The More the Satanic
worshippers poor fuel to their fire the more the US begins to get unrestful the
more they will need to FORCE their agenda of Noahide enforcement
Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security
By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, December 1, 2008; A01
military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops (Thugs
willing to fire upon US Citizens) inside the United States by 2011
trained to help state and local officials respond to a
nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to
What Major city do they expect to pull off their final
The long-planned shift in the Defense
Department's role in homeland security (Noahide agency
lead by the Talmudic Joos) was recently backed with funding and
troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts,
defense analysts said.
There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil liberties
groups and libertarians who express concern that the new homeland emphasis
threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act,
a 130-year-old federal law restricting the military's role in domestic law
The constitution was superceded by HJR 104, PL 102-14,
But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened
homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest
domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass
Their Conspiracy Theories abound
Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to
domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five years -- "would
have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale,
assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at
for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian
authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental
change in military culture," he said.
Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces
to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person
unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort
Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr.,
commander of the U.S. Northern Command.
If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National
Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local
and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic
chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or
CBRNE event, as the military calls it.
Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack have
been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine
Corps activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force
and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such efforts
accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq was invaded in
2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil support personnel across
the United States.
They needed this Mumbai incident to trigger the
enforcement, whil most "Marakans" slumber in a drunken comatose state
In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized "preparing
for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents." National
security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to grind down U.S.
combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include those who "want to
inflict such brutality on our society that we give up the fight," such as
by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.
see the Protocols of Zion of the "Forged"
people, the master race wannabe's of hell
In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon
England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years
to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management
Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to
thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as
many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane
Katrina caused in 2005.
Why so much fear? Possibly for they know what they do?
Last month, McHale said, authorities agreed to begin a $1.8 million pilot
project funded by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency through which civilian authorities in five
states could tap military planners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii,
Massachusetts, South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on a
particular threat -- pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane, earthquake and
catastrophic chemical release, respectively -- speeding up federal and state
emergency planning begun in 2003.
Last Monday, Defense
Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered defense officials to review whether the
military, Guard and reserves can respond adequately to domestic disasters.
Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates. He cited
the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which concluded in January
that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready and that they lack equipment and
Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S.
Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon
approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-duty combat brigade
to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the
command to rely on troops requested from other sources.
"This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something that you
want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who has assessed
the military's homeland security strategies.
Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato
Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive
see HJR 104, PL 102-14
Domestic emergency deployment may be "just the first example of a series
of expansions in presidential and military authority," or even an increase
in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU's National Security
Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of "a creeping
militarization" of homeland security.
Dictatorship, No individual rights, but a Borg Noahide
proselyte collective unto Satan
"There's a notion that whenever there's an important problem, that the
thing to do is to call in the boys in green," Healy said, "and that's
at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing
armies to keep the peace."
McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act, that only
8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for security and that their
duties will be to protect the force, not other law enforcement. For decades, the
military has assigned larger units to respond to civil disturbances, such as
during the Los Angeles riot in 1992.
the testing ground
U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first reaction force
is built around the Army's
3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April
after 15 months in Iraq. The team includes operations, aviation and medical task
forces that are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with
units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal, emergency care
The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade's next
scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get additional time in the
United States to rest and regroup, compared with other combat units, but it may
also face more training and operational requirements depending on its homeland
Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two wars,
and the need for troops to spend time with their families. "We want to make
sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan," he said. The 1st
Brigade's soldiers "will have some very aggressive training, but will also
be home for much of that."
Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next
two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn
mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th Maneuver
Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in May after more than a
year in Afghanistan.
Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to
homeland security and calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and
reserves, McHale said, Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.
hey, simply fleece "Maraka" it works well for
the Talmudic scum
"It's one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it's something
else to make it happen," he said. "It's time to put our money where
our mouth is."
and your foot
They Prepare in their own GUILT
of their Murderous hearts
Kislev 2, 5769, 11/29/2008
Johnny/Annie Get Your Gun
by Tamar Yonah
"It's just not Jewish to have a gun" a lot of people think.
Better think again. One of the famous slogans coined by Rabbi Meir
Kahane, z"l was "every Jew, a .22".
(and 2800 Goyim slaves) Many Jews get uncomfortable
at the thought of a having a gun. In Israel, it's common to have weapons
in the home, but in America???
After the horrible and tragic murders of Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife
Rivka that took place at the Chabad House (Jewish center) in Mumbai, India, including
all the others in the building, I think we need to re-access the world we live
in. Every Jew should consider him/herself a target.
We are going into hard times.
