Wonkers and Israel

[Walker]

There Is No Such Thing As 'Palestinians'
BY RABBI MICHAEL BARCLAY

For over 3,000 years, there has been no such thing as a Palestinian or a country of Palestine! So how did this Palestinian issue even start in modern times? In 1948, U.N. Resolution 181 granted statehood to two states: a Jewish one called Israel and an Arab one called Palestine. This is the first time there is a nation or people with the name of Palestine, even though they were in fact all Jordanians. Immediately, five Arab nations attacked Israel, which continued to be attacked repeatedly for the next 15 years but successfully defended her nationhood.

And now comes the seed that leads to the current support from the left of “Palestine.” In the early 1960s, the Arab coalition was not only physically losing wars, but was considered bullies of Israel in worldwide media. They were the Goliath that kept losing to David. So they hired the public relations firm of Dudley-Anderson-Yutzy in New York (founded in 1909, no longer in business) to change their image in the world. George Anderson told them they needed a “victim,” a group that would be perceived as smaller and even more abused than the Israelis, and the Palestinian cause was born.

- continued at link (edited to add link)
https://pjmedia.com/columns/rabbi-micha ... s-n1735136

[Sculptor]

The day to day life of innocent people.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/XCVxz6rIQ74

[Averroes]

I find it to be very interesting that the Rabbi said that many non-religious Jews and Evangelical Christians support the criminal terrorist state of Israel. Having discussed with you before, I don't recall you as a non-religious Jew. However, you seem to be a supporter of the terrorist and pariah state of Israel, may I ask : are you an Evangelical Protestant Christian?

The above subquote was a question that had I asked Walker earlier:

I find it to be very interesting that the Rabbi said that many non-religious Jews and Evangelical Christians support the criminal terrorist state of Israel. Having discussed with you before, I don't recall you as a non-religious Jew. However, you seem to be a supporter of the terrorist and pariah state of Israel, may I ask : are you an Evangelical Protestant Christian?

And Iwannaplato was just quoting me. I think your detailed reply was intended to be addressed to me.
________________________

In as polite a manner as I could I tried to point out to Walker, and to encourage him to dialogue with me on the topic of Neoconservatism. One of his influences, and not without at least some good reasons, is Mark Levin. The more *unfortunate* side of Levin is that he is 1) a Neoconsoverative and 2) a Zionist. Note that by pointing out that he is a Zionist it makes it seem like this is a bad thing. I personally think it is a very questionable thing, and something that requires examination, but America today, if I can speak so generally, is dominated by a pro-Israel pro-Zionist perspective. And from my own perspective and background I know something of it because I grew up with it and to a degree in it.

In my view, and taken generally and largely, Zionism is a destructive movement. It seems like it has been good, or resulted in good, but as we see now when the lid is ripped off one looks directly into an abyss of unsolvable problems that resulted from it. It is next to impossible to even imagine how they will be resolved. And that is why I make the assertion that Jewish history is not over. What I mean is that, for one reason of another, for a group of reasons, Jews and Jewish history have led them to an extremely difficult predicament. When I say this it is as a participant, not as an outsider.

My view of Walker -- he is not a Christian and he is not a Jew either (he is a post-Christian like so many, an entire topic unto itself) -- is that he is uniquely American in his outlook. His outlook seems to be informed by a set of people like Mark Levin. As such these people and their views and ideas can be examined from a critical perspective. I also submit that Neoconservatism, and the wars that they have encouraged, have resulted in an extremely heavy moral price that is being paid, even if unconsciously, by the nation itself. But I do not think that people can identify the ailment. They are the victims of it, it affects them at a psychic level, but they cannot see and identify what the cause is.

And Neoconservatism is deeply tied up into Jewish American and Israeli interests. This is a fact that everyone knows. It is not debatable. There is a profound problem -- a moral problem -- that revolves around America's association with the state of Israel. We need only examine what we are all embroiled in right now! It is so obvious.

There are a dozen different dimensions to the present political conflict. But not the least among them is that of Christian Zionism and its association with Jewish Zionism. Is the topic off-limits? Why? It is discussed fervently within Jewish and Israeli circles. Israel itself is in a social and political crisis that has a great deal to do with the issue and problem of Zionism. What, is this new information for the people who read here?!?

So things have come to a head. And each person who has an opinion, deals with an idea, or has feelings that connect with this issue, has been lit up by the intensity on-going. Or to use another metaphor they resonate as if they are vibrating strings. Some, like Veggie, resonate off the rails. Walker resonates with the talking points from the list of a Neocon.

I suggest that we have many different alternatives to how we view this crisis.

Finally, Evangelical Christian Zionism is a disease of the mind and of the soul (or spirit). It itself is a sickness. One gets it but that also implies that one can recover from it. It is a complex mental and spiritual disease but it can be sorted out by an individual. My interest is in examin ing what the medicines of recovery are.

It is unlikely, at this late point, that the Christian Zionist disease in America can be cured in time though. And this must also be understood. There is no alternative for responsible people.

Thank you for posting this detailed analysis in reply to my question. I didn’t receive a reply from the one whom I asked the question. But your answer makes sense to me.
_________________________

Have you watched the video of the interview of Rabbi Yisroel David Weiss that I posted earlier? Here is the link again:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2H-F0HVKDY

About Zionism he said that they were non-religious imposter Jews and that they oppress the Orthodox practicing Jews who uphold the Torah. Below is an excerpt of the Rabbi Weiss' interview:

Zionism was created by mostly non-religious Jews. It was a nationalist movement of people who estranged themselves from God, [and] from the Torah. They were non-religious. So you see what the falseness of it. And all the Zionists, they put on a facade of Judaism, they incorporated religion in order that the world should say: “it's a religious thing we have to support them.” The evangelists, the Christians, and the millions support them. Jews who don't know the Torah well, unfortunately, the more non-religious. And they have this emotional playing that we're returning; 2,000 years we're in exile. That's the difference between Judaism and Zionism.
Now so in other words, in short and very concisely, Judaism is subservience to God, Zionism is nationalism, and it's expressly forbidden for us.

