Understand the Arab Israel Conflict

Every year on the 29th Nov we, in Israel celebrate the vote at the United Nations to divide the land between the Jordan River and the Mediteranean Sea between the Jews and the Arabs. The Arabs don't celebrate it and there lies the problem.

The Arabs simply rejected the result of that vote while the Jews accepted it with joy. This was natural and inevitable.

The Jews who had no land of their own and had just suffered the greatest catastrophe in history were in no position to turn down the decision of the UN to give them a piece of land of their own even if it was only less than half of the land where they originally lived from the days of king David until the 8th century, when the country fell into dilapidation under the Arab administration of neglect and misrule..

The Arabs, on the other hand, who rule over 7 countries, half of Palestine looked very measly and was even an insult to the pompous, inflated view of grandeur that they had of themselves.

The Arab delusion of greatness was matched by their delusion that Jews could be easily frightened into fleeing from the little strip of land along the Mediteranean Sea which the UN had allotted to them and so launched the 1947 war which resulted in the Jewish declaration of independence in 1948.

Their dream of an easy victory wan't quenched even by their dismal defeat in the war. Some Western countries like the ex USSR foolishly also egged them on, obviously out of self interest to sell and test new weapons. With this encouragement the Arabs launched 6 more wars, 1956, 1967, 1973,1982, 2006 and 2010. Each time they brought greater disaster on themselves. Now Iran is trying to launch the ultimate war, an atomic war.

Jews and Arabs want to live together in peace but this will never be achieved as long as there is no Arab unity to accept the UN on the 29th Nov 1947. Jewish unity exists but Arab unity is lacking.

Considering the strife among the various factions of the Arab world there's no hope of convincing them that the UN decision is good for everyone.

First and foremost the Arabs need unity on this issue. But they're not going to achieve unity on this issue because it's an outside issue, no matter how important it appears to be this issue doesn't divide them. Many other, internal issues divide them and their disagreement on the Israel/Palestine issue is just an offshoot of the main issues which divide them.

Iran's excuse for making an atom bomb

When the first atom bomb was made by America she had a very good reason;  her existence and the future of the free world was being threatened by Japan. Japan didn't just appear to be a threat but proved that she was one by invading Pearl Harbor and fighting a tenacious war in the Pacific.

A country needs a very good reason to manufacture such a complicated and lethal weapon like an atomic bomb. A real threat by another country is such a reason. Iran does not have a valid reason for making such a death dealing bomb.

Now, of course, you might all raise your arms in protest at this contention of mine and point out the enormity and strength of Israel's armed forces, including the likelihood that she posesses the bomb.

The creation of the image of Israel as a beligerent, imperialistic country, threatening its peaceful Arab neighbors has been in the making since the beginning of a Jewish presence in the Middle East, more than 3000 years ago.

There are many theories of how the creation of this image began but one thing is certain; the Jews did not seek to create such an image. Their neighbors definitely did seek to create an image of the Jews as a nation that threatened the existence of their neighbors because it gave them a pretext to destroy the Jews.

In spite of all their efforts in the course of 3000 years, to convince their neighbors that they never had any beligerent or imperialistic intentions against them the Jews didn't succeed. The most outstanding effort in this direction is the creation of the Bible, a history of the Jews, written to illustrate, through historic events the peaceful intentions of the Jews towards the rest of humanity.

The Jews have constantly held out the hand of peace "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation" and it's constantly rejected; Egyptian slavery, Assyrian conquest, the Babylonian destruction, the Roman destruction, are only a few examples.

Instead of lauding the Jews for their laws, in the Bible, against usury, honest business practices, righteousness, love of one's neighbor, loyalty to one's wife and many more humane laws the nations of the world accuse the Jews of theft, greed, the desire of world dominance, slaughter of little children, cruelty to other humans and to animals and many more false accusations, completely contradicted in the laws of the Bible.

The pretext for killing Jews took three thousand years to create and was used most diabolically untill now by the Germans. Now the pretext that the Jews are a threat to the Arab world is being used to create the worst catastrophe the world will ever witness. The creation of the atomic bomb by Iran to exterminate the Jews.

The world stands by, almost completely inactive, as they did when Hitler came to power in Germany because the world has accepted the false pretext of the Jews as an evil nation. A pretext which has been more than three thousand years in the making.

I don't agree that Iran is making the bomb to protect itself against a real danger, as America did in 1945. Iran is making an atom bomb to protect itself against the imaginary danger of the Jews who they have convinced themselves (foolishly and evily) are a danger to the Arab world and the rest of the world.

The world stands by inactive because Iran has succeeded in convincing it that the threat is real.