Rumors are that food
will be scarce, and money
will be like tissue paper, not having any buying power.
Acts:8:20: But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
People are gonna get very angry. Riots may
ensue, and police may not be able to help you. Jews
never fail to be blamed when a host country is in hard times.
Ask why. BUT I warn you all, MURDER is MURDER and the
Father of MURDER is Satan
Jewish families and Jewish institutions are sitting ducks and will be targets.
Knowing that a .22 doesn't have much stopping power, I think a .38 is better for
protecting one's life. If you are the head of your household, wherever they
allow gun ownership, GET A GUN. Protect yourself and your family. (Remember,
if you own a gun and are making Aliyah, make sure to get the proper permission
from Israel to bring your gun over in your lift. Not notifying and
shipping a gun to Israel without the proper legal permission can land one in
It is the responsibility of most every family (especially
if they are Jewish and therefore more of a target) to have a gun and know
how to use it. Husband as well as wife, as what if the husband isn't home
at the time a threat happens? A woman shouldn't be defenseless. She may
also have kids at home with her and she needs to be able to protect them as
Remember the old cowboy movies from Hollywood when the American settlers went
out west, and the woman was left at home on the ranch when her husband was gone,
exposing her to possible wayfarers wandering into her home and having their way
with her? We all saw those scenes where the woman grabs her husband's
rifle, strands of hair falling in front of her eyes as she raises the rifle butt
to her shoulder and shouts, "Don't come a step closer, or I'll shoot!"
Well, today, it is getting to be like the wild west.
Everyone should get a gun, and KNOW HOW TO USE IT. That of course includes
safety. LEARN GUN SAFETY LAWS and again, make sure the country you live in
lets you own a gun and that everything is legal.
Folks, there are bad guys out there. They come as criminals,
drugged-out-of-their-mind-thieves, and terrorists. They have no problem
murdering innocent men women and children in the streets and buildings of Mumbai,
or New York City, a McDonald's restaurant, or in your own home.
Would you rather be like this?
Or like this?
I remember reading a very good book called, "Armed
& Female" by Paxton Quigley. In there was a true story about a
woman in Florida named Kate
Petit, whose car broke down on the side of a road. After some
time of waiting for help, an expensive looking car stopped and a nicely dressed
man got out to help her.
"I had to sum up the situation in a hurry," said Kate. "Here was
this respectable-looking gentleman who stopped an expensive-looking car on the
highway and backed all the way up to me and my burning car. I didn't have much
choice except to ask him for help."
She was standing there, clutching her purse to her body, as he talked to her
politely. As he was talking, he got physically close to her, when he
slipped a knife from inside of his suit and pressed it sharply into Kate's ribs.
He told her that if she didn't cooperate, he would push the knife into her
heart. He then slit a tear in her blouse and she felt the knife cut her.
She was then ordered into the trunk of his car. The man drove for about
half an hour. "All the time I was in the trunk, I could hear him
yelling from the driver's seat about what he was going to do to me."
When the car came to a stop and she heard the engine cut, she knew it was
time. Kate repositioned herself in the trunk of the car so that she was
lying on her back, her feet tucked up under her and her knees pushing hard up
against the inside of the license plate wall. Her head was jammed up against the
back seat, and she hoped the overhang wouldn't obstruct a clear view of him when
he opened the trunk. She knew he would have his knife out. She waited as he
opened the trunk of the car.
Kate doesn't remember when the man stopped yelling at her in the trunk, and
doesn't remember what he said when he opened the trunk. All she remembers is the
BANG BANG BANG of the bullet holes being made in the man's chest by the .38
caliber revolver she had taken out of her purse that she clutched with her as
she was thrown into the trunk. And thank G-d she had her gun, knew how to
use it and then saved her life with it. The man she killed was" a
twice-convicted felon who had previously been found guilty of 11 counts of
sexual assault, including sodomy, child molestation, and rape. He had served
several prison sentences in another state for his offences. At the time he
picked up Kate on the highway, he was out on parole for good prison behavior(!)
after serving only 22 months for raping a woman and her 12-year-old-daughter.
the murderer has a gun. Danny the druggie has a gun. Robbie the rapist has
a gun. Mohamed, Fatima and even little Ahmed have guns. They know
what they are going to do with them. Why shouldn't the 'good guy' purchase
and learn how to use a gun? If you're alone, or you have kids, at least you'll
have a fighting chance. Johnny/Annie Get Your Gun.
Mohamed, Fatima and even little Ahmed have guns.