I find very interesting the explanation of Rabbi Weiss that Zionists are non-religious imposter Jews who "estranged themselves from the Torah". That description of the Zionist reminds me a lot of Pauline Christianity, i.e. nowadays mainstream Christianity (i.e. Catholics, and Protestants). As you might already know mainstream Christianity's distinctive characteristics is non-observance of the Mosaic law and this is due to Paul. For example, biblical Jesus says in Mathew 5:17-20:

• 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. [Mathew 5:17-20]

While Paul writes for example in Galatians 3:10-11:

• 10.But those who depend on the law to make them right with God are under his curse, for the Scriptures say, “Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the commands that are written in God’s Book of the Law.” 11.So it is clear that no one can be made right with God by trying to keep the law.[Galatians 3:10-11]

I notice that Galatians 3:11 is a non-sequitur.

Throughout his letters, Paul is at task trying to abolish the commandments of the Law of Moses. So I ponder, as the followers of Paul and the Zionists don’t feel bound by laws such as “You shall not murder” or “thou shall not steal”, everything goes. So, it’s not surprising that Pauline Christians support the Zionist imposter Jews in their crime against humanity and genocide of the Palestinian people. As the saying goes: birds of a feather flock together.

Rabbi Weiss also says that before Palestine was under Zionist occupation, the Jews lived in total peace with the Muslims in Palestine.

(…) But Palestine was an inhabited land. The majority were Muslims… So in order for them to create that state, they had to expel, at least in the best case, the Palestinian people. It's against [and] it flies in the face of what our Torah is about because in the Torah it says, "Thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal" (...)

And on top of that, we have to remember that in this 2,000 years of exile that we've suffered so much because we are Jews. The Jews were burnt at the stake. They were tried. They tried to forcefully convert Jews by the Crusades, by the Inquisition. And they were expelled from Spain, from Italy, where did the Jews go?

The Muslim lands took in the Jews. They embraced us in every Muslim land. Iran, wherever you'd like, Palestine was under the Ottoman Empire. They took us in and we flourished in their lands. There was no human rights to protect us, and yet we flourished. It wasn't necessary human rights.

So now for the Zionists to come along and accuse the Muslims of an ingrained hate to Jews or the Palestinian people of an ingrained hate to Jews, how dare they, how repugnant! And to go and turn that on its head and say, “these people wronged us”, all of this is the most criminal part of this…

We have a picture here [showing pictures], even you can see how we used to live together and we babysat each other's children. We lived in total peace.

That is why the very religious [Jews] around the world, we stand in total support. We hurt, we cry with the Palestinians, we are humiliated because the Zionists took our religion, and they're using it as a tool to occupy, to intimidate, to silence other people because if you speak up against them, you're called anti-Semitic. So we the religious communities stay in that opposition.

[iambiguous]

Next up: wonkers and Hamas.

Now, don't pull punches, okay?

[Peter Kropotkin]

Age, I invite you to take a gander at this.

Palestinian kids face this everyday, and have done for decades

You do not have to rely on me, I got that from several IDF soldiers that have left Israel after being horrified at the abuses they were expected to inflict daily on Palestinians going about their daily lives.

VT: Get off my thread you Nazi kunt.

K: AND we get our hourly quota of.. outrage and insults.. rinse and repeat...
rinse and repeat...

Kropotkin

[Walker]

Progressives call for US to take in some of the expected 1 million Gaza refugees
https://nypost.com/2023/10/14/progressi ... from-gaza/

Comment: Having been indoctrinated to hate Jews, and because the hatred of Jews is approved by the authorities in that culture, this call by Progressives to transplant the terrorism to the USA wouldn’t be prudent in regards to not only Jewish folks in the USA but all other citizens of the USA, although it is consistent with The Democrats Hatred of America.

[Walker]

The Hamas Network in America: A Short History
Program on Extremism at George Washington University 2000 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20006
https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files ... merica.pdf

“Hamas in America Individuals and networks providing various forms of support for Hamas have been active in America for decades.1 Small numbers of Palestinians who belonged to Muslim Brotherhood networks in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, in fact, arrived in the US since the 1960s to study at American universities or as immigrants/refugees (Hamas, as its charter states, is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine”2).

“Over time, from the official foundation of Hamas in 1987 onwards, this network increasingly organized itself, creating a relatively large set of public-facing organizations devoted to activities such as funding, lobbying, education and dissemination of propaganda. Since the US government first designated Hamas as a terrorist organization in 19973 [SIC], US authorities have conducted several activities to clamp down on this network, including deporting and prosecuting Hamas operatives and shutting down multiple front organizations.”

Materials introduced as evidence by the government during these procedures represent an unique treasure trove of information on the otherwise extremely secretive network of Hamas operatives in America.4 Drawing largely from internal Hamas documents seized by the FBI and wiretaps of conversations among Hamas operatives conducted by the FBI and introduced as evidence during the 2007 terrorism financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation, a Texas-based charity U.S. authorities accused of financing Hamas5, this report seeks to outline the history and evolution of the Hamas network in the US from its early days.6

- continued at link

[Alexis Jacobi]

Throughout his letters, Paul is at task trying to abolish the commandments of the Law of Moses. So I ponder, as the followers of Paul and the Zionists don’t feel bound by laws such as “You shall not murder” or “thou shall not steal”, everything goes. So, it’s not surprising that Pauline Christians support the Zionist imposter Jews in their crime against humanity and genocide of the Palestinian people. As the saying goes: birds of a feather flock together.

If I understand correctly the Pauline and Christian opposition to the *Law* is focused on the (absurdist) rules & regulations imposed by Jewish religious authorities. According to that view those rules & regulations resulted in an external formality that if maintained resulted in being in a right relation to God. Christians maintained that the object was not the observation of religious minutiae but some sort of inner transformation.

The roots of Christian Zionism are a little complex. Here a Palestinian Christian offers a definition of Christian Zionism.

Stephen Sizer wrote Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon?

