to the severest persecutions as Islam began to gain ground at Mecca; over a hundred of them fled to Abyssinia, but persecution grew more relentless still. Ultimately the Muslims had to
take refuge in Medina, but they were not left alone even there, and the sword was taken up by the enemy to annihilate Islam and the Muslims altogether.
The Holy Qur’an bears express testimony to this: “To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged-and verily, Allah is Most Powerful for their aid-(they are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right-(for no cause) except that they say, ‘Our Lord is Allah.’...” (22:39-40).
Later, the express condition was laid down: “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.” (2:190). The Holy Qur’an, therefore, allowed fighting only to save a persecuted community from powerful oppressors, and hence the condition was laid down that fighting was to be stopped as soon as persecution ceased: “But if they cease, Allah is oft-forgiving, most merciful. And fight them on no more until there is no more tumult or oppression...” (2:192-3).
If the enemy offered peace, peace was to be accepted, though the enemy’s intention
may be only to deceive the Muslims: “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is the One that heareth and knoweth (all things). Should they intend to deceive thee-verily Allah sufficeth thee: He it is that hath strengthened thee with His aid...” (8:61-2).
The Prophet made treaties of peace with his enemies; one such treaty brought about the famous truce of Hudaibiyyah, the terms of which were not only disadvantageous, but also humiliating to the Muslims. According to the terms of this treaty, if an unbeliever, being converted to Islam, went over the Muslims he was to be returned, but if Muslim went over to the unbelievers, he was not to be given back to the Muslims. This term of the treaty cuts at the root of all allegations of the use of force by the Holy Prophet. It also shows the strong conviction of the Holy Prophet that neither would Muslims go back to unbelief, nor would the new converts to Islam be deterred from embracing Islam because the Prophet gave them no shelter. And these expectations proved true, for while not a single Muslim deserted Islam, a large number came over to Islam, and being refused shelter at Medina formed a colony of their own in neutral territory.
It is a mistake to suppose that the conditions related above were abrogated at any time. The condition to fight “with those who fight with you” remained in force to the last. The last expedition led by the Holy Prophet was the famous Tabuk expedition, and every historian of Islam knows that though the Holy Prophet had marched a very long distance to Tabuk at
the head of an army of thirty thousand, yet when he found that the enemy did not fulfill the condition laid down above, he returned, and did not allow his troops to attack the enemy territory.
Nor is there a single direction in the latest revelation on this subject in Chapter 9, the immunity that goes against this condition. The opening verse of that chapter speaks expressly of “...pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances,” and then in verse 4 excepts from its purview “...those pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided anyone against you,” thus showing clearly that the “immunity” related only to such idolatrous tries as had first made agreements with the Muslims and then violating them, killed and persecuted the Muslims wherever they found them, as verse 10 says expressly: “In a believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant!” Such people are also spoken of in an earlier revelation: “They are those with whom thou didst make a covenant, but they break their covenant every time...” (8:56).
Further on, in chapter 9, the condition of the enemy attacking the Muslims first is plainly repeated: “Will you not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took to aggression by being the first (to assault) you?” So from the first to the last, the Holy Qur’an allowed fighting only against those who fought the Muslims first; it allowed expressly only fighting in defense without which the Muslims could not live, and it clearly forbade aggressive war.
The waging of war on unbelievers to compel them to accept Islam is a myth pure and simple, a thing unknown to the Holy Qur’an. It was the enemy that waged war on the Muslims to turn them away from their religion as the Holy Book so clearly asserts: “...Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith if they can....” (2:217).
It is sometimes asserted that the Holy Qur’an forbids relations of friendship with the followers of other religions. How could a book which allows a man to have as his comrade in life, a woman, following another religion (5:5), say in the same breath that no friendly relations can be had with the followers of other religions? The loving relation of husband
and wife is the friendliest of all relations, and when this is expressly permitted, there is not the least reason to suppose that other friendly relations are forbidden.