"Don't be a victim." Israeli Annie gets her gun.
to kill the goyims
From them the all engulfing
770 Eastern Parkway, NY, NY
|Last update - 11:57 01/12/2008
Terror in Mumbai
/ After Mumbai, the war against terror has
Now that the criticism in Israel of the way the Indian
authorities handled the Mumbai terror attack has died down a little, it seems
like a good time to begin examining the practical lessons that can be learned
from what happened.
The next big thing. It's doubtful that just 10 terrorists were responsible for
the well-planned attacks, as India claims. It is very likely that assistance
from other terrorists was necessary, and it's clear that the Muslim organization
that was responsible has set the bar high for copycats the world over: simultaneous
attacks in several sites, with hostage-taking and explosives and
grenades, which paralyzed an enormous city for two and a half days.
While there have been a few multiple-casualty terror attacks since September 11,
2001 (including in Bali, London and Madrid),
London on 7/7
the Mumbai attack was apparently the most sophisticated of
these. It's hard to judge whether Hezbollah, Hamas or the global jihad groups
(Al-Qaida derivatives) are capable of carrying out something similar within
Israel, which currently seems slightly better prepared than India to combat such
an attack. Still, from now on, that is the extreme scenario that must be taken
Noahide News from
the Nazi of Sanhedrin
The Irrelevance of “Toleration” in Judaism
By Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz
Common Knowledge 11:1 (pp.
Copyright 2005 by Duke University Press
The interactions that are possible between Jews
and non-Jews in modern times are fundamentally different from those of any
previous era in Jewish history. Particularly in the Western world, Jews and
non-Jews meet each other in civil society on an equal footing. In the secular
context of the modern state, a consensus has been reached about religious
freedom. Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists may live side
by side—and each by his own faith shall live.
Despite this infrastructure of toleration, our
times are plagued by religious fanaticism and hatred.
"It is our duty to
force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they
will be killed." (Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, Ma'ariv,
October 6, 2004) ...
It seems that the political consensus to “live
and let live” has done little to alleviate the intolerance that is inherent to
religious belief. The difficulties involved in recognizing the faiths of others
are particularly acute when the religions involved are monotheisms. Every
religion makes claims to truth that cast doubt on the claims made by other
religions, but in monotheist religions those claims tend to be absolute and
exclusive. Belief in a unique and omnipotent God who lives beyond the
limitations of time, who created the universe and has revealed truths through
his prophets, makes it difficult to account for alternatives. A significant
proportion of all warfare, ancient and modern, has resulted from the
uncompromising beliefs of the monotheist faithful.
Rv:18:24: And in her
(Jerusalem the Harlot) was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.
My point is that “toleration” is a concept
very hard to apply in the context of monotheism. An analogy between science and
religion may be useful: monotheist religions are, in one respect at least, like
the natural sciences. A polytheism or henotheism can tolerate more than one
claim to truth, even when those claims in some degree conflict. Polytheist and
henotheist religions are in this way like the humanities: they make room for,
even if they do not thrive on, diverging points of view. The opinions and
interpretations of others are taken to be valid if they are seen to be cogent.
But in the natural sciences, there is a distinction between truth and falsehood
(or at least, between falsified and unfalsified results). The idea of falsehood
is at the core of any science—and of each monotheism. There is a true God and
there are false gods. The truth of the one God is absolute and exclusive.
However desirable religious toleration may be, the basic nature of monotheism is
an obstacle to tolerance.
I do not believe that there is a definitive
solution to this problem. Religious beliefs cannot, and really should not,
figure as options on a list of legitimate alternatives. However, there are
partial solutions about which not enough has been said. Judaism, despite the
absolute and exclusionary quality of its monotheism, has a side that tends
toward openness and toleration. This side of Judaism has also an expression in
the Jewish abstention from proselytizing.1 Even ultimately, Judaism does not
view itself as the religion of all people. It is the religion of the Jews alone
and is, for almost all its practitioners, inherited. The assumption that Judaism
is the religion of one people (and a few unsought converts) is emphatically a
normative principle and is important to our discussion because it suggests that,
within Jewish doctrine, there is room for the religious beliefs of others.
They alone wannabe the
Massah Race above all Goyim
This principle applies not only to the
world as it is today but also to the messianic projections that Judaism makes
for the future.
Mt:23:37: O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Although the messianic era represents an
ultimate vindication of truth as Judaism understands it—a time when the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will assert his dominion over all the world—at that
time the peoples of the world will not embrace Judaism and will not come to
observe Jewish law.