Blurb from the book:

The term "Zionism" was first coined in the late nineteenth century, and referred to the movement for the return of the Jewish people to an assured and secure homeland in Palestine. Ironically, this vision was largely nurtured and shaped by Christians long before it received widespread Jewish support. The origins of "Christian Zionism" lie within nineteenth-century British premillennial sectarianism, but by the early twentieth century it had become a predominantly American dispensational movement, and pervasive within all main evangelical denominations. The contemporary Christian Zionism movement emerged after the "Six Day War" in Israel in 1967, and it has had a significant influence on attitudes towards the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the Middle East. Evangelicals are increasingly polarized over whether Christian Zionism is biblical and orthodox or unbiblical and cultic. In this book Stephen Sizer provides a thorough examination of the historical development, variant forms, theological emphases and political implications of Christian Zionism. His excellent and informative survey is interwoven with critical assessment that repudiates both nationalistic Zionism and anti-Semitism.

It is true that Christian Zionism has a root in Christian Zionism -- a movement largely arising in England.

Again, Jewish/Christian Zionism is and has been extremely extremely destructive in the course of its 70 year existence. For this reason, as everyone now faces the manifest possibility of a giant conflagration and people begin to even talk about the use of tactical nuclear weapons (the Samson Option), it is far more easy to see that Zionism is a bad tree with a bad fruit.

Now, presently, it is all coming far more out into the open. Interesting indeed but also terrifying given what could result.

Here is a traditional Catholic interpretation of Christian Zionism -- if it interests you or anyone.

[Walker]

The Big Wonker flies into a war zone, lands in Israel, then tells the world that he is giving Hamas one hundred million dollars on behalf of the United States ... Hamas being the government in Gaza that Israel aims to destroy.

Way to go.

[Alexis Jacobi]

This recent event, these unfolding events, encompass within them a microcosm of so many of the issues and conflicts besetting the world. The pressure is on to define oneself — morally — in relation to each thorny social question.

So, are you, Alexis Jacobi, going to start to 'define' and/or 'defend' yourself here, morally?

If no, then WHY expect ANY one "else" to do it?

And are 'you' even going to define what ANY of these, supposed and so-called, 'thorny social questions' are here, exactly?

Also, WHY do 'you' CLAIM that there is some so-called 'pressure' here? From who and from where is this alleged 'pressure' coming, EXACTLY?

Here I thought you asked some good questions and, as it happens, I have been mulling over all of this over the last few days. I will make efforts to explain why I think this event has blown the lid off so many different issues and concerns. But you will, I hope, bear with me because the fact is I find myself in a position of redefinition in regard to so many questions and issues. I find it hard to organize it all.

Since my stated objective is to *see clearly and to explain* what is going on, and to see through what we might call false narratives or misleading narratives, I must lay out on the table what I understand to be the primary and central issue. I have said it before and say it again: Zionism is the problem here. This is the *core fact* that must be seen. If it is not seen, and if it is denied, the problem is never addressed. But here's the thing: to address the issue of Zionism is extremely complex. Why? Because Zionism is connected with a set of false-narratives and also lies which mask power-machinations. Even having said that I am personally opposed to Zionism is a statement that, said at the wrong place and at the wrong time (and by the wrong person) could get one, or will get one, into all sorts of trouble. Because -- it is said -- that to take the anti-Zionist position is antisemitic.

Now, what happens then is that one is forced to defend oneself against that deadly accusation and right there one falls into a cunning trap. Because one's opposition to Zionism, or let me put it in the first-person, because my opposition to Zionism may well involve a complex of oppositions to "the Jewish project" in a historical sense. Here, I must stop and explain. Those who have participated on this forum for the duration of the Christianity thread covered a great deal of ground. In my case, coming as I have said from a Jewish cultural background but having an interest and concern for Christianity because it is fundamental to Occidental civilization, my opposition to the zealotry and fanaticism that I discovered in Immanual Can, led me to realize that it was not, not ultimately, the Christian position that I had to oppose, but the very central tenets of Judaism. And there are two central tenets that have relevancy here:

One is the notion of the selection of the Jews. And the other is the Jewish belief that Israel was 'given by God' to the Jews. Since both of these assertions, or deep beliefs, or fanatical convictions, are untrue, then it happens that the entire construct upon which Judaism is built, and Christianity is based, fall to pieces. So the guiding or informing Narrative, based in some sort of metaphysical belief, falls to pieces (for those who see in these terms) but what remains is the power-dynamic. And the power-dynamic, like all power-dynamics, is raw & ugly.

If you follow Jewish affairs, and I assume few and possibly no one who writes here does, you would know that in Israel today and right now there is a faction connected with the extremist faction of which Netanyahu is aligned, that sees the event of TODAY and RIGHT NOW as heralding Jewish messianic times. It sounds insane to express it but all of this, everything happening now, is interpreted as heralding the coming of the Mashiach. I admit to embarrassment by bringing this up. Yet it is crucial to an understanding of what is happening now and, possibly, what will soon happen.

Now I realized when I was seriously trying to converse rationally with Immanuel Can that at the level of *belief* and that *place* where belief functions there was no way to get through to him. But I was not and I am not really concerned about him (or any believer) but rather about the time we are in and what is going on -- especially culturally and socially -- in my own country. The essential realization is this: the time is being driven by a maddened psychology. Yes, I might be able to get out of it myself, and anyone of us might too, but this will not and likely cannot have an effect on the larger momentum of events which are both a) unfolding as if organically, but b) are being molded and structured by people who hold these views, these beliefs, but who are also operating through strict power-dynamic rules, that is to say machiavellianly.

So there is obviously one level in the Israel-Palestine issue that hinges into the madness of belief, and this is tied-up with the Zionist assertion that the conquest of Palestine is a God-ordained recovery of what God gave 'eternally' to Jews. Palestine was conquered, and the culture living there displaced, by people whose mission and power-dynamic was expressed through a Biblical superimposition. OK, most everyone gets that on one level or another. But it has been made very clear, very clear indeed, that the same narrative of having been granted authority and power in the conquest of Palestine is being expressed with tremendous vehemence in the related category of Gentile opposition to the Jewish Project. The two operate together.

But here it is a question of framing. Let me try to explain. Most of those who write here hold the view (I regard it as correct) that the Zionists perpetrated 'Nakba' on the Palestinian population. We understand the desperation, indeed a sort of psychosis, of a trapped, oppressed, blockaded people. But we do something that is absolutely intolerable to many Israelis and many Jews: we *explain* the sheer murderous brutality of the Hamas warriors (1500 of which apparently sacrificed their lives in that operation) and through our explanation we do not condemn, in total fashion, the actions of Hamas or any such group. Here there is a complex psychological element: in the Israeli and Jewish mind Hamas is not only Hamas, Hamas represents the historical and metaphysical enemy of the Jews: Amalek.