The fact is, that wherever there is a prohibition against making friends with other people, it relates only to the people who were at war with Muslims, and this is plainly stated in the Holy Qur’an: “Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: For Allah loveth those who are just. Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances) that do wrong.” (60: 8-9).
Another widely prevailing misconception may also be noted here. It is generally thought that the Qur’an provides a death sentence for those who desert the religion of Islam. Anyone who takes the trouble to read the Holy Qur’an will see that there is not the least ground for such a supposition. The Holy Qur’an speaks repeatedly of people going back to
unbelief after believing, but never once does it say that they should be killed or punished. I give here a few quotations:
“...And if any of you turn back from their faith and die in unbelief, their works will bear no fruit in this life and in the Hereafter...” (2:217)
“O ye who believe! If any from among you turn back from his faith, soon will Allah produce a people whom He will love as they will love Him...” (5:54)
“But those who reject faith after they accepted it, and then go on adding to their defiance of faith-never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray.” (3:90).
On the other hand, the Holy Qur’an speaks of a plan of the Jews to adopt Islam first and then desert it, thus creating the impression that Islam was not a religion worth having (3:71). Such a scheme could never have entered their heads while living at Medina where the government was Muslim if apostasy according to the Qur’anic law were punishable with death.
The misconception seems to have arisen from the fact that people who, after becoming apostates, joined the enemy and were treated as enemies, or where an apostate took the life of a Muslim he was put to death, not of course for changing his religion, but for committing a murder. - qazima, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Come! Let’s Change the Wor(l)d Together!
The Truth About the Talmud
Let’s Remove Blasphemy Against Jesus And Mary
And Hatred For Gentiles* (Non-Jews) From Talmud
*The Rest of Humanity
A Documented Exposé of Supremacist Rabbinic Hate Literature
By Warrant of John 18:37, Galatians 4:16
Copyright ©2000-2006 by Michael A. Hoffman II All Rights Reserved
Introduction
The Talmud is Judaism's holiest book (actually a collection of books). Its authority takes precedence over the Old Testament in Judaism. Evidence of this may be found in the Talmud itself, Erubin 21b (Soncino edition): "My son, be more careful in the observance of the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah (Old Testament)."
The supremacy of the Talmud over the Bible in the Israeli state may also be seen in the case of the black Ethiopian Jews. Ethiopians are very knowledgeable of the Old Testament. However, their religion is so ancient it pre-dates the Scribes' Talmud, of which the Ethiopians have no knowledge. According to the N.Y. Times of Sept. 29, 1992, p.4:
"The problem is that Ethiopian Jewish tradition goes no further than the Bible or Torah; the later Talmud and other commentaries that form the basis of modern traditions never came their way."
Because they are not traffickers in Talmudic tradition, the black Ethiopian Jews are discriminated against and have been forbidden by the Zionists to perform marriages, funerals and other services in the Israeli state.
Rabbi Joseph D. Soloveitchik is regarded as one of the most influential rabbis of the 20th century, the "unchallenged leader" of Orthodox Judaism and the top international authority on halakha (Jewish religious law). Soloveitchik was responsible for instructing and ordaining more than 2,000 rabbis, "an entire generation" of Jewish leadership.
N.Y. Times religion reporter Ari Goldman described the basis of the rabbi's authority:
"Soloveitchik came from a long line of distinguished Talmudic scholars...Until his early 20s, he devoted himself almost exclusively to the study of the Talmud...He came to Yeshiva University's Elchanan Theological Seminary where he remained the pre-eminent teacher in the Talmud...He held the title of Leib Merkin professor of Talmud...sitting with his feet crossed in front of a table bearing an open volume of the Talmud." (N.Y. Times, April 10, 1993, p. 38).
Nowhere does Goldman refer to Soloveitchik's knowledge of the Bible as the basis for being one of the leading authorities on Jewish law.