Mt:8:11: And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
In the closing chapters of his monumental Code
of Jewish Law, Maimonides (Mammon-eye) gives
an account of the end of days. In his portrayal, the messianic realm is one of
peace, but not uniformity of faith. According to Maimonides, when Isaiah saw the
wolf and the lamb lying down together, what he envisioned was not a change in
the nature of creation. Wolves will still be wolves, and lambs lambs; what will
change is the relationship between them. At the end of days, the different
peoples of the world will not become less different. And because they will not
embrace a single faith, the prohibition against gentiles
undertaking distinctively Jewish practices will continue.2
How else will every Jew
have 2800 Goyim slaves to serve them?
However, each religion will come to share with
all the others a small set of fundamental truths, and people everywhere will
abandon violence, theft, and oppression. Jews rarely have had the political
power to enforce their beliefs on others.
But now the Jews control,
Moscow, Washington DC, Berlin, Paris, London and Bejing
But, as Maimonides suggests, that lack of
power does not explain why Jews have refrained from sending missionaries to
convert gentiles.3 The Jewish tradition enshrines one set of expectations for
Jews and another for non-Jews. The eleventh chapter of the
talmudic tractate Sanhedrin begins with the assurance of Isaiah that
“all Israel have a portion in the world to come.”4
All Israel who are the
spiritual Israel, Galatians 3. Sorry,.... Nazi of Satan
The rest of the chapter is dedicated to
discussing exactly which transgressions may lead to a Jew’s forfeiting that
entitlement. The offenses that dominate the discussion are inapplicable to
gentiles who have no investment in the Torah per se.
No investment in Satan's
little book of Blaspemy. Thank the LORD.
Mt:12:21: And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
One offense for which a Jew forfeits his place in
the world to come is denial that resurrection of the dead is intimated in the
Torah. A Tibetan lama would not likely make such a denial: a lama might well not
believe in bodily resurrection but he would have no reason to deny (or affirm or
indeed care) that the doctrine is intimated in an ancient Hebrew text. Such
ordinances are irrelevant to most gentiles (though matters are more complex with
respect to Christians, who include the Torah in their own Bible).
The Everlasting Covenant,
from Genesis to the Revelation of Jesus, whom you reject Nazi
Likewise, if gentiles are forbidden to
undertake distinctively Jewish practices (the wearing of phylacteries, for
example, or the separation of meat and milk), then their salvation cannot be
foreclosed on the grounds that they did not undertake to observe them. In other
words, the righteous among the gentiles are not
blocked, as transgressor Jews are, from redemption; but righteous gentiles have
their own path, different from that of Jews. At the end of the righteous
gentiles’ path are the same eternal rewards that await the righteous among the
Mt:23:15: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold
more the child of hell than yourselves.
“Toleration” would not be an accurate name
for this doctrine, and certainly the doctrine is not one of religious
equivalence. However, the approach that Judaism takes toward righteous
gentiles offers a partial solution to the problem of intolerance in
monotheist religions. By establishing different sets of expectations for
different groups, Judaism makes room for adherents of other faiths to perform
their own religious obligations in a way that entitles them to salvation by the
God of Israel.
NOT the GOD of Spiritual
ISRAEL, NAZI of Satan's Sanhedrin
Mt:22:11: And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
Mt:22:12: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
While Jews are enjoined to follow 613
commandments of the Torah, the demands that normative Judaism makes of gentiles
comprise only seven laws.
Acts:15:10: Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
These six prohibitions and one positive
commandment are together known as the
Noahide laws because (according to chapter seven of Sanhedrin) they
were the series of laws
given to Noah after the flood (though they differ little from the basic laws
given to Adam).5
Mk:7:9: And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Mk:7:13: Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
laws set a universal
standard for gentile religions and embody the truths that, according to
Maimonides, the peoples of the world will come to recognize and share at the end
2 Thes.2:3: Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there
come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4: Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
Thus, the Noahide
laws delineate the
boundaries of Jewish religious toleration: failure to observe these laws
would bar a person or a people from entering their own gate into heaven. (The
Jews’ gate is not open to them.)
One of the highest principles of the Noahide
laws is belief in the one
God. Both Islam and Christianity (though Trinitarian doctrine presents a
complication) satisfy this key demand and clear the way
for Jewish recognition of these religions.