The idea of Amalek is very ingrained in the Jewish mind. Essentially, any Gentile opposition to Jews and Judaism is a manifestation of Amalek. Here a very strict metaphysical dichotomy expresses itself. The Rabbis express *the Jewish Project* as that of having been selected by God for the purpose of establishing what corresponds to the Christian idea of God's eternal throne. Political Zionism and the reconquest of Palestine, for many (but not for all) Jews, is a manifestation of God's will. So again any opposition to the Israeli project is understood at the most fundamental level as Gentile opposition to God's will. Those who are doing God's will, and genuinely understand that they are, cannot liberally accept the presence of those who don't see things as they do. No toleration of Amalek is allowed.

What I have expressed here is just one part of a whole range of issues, problems and conflicts that are exposed through the present events.

[Gary Childress]

This recent event, these unfolding events, encompass within them a microcosm of so many of the issues and conflicts besetting the world. The pressure is on to define oneself — morally — in relation to each thorny social question.

So, are you, Alexis Jacobi, going to start to 'define' and/or 'defend' yourself here, morally?

If no, then WHY expect ANY one "else" to do it?

And are 'you' even going to define what ANY of these, supposed and so-called, 'thorny social questions' are here, exactly?

Also, WHY do 'you' CLAIM that there is some so-called 'pressure' here? From who and from where is this alleged 'pressure' coming, EXACTLY?

Here I thought you asked some good questions and, as it happens, I have been mulling over all of this over the last few days. I will make efforts to explain why I think this event has blown the lid off so many different issues and concerns. But you will, I hope, bear with me because the fact is I find myself in a position of redefinition in regard to so many questions and issues. I find it hard to organize it all.

Since my stated objective is to *see clearly and to explain* what is going on, and to see through what we might call false narratives or misleading narratives, I must lay out on the table what I understand to be the primary and central issue. I have said it before and say it again: Zionism is the problem here. This is the *core fact* that must be seen. If it is not seen, and if it is denied, the problem is never addressed. But here's the thing: to address the issue of Zionism is extremely complex. Why? Because Zionism is connected with a set of false-narratives and also lies which mask power-machinations. Even having said that I am personally opposed to Zionism is a statement that, said at the wrong place and at the wrong time (and by the wrong person) could get one, or will get one, into all sorts of trouble. Because -- it is said -- that to take the anti-Zionist position is antisemitic.

Now, what happens then is that one is forced to defend oneself against that deadly accusation and right there one falls into a cunning trap. Because one's opposition to Zionism, or let me put it in the first-person, because my opposition to Zionism may well involve a complex of oppositions to "the Jewish project" in a historical sense. Here, I must stop and explain. Those who have participated on this forum for the duration of the Christianity thread covered a great deal of ground. In my case, coming as I have said from a Jewish cultural background but having an interest and concern for Christianity because it is fundamental to Occidental civilization, my opposition to the zealotry and fanaticism that I discovered in Immanual Can, led me to realize that it was not, not ultimately, the Christian position that I had to oppose, but the very central tenets of Judaism. And there are two central tenets that have relevancy here:

One is the notion of the selection of the Jews. And the other is the Jewish belief that Israel was 'given by God' to the Jews. Since both of these assertions, or deep beliefs, or fanatical convictions, are untrue, then it happens that the entire construct upon which Judaism is built, and Christianity is based, fall to pieces. So the guiding or informing Narrative, based in some sort of metaphysical belief, falls to pieces (for those who see in these terms) but what remains is the power-dynamic. And the power-dynamic, like all power-dynamics, is raw & ugly.

If you follow Jewish affairs, and I assume few and possibly no one who writes here does, you would know that in Israel today and right now there is a faction connected with the extremist faction of which Netanyahu is aligned, that sees the event of TODAY and RIGHT NOW as heralding Jewish messianic times. It sounds insane to express it but all of this, everything happening now, is interpreted as heralding the coming of the Mashiach. I admit to embarrassment by bringing this up. Yet it is crucial to an understanding of what is happening now and, possibly, what will soon happen.

Now I realized when I was seriously trying to converse rationally with Immanuel Can that at the level of *belief* and that *place* where belief functions there was no way to get through to him. But I was not and I am not really concerned about him (or any believer) but rather about the time we are in and what is going on -- especially culturally and socially -- in my own country. The essential realization is this: the time is being driven by a maddened psychology. Yes, I might be able to get out of it myself, and anyone of us might too, but this will not and likely cannot have an effect on the larger momentum of events which are both a) unfolding as if organically, but b) are being molded and structured by people who hold these views, these beliefs, but who are also operating through strict power-dynamic rules, that is to say machiavellianly.

So there is obviously one level in the Israel-Palestine issue that hinges into the madness of belief, and this is tied-up with the Zionist assertion that the conquest of Palestine is a God-ordained recovery of what God gave 'eternally' to Jews. Palestine was conquered, and the culture living there displaced, by people whose mission and power-dynamic was expressed through a Biblical superimposition. OK, most everyone gets that on one level or another. But it has been made very clear, very clear indeed, that the same narrative of having been granted authority and power in the conquest of Palestine is being expressed with tremendous vehemence in the related category of Gentile opposition to the Jewish Project. The two operate together.

But here it is a question of framing. Let me try to explain. Most of those who write here hold the view (I regard it as correct) that the Zionists perpetrated 'Nakba' on the Palestinian population. We understand the desperation, indeed a sort of psychosis, of a trapped, oppressed, blockaded people. But we do something that is absolutely intolerable to many Israelis and many Jews: we *explain* the sheer murderous brutality of the Hamas warriors (1500 of which apparently sacrificed their lives in that operation) and through our explanation we do not condemn, in total fashion, the actions of Hamas or any such group. Here there is a complex psychological element: in the Israeli and Jewish mind Hamas is not only Hamas, Hamas represents the historical and metaphysical enemy of the Jews: Amalek.