The rabbi's credentials are all predicated upon his mastery of the Talmud. Other studies are clearly secondary. Britain's Jewish Chronicle of March 26, 1993 states that in religious school (yeshiva), Jews are "devoted to the Talmud to the exclusion of everything else."
The Talmud Nullifies the Bible
The Jewish Scribes claim the Talmud is partly a collection of traditions Moses gave them in oral form. These had not yet been written down in Jesus' time. Christ condemned the traditions of the Mishnah (early Talmud) and those who taught it (Scribes and Pharisees), because the Talmud nullifies the teachings of the Holy Bible.
Shmuel Safrai in The Literature of the Sages Part One (p.164), points out that in chapters 4 and 5 of the Talmud's Gittin Tractate, the Talmud nullifies the Biblical teaching concerning money-lending: "Hillel decreed the prozbul for the betterment of the world. The prozbul is a legal fiction which allows debts to be collected after the Sabbatical year and it was Hillel's intention thereby to overcome the fear that money-lenders had of losing their money."
The famous warning of Jesus Christ about the tradition of men that voids Scripture (Mark 7:1-13), is in fact, a direct reference to the Talmud, or more specifically, the forerunner of the first part of it, the Mishnah, which existed in oral form during Christ's lifetime, before being committed to writing. Mark chapter 7, from verse one through thirteen, represents Our Lord's pointed condemnation of the Mishnah.
Unfortunately, due to the abysmal ignorance of our day, the widespread "Judeo-Christian" notion is that the Old Testament is the supreme book of Judaism. But this is not so. The Pharisees teach for doctrine the commandments of rabbis, not God.
The Talmudic commentary on the Bible is their supreme law, and not the Bible itself. That commentary does indeed, as Jesus said, void the laws of God, not uphold them. As students of the Talmud, we know this to be true.
Jewish scholar Hyam Maccoby, in Judaism on Trial, quotes Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph: "Further, without the Talmud, we would not be able to understand passages in the Bible...God has handed this authority to the sages and tradition is a necessity as well as scripture. The Sages also made enactments of their own...anyone who does not study the Talmud cannot understand Scripture."
There is a tiny Jewish sect which makes considerable effort to eschew Talmud and adhere to the Old Testament alone. These are the Karaites, a group which, historically, has been most hated and severely persecuted by orthodox Jewish rabbinate.
To the Mishnah the rabbis later added the Gemara (rabbinical commentaries). Together these comprise the Talmud. There are two versions, the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud.
The Babylonian Talmud is regarded as the authoritative version: "The authority of the Babylonian Talmud is also greater than that of the Jerusalem Talmud. In cases of doubt the former is decisive." (R.C. Musaph-Andriesse, From Torah to Kabbalah: A Basic Introduction to the Writings of Judaism, p. 40).
This study is based on the Jewish-authorized Babylonian Talmud. We have published herein the authenticated sayings of the Jewish Talmud. Look them up for yourself.
We publish the following irrefutable documentation in the hope of liberating all people, including Jewish people, from the corrosive delusions and racism of this Talmudic hate literature, which is the manual of Orthodox and Hasidic Jews the world over.
The implementation by Jewish supremacists of Talmudic hate literature has caused untold suffering throughout history and now, in occupied Palestine, it is used as a justification for the mass murder of Palestinian civilians. The Talmud specifically defines all who are not Jews as non-human animals.
Some Teachings of the Jewish Talmud
Where a Jew Should Do Evil
Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.
Penalty for Disobeying Rabbis
Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.
Hitting a Jew is the same as hitting God
Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews
Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.
Jews Have Superior Legal Status
Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."
Jews May Steal from Non-Jews
Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."
Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews
Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."
Jews May Lie to Non-Jews
Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.
Non-Jewish Children are Sub-Human
Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.
Insults Against Blessed Mary
Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a whore: "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b of the Soncino edition, it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Miriam the hairdresser," had sex with many men.
Gloats over Christ Dying Young
A passage from Sanhedrin 106 gloats over the early age at which Jesus died: "Hast thou heard how old Balaam (Jesus) was?--He replied: It is not actually stated but since it is written, Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."