But what of—to take more difficult
cases—the Indic religions and the various kinds of Buddhism? Again, I do not
believe that a definitive solution is possible, but a partial
solution may be considered. It is important to introduce a distinction
between theology and religious practice. In the ancient religions grouped under
the name of Hinduism, there are many gods and local shrines, but the theological
principles that guide belief and provide a uniformity of moral standards assume
that all the deities revered in India
or elsewhere are forms of, expressions of, or names for, one ultimate reality or
God. Saivites propose Siva as the best name (among many names) for this ultimacy;
Vaisnavites prefer Visnu or Krishna; atman is an Upanisadic word
for the same principle—and brahman is perhaps the most common way
among non-Muslim, non-Christian Indians of naming ultimacy. As for Buddhism, the
difficulty is not that there is a plethora of gods, though Siddartha Gautama and
other buddhas, bodhisattvas, and “incarnate” lamas are often treated as
For Talmudic Judaism it is
Lucifer and the female and male Polytheistic gods of Shekinah
The difficulty, from the perspective of the
is that it is unclear whether Buddhism is theistic at all. Buddhist thinkers
tend to argue that metaphysical beliefs are among the causes of human suffering.
(There are parables attributed to the Buddha in which the metaphysician or
theologian is likened to one who has been shot by an arrow and is worried about
who made the arrow, how it was constructed, and how it flew to its mark, instead
of trying to remove it and doctor the wound.) Still, it is not necessarily
atheistic to conclude that, because holding metaphysical beliefs leads to pain,
it is best to concentrate our attention on proper human behavior. In any case,
however controversial the question of whether Buddhism is theistic, it is
certainly not polytheistic.
By the standards of Jewish law as applied to
Jews, Hinduism and Buddhism do not count as monotheistic traditions. However,
the essential point of the Noahide
laws is that the
standards of Jewish law do not apply to non-Jews. Radically
pure monotheism is expected by Judaism only from Jews. The Noahide
laws do not preclude
gentile religions from developing softer, more complex, and compromised forms of
monotheism. Under the Noahide
laws, it is possible to
assume that Hinduism and Buddhism are sufficiently monotheistic in principle for
moral Hindus and Buddhists to enter the gentiles’ gate into heaven.
Their is but ONE GATE Nazi,
that Gate is through Christ Jesus
Jewish law regards the compromises made or
tolerated by the world’s major religions as ways of rendering essentially
monotheistic theologies easier in practice for large populations of
and even your fathers whom
you boast could not enter through the Gate of your Law, Nazi
The fierceness of Islamic
opposition to such compromises has no counterpart in Judaism.
In Islam, it is seriously blasphemous for
anyone of whatever faith to combine belief in the one God with popular ideas
about other heavenly powers or with subtle theological doctrines such as the
Trinity. Islam cannot tolerate such compromises because the truth that they
violate is applicable universally and not simply to Muslims. The problem is that
Islam is radically monotheistic (like Judaism) yet is also (unlike Judaism,
which is the religion of one people) universalistic as well.
You both serve the same
father, and he is the MURDERER from the foundation of the World
It is an entirely normative principle in Judaism
that the monotheism expected of gentiles by the Noahide
laws is of a less
absolute kind than that expected of Jews.
They give you their lesser
gods the fallen angels, they reserve the right to serve their father alone
In the Middle Ages, many authorities indeed
recognized Christian doctrine (even the doctrine of the Trinity) as a basically
monotheistic belief.6 One can readily understand how the doctrine of a triune
Godhead could contaminate Christianity’s claim to be monotheistic. However,
Christianity was generally not considered polytheistic or idolatrous, though
Maimonides—who did not live in Christendom—dissented from the widespread
rabbinic agreement on this point. The concept of the Trinity was represented in
the church as a mystery or paradox because it apparently contradicted a central
component of their faith in the one God.
How does the Image of the
invisible GOD contradict, O Nazi?
Thus the Trinity, even though it is an
essential feature of Christian theology and not merely one of folk religion,
could be taken by Jewish scholars as a supplement to, rather than a replacement
for, the idea of God as one. By Jewish standards as applied to Jews,
Trinitarianism is not monotheism. But by the standards of the Noahide
laws, the doctrine of the
Trinity is not an idolatrous belief to which Judaism can express an objection.
There is but one IAM,
laws provide a mechanism
for thinking about religious tolerance, but they are not, at least in modern
terms, examples themselves of liberal toleration. The Noahide
laws presuppose the
superior purity of Jewish belief and, to a more limited extent, of Jewish
practices; thus, the difference between Judaism’s expectations of Jews and its
expectations of gentiles suggests a hierarchy of religions.
the wannabe gods and their
two fold children of hell Noahide proselytes
However illiberal this system may sound to modern
ears, the existence of a hierarchy of expectations results in a set of rules for
defining heresy that do not concern non-Jews. While the simplest violation of
belief in the one God constitutes a heresy within the Jewish world, the popular
beliefs of gentiles are met with understanding.