The idea of Amalek is very ingrained in the Jewish mind. Essentially, any Gentile opposition to Jews and Judaism is a manifestation of Amalek. Here a very strict metaphysical dichotomy expresses itself. The Rabbis express *the Jewish Project* as that of having been selected by God for the purpose of establishing what corresponds to the Christian idea of God's eternal throne. Political Zionism and the reconquest of Palestine, for many (but not for all) Jews, is a manifestation of God's will. So again any opposition to the Israeli project is understood at the most fundamental level as Gentile opposition to God's will. Those who are doing God's will, and genuinely understand that they are, cannot liberally accept the presence of those who don't see things as they do. No toleration of Amalek is allowed.

What I have expressed here is just one part of a whole range of issues, problems and conflicts that are exposed through the present events.

The people of Easter Island rendered their island an almost sterile grassland as they cut down every tree on the island in order to transport the headstones that served as the foundation for their religion. They worshiped the mana that was bestowed on them from heaven. But it was not heaven that bestowed mana upon them, it was the soil beneath their feet and the creatures that lived in it that bestowed their vitality. Religions that look toward the heavens are not earth religions. They envy all that they see above them and do not appreciate what is under their feet. They are failed religions in so far as they do not sustain life. They use it instrumentally, as an oven uses fuel to keep itself lit. Sky religions desecrate what is truly holy and sacred, life itself and all that sustains it.

[Age]

This recent event, these unfolding events, encompass within them a microcosm of so many of the issues and conflicts besetting the world. The pressure is on to define oneself — morally — in relation to each thorny social question.

So, are you, Alexis Jacobi, going to start to 'define' and/or 'defend' yourself here, morally?

If no, then WHY expect ANY one "else" to do it?

And are 'you' even going to define what ANY of these, supposed and so-called, 'thorny social questions' are here, exactly?

Also, WHY do 'you' CLAIM that there is some so-called 'pressure' here? From who and from where is this alleged 'pressure' coming, EXACTLY?

Here I thought you asked some good questions and, as it happens, I have been mulling over all of this over the last few days.

THANK YOU for LISTENING, and HEARING, what I have JUST ASKED here. Most either just completely and utterly IGNORE, or just REJECT, almost instantaneously the JUST, CLARIFYING QUESTIONS I ASK here.

'Mulling' or 'pondering' OVER, and/or 'wondering' ABOUT, the QUESTIONS I ASK here SHOWS a GREAT DEAL of OPENNESS, and thus a GREAT DEAL of True Intelligence and WISDOM also.

I will make efforts to explain why I think this event has blown the lid off so many different issues and concerns. But you will, I hope, bear with me because the fact is I find myself in a position of redefinition in regard to so many questions and issues. I find it hard to organize it all.

TOTALLY and FULLY UNDERSTOOD.

Since my stated objective is to *see clearly and to explain* what is going on, and to see through what we might call false narratives or misleading narratives, I must lay out on the table what I understand to be the primary and central issue. I have said it before and say it again: Zionism is the problem here.

I will now 'lay out on the table' that, to me, the word 'problem' means and refers to, a question proposed for a solution. So, to me, one word, by itself, can NEVER be 'a problem'. (Unless, of course, the one word is either, 'How?', 'Why?', 'When?', 'What?', or 'Where?' or 'another', and those one worded questions are in direct relation to FINDING 'the solution' of some 'thing'.)

This is the *core fact* that must be seen.

Okay, But for absolutely ANY one other than 'you', 'we' will FIRST have to KNOW how 'you' are defining the "zionism" word here and what "zionism", to 'you' REFERS TO, EXACTLY, how "zionism" is some supposed 'problem', and how 'this', (whatever 'this' is, exactly'), is the alleged 'core fact', which MUST BE SEEN).

If it is not seen, and if it is denied, the problem is never addressed.

Okay. But UNTIL 'you' EXPLAIN 'it', 'it' will NEVER COME-TO-BE SEEN, thus NOR even UNDERSTOOD.

But here's the thing: to address the issue of Zionism is extremely complex. Why? Because Zionism is connected with a set of false-narratives and also lies which mask power-machinations.

But 'you', "alexis jacobi", do NOT have NOR hold ABSOLUTELY ANY 'false-narratives' NOR 'lies', right?

'you' do HAVE the ABSOLUTELY CRYSTAL CLEAR and True and Honest picture and perspective, correct?

Also, If one DID and DOES have the ABSOLUTE and CLEAR Picture here of "zionism", then it would be a Truly VERY SIMPLE and VERY EASY 'thing' to ADDRESS, EXPLAIN, and DISCUSS ANY so-called 'issue' here for 'that one', true?

Even having said that I am personally opposed to Zionism is a statement that, said at the wrong place and at the wrong time (and by the wrong person) could get one, or will get one, into all sorts of trouble. Because -- it is said -- that to take the anti-Zionist position is antisemitic.

Okay, But just IMAGINE that 'I', for one, have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA NOR CLUE of what the word 'zionism' even MEANS nor even REFERS TO, remotely, let alone EXACTLY, (which by the way I have NO IDEA NOR CLUE OF), and then just EXPLAIN to 'Me' here what 'zionism" even IS, FIRST.

So, that 'it' can be CLEARLY SEEN here.

Now, what happens then is that one is forced to defend oneself against that deadly accusation and right there one falls into a cunning trap.

Okay. But we do NOT seem to be PROGRESSING ANYWHERE here.

I just seem to be seeing EXCUSES for one NOT just ANSWERING the ORIGINAL and ACTUAL QUESTIONS, ASKED FIRST, because of some IMAGINED, PRESUMED, and/or BELIEVED 'counter-offensive' of some sort.

Because one's opposition to Zionism, or let me put it in the first-person, because my opposition to Zionism may well involve a complex of oppositions to "the Jewish project" in a historical sense.

IF by ANY of 'this' 'you' are ALLUDING TO a said 'group of people' OPPRESSING "another" 'group of people' in one way or another, THEN is there ANY 'thing' REALLY to dispute here?

Here, I must stop and explain.

GREAT.

I am STILL WAITING.

Those who have participated on this forum for the duration of the Christianity thread covered a great deal of ground.

Maybe so. But was absolutely ANY 'thing' ACTUALLY REACHED, or ACHIEVED?