Jesus in the Talmud:
Horrible Blasphemies Against Jesus Christ
While it is the standard disinformation practice of apologists for the Talmud to deny that it contains any scurrilous references to Jesus Christ, certain Orthodox Jewish organizations are more forthcoming and admit that the Talmud not only mentions Jesus but disparages him (as a sorcerer and a demented sex freak). These orthodox Jewish organizations make this admission perhaps out of the belief that Jewish supremacy is so well-established in the modern world that they need not concern themselves with adverse reactions.
For example, on the website of the Orthodox Jewish Hasidic Lubavitch group--one of the largest in the world--we find the following statement, complete with Talmudic citations:
"The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of 'Jesus the Nazarene':
1) He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).
2) He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a).
3) He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh, which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).
End quote from http://www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm (Lubavitch website) June 20, 2000.
[Note: we have printed and preserved in our files a hard copy of this statement from the Lubavitch"Noah's Covenant Website," as it appeared on their website at http://www.noahide.com on June 20, 2000, in the event that denials are later issued and the statement itself suppressed].
Let us examine further some of these anti-Christ Talmud passages:
Gittin 57a. Says Jesus is in hell, being boiled in "hot excrement."
Sanhedrin 43a. Says Jesus ("Yeshu" and in Soncino footnote #6, Yeshu "the Nazarene") was executed because he practiced sorcery: "It is taught that on the eve of Passover Jesus was hung, and forty days before this the proclamation was made: Jesus is to be stoned to death because he has practiced sorcery and has lured the people to idolatry...He was an enticer and of such thou shalt not pity or condone."
Kallah 51a."The elders were once sitting in the gate when two young lads passed by; one covered his head and the other uncovered his head. Of him who uncovered his head Rabbi Eliezer remarked that he is a bastard. Rabbi Joshua remarked that he is the son of a niddah (a child conceived during a woman's menstrual period). Rabbi Akiba said that he is both a bastard and a son of a niddah.
"They said, 'What induced you to contradict the opinion of your colleagues?' He replied, "I will prove it concerning him." He went to the lad's mother and found her sitting in the market selling beans.
"He said to her, 'My daughter, if you will answer the question I will put to you, I will bring you to the world to come.' (eternal life). She said to him, 'Swear it to me.'
"Rabbi Akiba, taking the oath with his lips but annulling it in his heart, said to her, 'What is the status of your son?' She replied, 'When I entered the bridal chamber I was niddah (menstruating) and my husband kept away from me; but my best man had intercourse with me and this son was born to me.' Consequently the child was both a bastard and the son of a niddah.
"It was declared, '..Blessed be the God of Israel Who Revealed His Secret to Rabbi Akiba..."
In addition to the theme that God rewards clever liars, the preceding Talmud discussion is actually about Jesus Christ (the bastard boy who "uncovered his head" and was conceived in the filth of menstruation). The boy's adulterous mother in this Talmud story is the mother of Christ, Blessed Mary (called Miriam and sometimes, Miriam the hairdresser, in the Talmud).
"The Editio Princeps of the complete Code of Talmudic Law, Maimonides' Mishneh Torah -- replete not only with the most offensive precepts against all Gentiles but also with explicit attacks on Christianity and on Jesus (after whose name the author adds piously, 'May the name of the wicked perish')... --Dr. Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion, p. 21.
"The Talmud contains a few explicit references to Jesus...These references are certainly not complimentary...There seems little doubt that the account of the execution of Jesus on the eve of Passover does refer to the Christian Jesus...The passage in which Jesus' punishment in hell is described also seems to refer to the Christian Jesus. It is a piece of anti-Christian polemic dating from the post-70 CE period..." --Hyam Maccoby, Judaism on Trial, pp. 26-27.
"According to the Talmud, Jesus was executed by a proper rabbinical court for idolatry, inc
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is