That is why they changed
the Doctrine of the Gospel of Jesus, God come in Flesh to three
John10:21: Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22: And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
The less than absolutely monotheist folk beliefs
of Christians or Buddhists are taken in Jewish law to be violations of
Christianity and Buddhism, religions that are in themselves adequately
monotheistic; hence such beliefs are only problematic internally—solely within
the discourse of another religion. Such violations do not affect what Judaism
has to say about Christianity or Buddhism or any other religious tradition. The
standards of Jewish law cannot be violated where they do not apply.
Judaism does not concern itself with the internal
heresies of other religions even when these have arisen to defend standards of
monotheism to which Judaism itself adheres. The struggles over iconoclasm in the
seventh century, struggles that touched the core of Christian monotheism, left
no mark on Jewish writing about Christianity in the period; and the
Jewish attitude toward Christianity was unaffected by the emergence of
Protestant sects in the sixteenth century, some of which have practices that
might be said to resemble those of Judaism more closely than do those of the
Catholic Church. The Jewish stance toward Islamic monotheism has been unaffected
by the internal struggles between Sunni and Shiite factions, and Judaism has
likewise nothing to say about the Sunni Wah-habi struggle to purify Islam of
folk practices (for example, grave worship) that contradict the basis of Islamic
monotheism. These struggles have had no bearing on Jewish writings about Islam.
Judaism is not affected by these internal struggles because they are recognized
to occur beyond the boundaries of Jewish law.
Praying over the dead
rebbe's Grave each year?
The monotheism of the gentiles is a category that
rests at the very edge of Jewish law—the halakha—while also lying
beyond the boundaries of halakhic deliberation.
Yet all the while these
Hasidic Hypocrites seek to copy Christianity with their False Messiah whom they
say will be their LORD and God
The extreme precision with which the halakha defines
and categorizes its legal concepts has never been applied to the Noahide
laws. Take, as another
example, the Noahide
prohibition of incest. While the internal standards of Jewish law define incest
in great detail, the Noahide
laws do not.
The Hasidic commune is
infested with Pedophilia and incest
Ultimately the prohibition applies among
gentiles in only some of the cases forbidden to Jews: while a Jew may not marry
his brother’s ex-wife, a gentile may do so without fear of incest. Similarly,
the patriarch Jacob, who lived before the law was given at Sinai, is not
censured for having married two sisters, although doing so is expressly
forbidden in the Mosaic law.
Jacob who was no Jew
The idea that certain laws
of Judaism do not apply to all is an essential feature of the halakha.
Special standards of religious practice apply to men, while women are exempted
from all commandments that must be practiced at a fixed time. The people of
Israel are not bound by the special obligations incumbent upon the priesthood: kohanim,
the descendants of Aaron, must keep from contact with the dead outside their
immediate families in order to preserve the ritual purity of the priesthood. And
the priesthood is not bound by the same rules of purity that must be observed by
the high priest, who cannot attend the funeral of even his own parents and
children. The high priest would not think to censure his fellow priests for
attending their parents’ funerals; a common priest, a kohen, would
not think to censure an ordinary Jew for attending the funeral of a friend,
teacher, or cousin (indeed an ordinary Jew might be censured for not attending).
Different standards apply to different groups even within the Jewish community.
The Noahide laws
operate on the same principle: differing standards apply to different groups.
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are proven to be
the ancient plan of the ... It will be used for "the
management of our lesser brethren".
But, as I have already indicated, the recognition
of difference is not an acknowledgment of equivalence. The high priest’s
standard of purity is more demanding than that of the common priesthood because
he alone enters the holy of holies and approaches the ark of the covenant.
Rv:11:19: And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the
ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.
A priest’s standard of purity is more
demanding than that of a common Jew because priests officiate in the Temple of
Rv:14:17: And another angel came
out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
Even Elijah Benamozegh, who was perhaps the
rabbinic figure most open toward, most appreciative of, Christianity and Islam,
viewed the relationship between Judaism and those other religions in
hierarchical terms.7 However open-minded his writings may seem in comparison
with those of others in the nineteenth century, Benamozegh was after all chief
rabbi of Venice and in every respect Orthodox. Israel was for Benamozegh, as the
Torah ordains, a priesthood to the nations—and Benamozegh clearly saw it as a
part of that priesthood’s task to correct the doctrines of gentile religions
when they erred. (He wrote, for instance, that “Christianity is but a
This hierarchical aspect of Noahide
legal thought might be viewed as an unpromising model for regulating
relations among the monotheist faiths. But its illiberal quality is, I
want to conclude by arguing, what is most promising about the Noahide
model. Basically, it does not require most religions to give up, or modify the
meaning of, such words as true and truth. It provides a basis
for conversation among religions without the expectation of compromise between
or reconciliation of claims. It requires no concession to objectionable beliefs
and practices, though the Noahide
model does sharply restrict the applicability of one religion’s laws
to any other’s. The Noahide
approach, in other words, is a formula for no more than peace. But then, peace
is in itself among the very greatest of religious values.