If yes, then what was 'that', EXACTLY?

In my case, coming as I have said from a Jewish cultural background but having an interest and concern for Christianity because it is fundamental to Occidental civilization, my opposition to the zealotry and fanaticism that I discovered in Immanual Can, led me to realize that it was not, not ultimately, the Christian position that I had to oppose, but the very central tenets of Judaism. And there are two central tenets that have relevancy here:

One is the notion of the selection of the Jews.

Just so you BECOME AWARE, to me, calling, naming, or labeling a group of human being with a word like "jews" has NOT YET been ACTUALLY ACHIEVABLE. In that 'that word' has NOT YET been AGREED UPON, nor Accurately, DEFINED. Just like the words "americans" NOR "scientists" have been ASSIGNED Accurately to ANY 'group of people'. NOR could ANY 'group of people', NOR even one 'person', be ANY of those 'things', SOLELY and ONLY.

So, just so 'you' KNOW calling, naming, or labeling 'you', human beings, with or by absolutely ANY 'thing', which 'you' ARE NOT, will NOT WORK WITH NOR FOR 'Me'.

And the other is the Jewish belief that Israel was 'given by God' to the Jews. Since both of these assertions, or deep beliefs, or fanatical convictions, are untrue, then it happens that the entire construct upon which Judaism is built, and Christianity is based, fall to pieces.

'This', and the fact that NO two of 'you', human beings, let alone ANY MORE, have even COME-TO AN AGREEMENT on what "judaism" and "christianity' REALLY IS EITHER, ANYWAY.

So the guiding or informing Narrative, based in some sort of metaphysical belief, falls to pieces (for those who see in these terms) but what remains is the power-dynamic.

One could argue that ALL BELIEF, (besides One BELIEF), is ALL UNNECESSARY, and thus just FALLS TO PIECES, anyway.

And the power-dynamic, like all power-dynamics, is raw & ugly.

I thought that 'it' was just A GIVEN, TO EVERY one, that WHENEVER absolutely ANY one INFLICTS or ENFORCES ANY sort of 'power' OVER "another one", which was NOT WANTED, then 'this' is OBVIOUSLY just Wrong, anyway.

If you follow Jewish affairs, and I assume few and possibly no one who writes here does,

WHY would 'you' even BEGIN TO ASSUME 'this' here?

you would know that in Israel today and right now there is a faction connected with the extremist faction of which Netanyahu is aligned, that sees the event of TODAY and RIGHT NOW as heralding Jewish messianic times. It sounds insane to express it but all of this, everything happening now, is interpreted as heralding the coming of the Mashiach. I admit to embarrassment by bringing this up. Yet it is crucial to an understanding of what is happening now and, possibly, what will soon happen.

But what these people ARE 'seeing' 'here and now', in the days when this is being written, might just be VERY TRUE.

AS some say, We WILL just HAVE TO WAIT, TO SEE.

Now I realized when I was seriously trying to converse rationally with Immanuel Can that at the level of *belief* and that *place* where belief functions there was no way to get through to him.

Okay. But might "others" here, in this forum, 'feel' the same way about 'you' "alexis jacobi" in that because of 'your' OWN BELIEFS "others" find that there is ALSO NO way to get through to 'you', AS WELL?

Or, could 'this' NEVER be happening and occurring here?

But I was not and I am not really concerned about him (or any believer) but rather about the time we are in and what is going on -- especially culturally and socially -- in my own country.

AND, what country is that, which 'you' SAY and CLAIM 'you' OWN here?

The essential realization is this: the time is being driven by a maddened psychology.

Was NOT the time when people HUNG a human being called "jesus christ" from a cross NOT a time being driven by human beings with what could be described as a "maddened psychology'? Or, by the way, ANY time between 'then' and 'now', when this being written?

Yes, I might be able to get out of it myself, and anyone of us might too, but this will not and likely cannot have an effect on the larger momentum of events which are both a) unfolding as if organically, but b) are being molded and structured by people who hold these views, these beliefs, but who are also operating through strict power-dynamic rules, that is to say machiavellianly.

Okay, But are 'you' EVER going to ANSWER the following four QUESTIONS of mine posed, and ASKED TO 'you', which 'you' quoted above here?

So, are you, Alexis Jacobi, going to start to 'define' and/or 'defend' yourself here, morally?

If no, then WHY expect ANY one "else" to do it?

And are 'you' even going to define what ANY of these, supposed and so-called, 'thorny social questions' are here, exactly?

Also, WHY do 'you' CLAIM that there is some so-called 'pressure' here? From who and from where is this alleged 'pressure' coming, EXACTLY?

So there is obviously one level in the Israel-Palestine issue that hinges into the madness of belief, and this is tied-up with the Zionist assertion that the conquest of Palestine is a God-ordained recovery of what God gave 'eternally' to Jews.

Ah okay, now we are getting 'somewhere'.

So, are 'you' SAYING, and ALLEGING, that there are some human beings, alive 'today', when this is being written, who ACTUALLY BELIEVE that there is some parcel land of earth, which belongs to some parcel group of human beings, ONLY?

Palestine was conquered, and the culture living there displaced,

WHERE IS "palestine", EXACTLY, and, WHAT is/was 'the culture' living 'there', EXACTLY, to 'you'?

(By the way, I am only ASKING 'you' 'these CLARIFYING QUESTIONS', like A LOT OF QUESTIONS I ASK here, in this forum, to SHOW and REVEAL that 'you', human beings, speak OF 'things', which 'you', REALLY, can NOT even provide AGREED UPON ANSWERS ON NOR TO, EXACTLY.)

by people whose mission and power-dynamic was expressed through a Biblical superimposition.

Okay.

OK, most everyone gets that on one level or another.

Okay.

But it has been made very clear, very clear indeed, that the same narrative of having been granted authority and power in the conquest of Palestine is being expressed with tremendous vehemence in the related category of Gentile opposition to the Jewish Project. The two operate together.

But here it is a question of framing. Let me try to explain. Most of those who write here hold the view (I regard it as correct) that the Zionists perpetrated 'Nakba' on the Palestinian population. We understand the desperation, indeed a sort of psychosis, of a trapped, oppressed, blockaded people. But we do something that is absolutely intolerable to many Israelis and many Jews: we *explain* the sheer murderous brutality of the Hamas warriors (1500 of which apparently sacrificed their lives in that operation) and through our explanation we do not condemn, in total fashion, the actions of Hamas or any such group. Here there is a complex psychological element: in the Israeli and Jewish mind Hamas is not only Hamas, Hamas represents the historical and metaphysical enemy of the Jews: Amalek.

The idea of Amalek is very ingrained in the Jewish mind. Essentially, any Gentile opposition to Jews and Judaism is a manifestation of Amalek. Here a very strict metaphysical dichotomy expresses itself. The Rabbis express *the Jewish Project* as that of having been selected by God for the purpose of establishing what corresponds to the Christian idea of God's eternal throne. Political Zionism and the reconquest of Palestine, for many (but not for all) Jews, is a manifestation of God's will. So again any opposition to the Israeli project is understood at the most fundamental level as Gentile opposition to God's will. Those who are doing God's will, and genuinely understand that they are, cannot liberally accept the presence of those who don't see things as they do. No toleration of Amalek is allowed.

What I have expressed here is just one part of a whole range of issues, problems and conflicts that are exposed through the present events.

Okay.

BUT I have YET TO SEE ANY 'problem', let alone ANY 'REAL problem' here.

The ONLY 'REAL issue' I SEE here IS 'you', human beings, 'TRYING TO' "justify" 'your OWN positions', DEPENDING, solely, ON NOTHING REALLY MORE than the "side" that 'you', SEPARATELY, think or BELIEVE is the BETTER or RIGHT "side" here. And,

The 'REAL conflicts', which 'you', adult human beings, ARE CAUSING and CREATING, BECAUSE OF 'your' OWN ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS, which IS CAUSING and CREATING EXTREME HARD and DAMAGE TO 'children', NOT just 'I' can SEE, VERY CLEARLY, BUT so CAN 'your' OWN 'children' SEE VERY CLEARLY ALSO. Who, VERY SADLY, ARE NOT JUST SEEING BUT ALSO 'FEELING', and SUFFERING, FROM ALL OF 'your' VERY TWISTED and DISTORTED ASSUMPTIONS and BELIEFS AS WELL.

[Age]

So, are you, Alexis Jacobi, going to start to 'define' and/or 'defend' yourself here, morally?

If no, then WHY expect ANY one "else" to do it?

And are 'you' even going to define what ANY of these, supposed and so-called, 'thorny social questions' are here, exactly?

Also, WHY do 'you' CLAIM that there is some so-called 'pressure' here? From who and from where is this alleged 'pressure' coming, EXACTLY?

Here I thought you asked some good questions and, as it happens, I have been mulling over all of this over the last few days. I will make efforts to explain why I think this event has blown the lid off so many different issues and concerns. But you will, I hope, bear with me because the fact is I find myself in a position of redefinition in regard to so many questions and issues. I find it hard to organize it all.

Since my stated objective is to *see clearly and to explain* what is going on, and to see through what we might call false narratives or misleading narratives, I must lay out on the table what I understand to be the primary and central issue. I have said it before and say it again: Zionism is the problem here. This is the *core fact* that must be seen. If it is not seen, and if it is denied, the problem is never addressed. But here's the thing: to address the issue of Zionism is extremely complex. Why? Because Zionism is connected with a set of false-narratives and also lies which mask power-machinations. Even having said that I am personally opposed to Zionism is a statement that, said at the wrong place and at the wrong time (and by the wrong person) could get one, or will get one, into all sorts of trouble. Because -- it is said -- that to take the anti-Zionist position is antisemitic.

Now, what happens then is that one is forced to defend oneself against that deadly accusation and right there one falls into a cunning trap. Because one's opposition to Zionism, or let me put it in the first-person, because my opposition to Zionism may well involve a complex of oppositions to "the Jewish project" in a historical sense. Here, I must stop and explain. Those who have participated on this forum for the duration of the Christianity thread covered a great deal of ground. In my case, coming as I have said from a Jewish cultural background but having an interest and concern for Christianity because it is fundamental to Occidental civilization, my opposition to the zealotry and fanaticism that I discovered in Immanual Can, led me to realize that it was not, not ultimately, the Christian position that I had to oppose, but the very central tenets of Judaism. And there are two central tenets that have relevancy here:

One is the notion of the selection of the Jews. And the other is the Jewish belief that Israel was 'given by God' to the Jews. Since both of these assertions, or deep beliefs, or fanatical convictions, are untrue, then it happens that the entire construct upon which Judaism is built, and Christianity is based, fall to pieces. So the guiding or informing Narrative, based in some sort of metaphysical belief, falls to pieces (for those who see in these terms) but what remains is the power-dynamic. And the power-dynamic, like all power-dynamics, is raw & ugly.

If you follow Jewish affairs, and I assume few and possibly no one who writes here does, you would know that in Israel today and right now there is a faction connected with the extremist faction of which Netanyahu is aligned, that sees the event of TODAY and RIGHT NOW as heralding Jewish messianic times. It sounds insane to express it but all of this, everything happening now, is interpreted as heralding the coming of the Mashiach. I admit to embarrassment by bringing this up. Yet it is crucial to an understanding of what is happening now and, possibly, what will soon happen.

Now I realized when I was seriously trying to converse rationally with Immanuel Can that at the level of *belief* and that *place* where belief functions there was no way to get through to him. But I was not and I am not really concerned about him (or any believer) but rather about the time we are in and what is going on -- especially culturally and socially -- in my own country. The essential realization is this: the time is being driven by a maddened psychology. Yes, I might be able to get out of it myself, and anyone of us might too, but this will not and likely cannot have an effect on the larger momentum of events which are both a) unfolding as if organically, but b) are being molded and structured by people who hold these views, these beliefs, but who are also operating through strict power-dynamic rules, that is to say machiavellianly.

So there is obviously one level in the Israel-Palestine issue that hinges into the madness of belief, and this is tied-up with the Zionist assertion that the conquest of Palestine is a God-ordained recovery of what God gave 'eternally' to Jews. Palestine was conquered, and the culture living there displaced, by people whose mission and power-dynamic was expressed through a Biblical superimposition. OK, most everyone gets that on one level or another. But it has been made very clear, very clear indeed, that the same narrative of having been granted authority and power in the conquest of Palestine is being expressed with tremendous vehemence in the related category of Gentile opposition to the Jewish Project. The two operate together.