1Thes:5:3: For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
1. On proselytization in Judaism, see Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot 46–48.
2. On the prohibition of gentiles from practicing Judaism, see Maimonides, Book
of Judges, chap. 10:9–10.
3. Maimonides, Laws
of Kings, chaps. 11–12.
4. The discussion of Isaiah 60:21 opens chap. 11 of Sanhedrin in the
Babylonian Talmud (chap. 10 in the Jerusalem Talmud).
5. The one positive command requires the establishment of courts of justice.
The six prohibitions are of idolatry, murder, blasphemy (very narrowly defined
ned), incest and adultery, robbery, and the eating of flesh cut from a live
animal. The Noahide laws
have intermittently, especially during the seventeenth century in Europe, been
discussed in the context of international law.
6. The most famous medieval Ashkenazic source on monotheism and Trinitarian
doctrine is Menachem ben Shlomo (the Meiri), active in Provence in the
fourteenth century. For the Meiri’s distinction between biblical paganism and
later monotheistic faiths, see Rabbi Menachemben Shlomo, Beth Habechira [The
temple], ed. Kalman Schlesinger et al. (Jerusalem: Gitler, 1975), 257–58. The
Meiri habitually refers to Christian and Muslim believers as baalei dat (possessors
of a religious truth). For this category as grounds for tolerating Christianity,
see his Hibur Hateshuva [Essay on repentance], ed. Avraham Sofer
(Jerusalem: Kedem, 1976), 47.
7. The text most relevant to this discussion is Elijah Benamozegh, Israël
et l’Humanité, edited by Aimé Pallière and published posthumously in
1914. The English edition is Israel and Humanity, trans. and ed.
Maxwell Luria (New York: Paulist Press, 1995).
8. Benamozegh, ‘Em la-Mikra, vol. 1 (Livorno: Benamozegh, 1862),
1b (as translated by Moshe Idel in his appendix to the Luria edition of Israel
and Humanity, 394).
The "Chosen", of the
Murderer from the beginning
Excerpt from the Forged Chosen
1. I pass now to the method of confirming the dynastic
roots of King David to the last strata of the earth.
2. This confirmation will first and foremost be included in that which to this
day has rested the force of conservatism by our learned elders of the
conduct of the affairs of the world, in the directing of the education of
thought of all humanity.
HJR 104, PL 102-14 Education and Shearing Day
3. Certain members of the seed of David will prepare
the kings and their heirs, selecting not by right of heritage but by
eminent capacities, inducting them into the most secret mysteries of the
political, into schemes of government, but
providing always that none may come to knowledge of the secrets. The object of
this mode of action is that all may know that government cannot be entrusted to
those who have not been inducted into the secret places of its art ....
Mt:10:26: Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.
4. To these persons only will be taught the practical application of the
aforenamed plans by comparison of the experiences of many centuries, all the
observations on the politico-economic moves and social sciences - in a word, all
the spirit of laws which have been unshakably established by nature herself for
the regulation of the relations of humanity.
5. Direct heirs will often be set aside from ascending the throne if in their
time of training they exhibit frivolity, softness and other qualities that are
the ruin of authority, which render them incapable of governing and in
themselves dangerous for kingly office.
6. Only those who are unconditionally capable for firm,
even if it be to cruelty, direct rule will receive the reins
of rule from our learned elders.
7. In case of falling sick with weakness of will or other form of incapacity.
kings must by law hand over the reins of rule to new and capable hands.
8. The king's plan of action for the current moment, and all the more so for
the future, will be unknown, even to those who are called his closest
Mt:10:26: Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.
KING OF THE JEWS
9. Only the king and the three who stood sponsor for him will know what is
10. In the person of the king who with unbending will is master of himself
and of humanity all will discern as it were fate with its mysterious ways. None
will know what the king wishes to attain by his dispositions, and therefore none
will dare to stand across an unknown path.
11. It is understood that the brain reservoir of the king must correspond in
capacity to the plan of government it has to contain. It is for this reason that
he will ascend the throne not otherwise than after examination of his mind by
the aforesaid learned elders.
12. That the people may know and love their king, it is indispensable for him
to converse in the market-places with his people. This ensures the necessary
clinching of the two forces which are now divided one from another by us by the
13. This terror was indispensable for us till the time comes for both these
forces separately to fall under our influence.