But here it is a question of framing. Let me try to explain. Most of those who write here hold the view (I regard it as correct) that the Zionists perpetrated 'Nakba' on the Palestinian population. We understand the desperation, indeed a sort of psychosis, of a trapped, oppressed, blockaded people. But we do something that is absolutely intolerable to many Israelis and many Jews: we *explain* the sheer murderous brutality of the Hamas warriors (1500 of which apparently sacrificed their lives in that operation) and through our explanation we do not condemn, in total fashion, the actions of Hamas or any such group. Here there is a complex psychological element: in the Israeli and Jewish mind Hamas is not only Hamas, Hamas represents the historical and metaphysical enemy of the Jews: Amalek.

The idea of Amalek is very ingrained in the Jewish mind. Essentially, any Gentile opposition to Jews and Judaism is a manifestation of Amalek. Here a very strict metaphysical dichotomy expresses itself. The Rabbis express *the Jewish Project* as that of having been selected by God for the purpose of establishing what corresponds to the Christian idea of God's eternal throne. Political Zionism and the reconquest of Palestine, for many (but not for all) Jews, is a manifestation of God's will. So again any opposition to the Israeli project is understood at the most fundamental level as Gentile opposition to God's will. Those who are doing God's will, and genuinely understand that they are, cannot liberally accept the presence of those who don't see things as they do. No toleration of Amalek is allowed.

What I have expressed here is just one part of a whole range of issues, problems and conflicts that are exposed through the present events.

The people of Easter Island rendered their island an almost sterile grassland as they cut down every tree on the island in order to transport the headstones that served as the foundation for their religion.

Is 'this', EXACTLY, what HAPPENED?

OR, what was SAID to HAVE HAPPENED?

They worshiped the mana that was bestowed on them from heaven. But it was not heaven that bestowed mana upon them, it was the soil beneath their feet and the creatures that lived in it that bestowed their vitality.

WHERE did ANY one think or BELIEVE 'heaven' WAS, EXACTLY?

'Heaven' IS HERE, ALL AROUND or EVERYWHERE.

Except, OF COURSE, in 'that 'war-torn, stressful, and pollution-riddled world' CREATED by adult human beings.

Religions that look toward the heavens are not earth religions.

But absolutely ANY one with A RELIGION that looks TOWARDS 'Heaven', and BEHAVES in THE WAYS NEEDED TO CREATE 'the world', or 'life on earth or anywhere else for that matter', as 'LIVING' IS IN A 'Heaven-like world', is a True and GOOD 'RELIGION' TO FOLLOW and ADHERE or ABIDE BY, NO matter WHEREABOUTS one IS in this One and ONLY, LIVING, Universe.

They envy all that they see above them and do not appreciate what is under their feet.

BUT ALL of 'you', human beings, it could be SAID and ARGUED, literally, CAME-FROM 'the earth' BENEATH 'you'. So, what is there NOT to appreciate by 'the dirt' and 'earth' BENEATH 'you'?

They are failed religions in so far as they do not sustain life. They use it instrumentally, as an oven uses fuel to keep itself lit. Sky religions desecrate what is truly holy and sacred, life itself and all that sustains it.

The REASON WHY words like 'sky', 'up-above', 'lifted-up', 'heavens-above', and the other words in relation to be 'ABOVE' or 'HIGHER' is ONLY to do WITH 'thinking' and 'thoughts', and 'those ones' that are ABOVE, or HIGHER, is MORE UNDERSTANDING, KNOWLEDGE, and/or WISDOM. Like in BEING 'ENLIGHTENED' and/or 'INSPIRED'. They are to do WITH BECOMING MORE LIGHTER, or being more SPIRIT like, and LESS 'physical' so as can be MORE EASILY and MORE SIMPLY LIFTED UP and FLOATING ABOVE. So as to be ABLE TO LOOK DOWN UPON what IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING and AT what IS REALLY True, Right, Accurate, AND Correct.

I CERTAINLY did NOT do 'this' JUSTICE here, but 'it' WILL, ALL, COME-TO-LIGHT, SOON ENOUGH, anyway.

[Gary Childress]

The people of Easter Island rendered their island an almost sterile grassland as they cut down every tree on the island in order to transport the headstones that served as the foundation for their religion.

Is 'this', EXACTLY, what HAPPENED?

OR, what was SAID to HAVE HAPPENED?

As far as historians have been able to piece together, it is "exactly" what happened.

[Alexis Jacobi]

1) “Problem”

[Middle English probleme, from Old French, from Latin problēma, problēmat-, from Greek, from proballein, to throw before, put forward : pro-, before; see pro-2 + ballein, blē-, to throw; see gwelə- in Indo-European roots.]

a. any thing, matter, person, etc, that is difficult to deal with, solve, or overcome
b. (as modifier): a problem child.

4. (Literary & Literary Critical Terms) (modifier) designating a literary work that deals with difficult moral questions: a problem play.

1. any question or matter involving doubt, uncertainty, or difficulty.
2. a question proposed for solution or discussion

2) “Zionism”

A known, defined thing.

3) “False-narratives'” / “Lies”

My views can only be considered essays or attempts to define what is seen and thought accurately and fairly. Ideally, there are narratives that get to the truth, or close. But obviously there are those that are false and also lies.

4) “Jews / Judaism”

You may know nothing of these topics, and most in fact don’t, so what is needed (for you to understand these terms) is research you conduct on your own because knowing is important to you.

5) “Progress”

If you are not progressing, I sympathize. I choose progress as my objective. Every day I progress. It is a question of ‘inclination’ and ‘decision’.

[While I did think your original questions had merit, I don’t foresee continuing to engage with you because of your nutty discursive methods (annoying, tedious).]

Finally:

But what these people ARE 'seeing' 'here and now', in the days when this is being written, might just be VERY TRUE.

It ‘might’ but then anything ‘might’ be true. I propose, in contradistinction, that these beliefs connect with pathologies. That is a very fraught and complex topic but one I do intend to go into in some depth further on.