14. The king of the Jews must not be at the mercy of his passions, and
especially of sensuality: on no side of his character must he give brute
instincts power over his mind. Sensuality worse than all else disorganizes the
capacities of the mind and clearness of views, distracting the thoughts to the
worst and most brutal side of human activity.
15. The prop of humanity in the person of the supreme lord of all the world
of the holy seed of David must sacrifice to his people all personal
16. Our supreme lord must be of an exemplary irreproachability. przion7.htm
Signed by the representative of
Zion, of the 33rd Degree
Jn:15:19: If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.
Eph.1:3: Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6: To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
The Nazi speaks in
"Chosen" Status Demands That We Be the Priests to the World
What is the inner nature of the Jew? It appears that the most complete
definition of the essential Jewishness can be found in the words that were
spoken close to the time when the Torah was given. These words have great
importance because they outline the great purposes, the all-embracing
Gal:4:24: Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
Gal:4:25: For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
“And now, if you will hearken to my voice and keep my covenant, then you
will be to me a special people of all the nations, for all the earth is mine.
And you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation; these are the
words that you shall say to the children of Israel” (Exodus
Ezek:23:18: So she discovered her whoredoms, and discovered her nakedness:
then my mind was alienated from her, like as my mind was alienated from her sister.
These words were an introduction to the general nature of Judaism before the
transmission of the details. The reply of the people to these words was as
follows: “And all the people answered together, and said: All that God has
spoken we shall do” (Ibid.:
Mt:27:25: Then answered all the
people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.
This is a decisive answer, the inward acceptance that precedes all the
commandments that came afterward in the Ten Commandments and in the whole Torah
“A Special People” With More
Three elements are mentioned in these verses, and all of them join together
in defining the inner essence of the people of Israel. The first definition is
“a special people.” This term has been given many interpretations. In a
certain sense this is the definition of a chosen people, the acceptance of which
is accompanied by a feeling of superiority and sometimes one of pride, but is
also perceived negatively by those who see it as an attitude of self-importance.
1 Peter2:9: But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
10: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
However, the basic meaning of “a special people” is in fact “a unique
people.” This uniqueness, the placing of a certain group of people in a role,
in a place, in some form of commitment, has an effect on this group, as it
affects the individual who attains any level of uniqueness. It implies various
aspects of elevation, and even of pride in the special role, in the special
But this uniqueness has another facet, no less significant, which is
expressed in the sharpest manner by the Prophet Amos (3:2):
“You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will
punish you for all your iniquities.” The status of being chosen is not only a
matter of rights or of a higher standing, but also of duties associated with
this special status, which derive from it and perhaps even precede it.
Being singled out in every way means not only being recognized as different
from others, but also being the object of criticism that is much more severe.
This severe criticism does not necessarily come from the envious and the haters:
God himself says that the very status of being chosen demands greater and
special attention. Many things that might be overlooked in others cannot remain
unmentioned and unnoticed when they concern a person who has the special status
of being chosen.
Pedophilia of Talmud Bavli? Blasphemy, Murder and
In addition, there is another, more comprehensive significance for a special
people. Choice and uniqueness mean being separate, different, and to a great
extent also alone, or isolated. The acceptance of this loneliness, even if it is
the loneliness of the peak, is difficult.
Individuals, like nations, do not always want to be in a state of isolation.
Particular people will sometimes go to any lengths to stand out in a crowd, to
be different; however, they still want this difference to be no more than a
label - some mark of recognition, but not a cause for isolation. But to be in a
constant state of uniqueness means to be alone, as the prophet of the nations,
Balaam, says of us: “[T]hey are a people who dwell alone and are not reckoned
among the nations” (Numbers
they are a small people from whom False Christ comes,
Dan:11:23: And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
This loneliness has many practical outcomes. People in general cannot and do
not even want to protect or guard those who are alone. To be alone also
engenders a sense of strangeness, and sometimes even of hate, that derives from
the inability of the chosen person to become integrated within the general
stream of things - an inability that is not necessarily based on some inward
difficulty or problem, but is the result of the choice itself.
Pagan anti-Semitism - and there have been examples of this phenomenon in the
Greco-Roman world - was focused especially on this issue of separateness, of the
otherness of the Jews, who were not fully integrated into the surrounding
society. All the other details, both correct and incorrect, that have been added
to this accusation are merely attempts to define the basic sense of public
discomfort with those who, in spite of the prevalence of a uniform culture, live
in it without merging into it completely, and maintain their particularity
everywhere and in all circumstances.