The world is once again following the foolish and evil irrationality that Nazi Germany followed in 1933.

God can't save us from out own foolishnes. We must wake up. It's overdue time for the world to understand the Jewish Bible that the Jews are a people of love for the world. The Jews are Christ and the world is going to let him be crucified again as they did when the Romans crucified him and as they did when Nazi Germany crucified him. Now the Iranians are going to try and crucify him. They won't succeed but the atempt will bring catastrophe on the whole world.

Iran's Atomic Bomb - A catastrophe created by humans

For some time now the media has published articles on the question of how long it's going to take for Iran to complete production of their atomic bomb. There was even a question as to whether Iran was really manufacturing a bomb. Even with the latest report, however, nobody seems convinced that Iran is really making a bomb and even those who think this are of the opinion that they're still several months or even years away from completion.

This plethora of doubt is in a way comforting and the more articles appear the more we, the public are left pondering and guessing. There's simply no definite answer either yes or no. In the case of such a vicious weapon being in doubt is more comforting than certainty unless the certainty was that Iran was definitely not making an atomic bomb and definitely not a threat to existence on the planet earth.

In the face of the absence of such certainty doubt is much better than the certainty that Iran definitely has an atomic bomb and definitely intends to use it sooner or later. This is a certainty that nobody wants to hear and the great powers don't want such certainty ever to reach the ears of the public. So the best solution is to convince everybody that there's doubt. It could be or it couldn't be. There's a 50/50 chance or maybe better but the important thing is that we're all kept nice and calm by being in doubt.

Nobody will know for certain whether there's an atomic bomb in Iran or not until it falls on their head. It's like the possibility of an earthquake or a tornado. It might come but then it might not so nobody's worried and everybody carries on as normal.

Unfortunately the writers of articles casting doubt are so numerous and so eager to put doubt in our minds that I'm getting a feeling of certainty. So many people are shouting "No Wolf" or "Maybe no Wolf" that I'm getting the nasty feeling that there is a wolf. I'd be happier if people were crying wolf, then I'd be relieved when it turns out that there's no wolf.

It's a relief when everyone cries wolf and eventually it turns that there's no wolf. But when everyone cries "No Wolf" we'r lulled into a false sense of security. When eventually the wolf comes to eat us up it's a big surprise. But it's short lived as are all surprises. It'll also be quick and perhaps painless, we hope.

It's all okay of course because not knowing that a catastrophe was about to happen we lived a good life. We've lived a blissful, ignorant life untill the moment of impact and then it's over.

This is the way of catastrophes. They come quickly and suddenly and the people most affected are least aware of them.

The forthcoming release

Already in early childhood I learnt that temper tantrums get people's attention, but it's no good throwing one unless one has something important to say.

The forthcoming release of a young Israeli soldier held hostage by the Hamas leadership of the Palestinian People in return for 1027 Palestinians, judged and sentenced by Israeli courts as criminals, is definitely something to shout about.

The media is giving expression to the wave of joy which is sweeping through the land. The joy is news and Gilad's release is news but the biggest news is that criminals who have been judged as such are being released.

We in Israel consider Gilad an innocent boy, who was simply doing his duty, as a soldier defending his country. We view the Palestinians being released as criminals judged by a court of law.

In the eyes of Israelis this isn't an exchange of equals, it's not an exchange of one innocent person for another. It's an exchange of innocence for guilt. This is the thing that shocks everybody.

Every day, like a horror movie in serial form, stories appear in the media about how the Palestinians being released murdered entire Israeli families in  cold blood, how they placed bombs on busses and in restaurants killing hundreds of people.

But there isn't a single word of any crime comitted by Gilad. The only story one can find about him is  that he's the epitome of innocence and the prime example of a young man who is loyal to his country and was captured by these criminal Palestinians while doing his duty for his country as expected of every citizen.

Actually this is a one sided view of the exchange. A more correct view is that, in the eyes of the Palestinian nation Gilad is the criminal and the Palestinians being released in exchange for him are the innocent ones.

This view comes from the difference between the way Israel carries out justice and the way the Palestinians carry out justice.

While the Palestinians being released were accused, judged, found guilty and sentenced by a properly constituted court of impartial judges where only the act committed by the accused was in question without involving how they felt about the individual who was accused of commiting those acts, Gilad was judged by the entire Palestinian People.

The Palestinian People judged the entire People of Israel as criminals already long ago, at least since the Jews decided more than 100 years ago to establish a Jewish State in the territory once known as Judea and recently named Palestine.

They don't agree that Jews have the right or the duty to defend their state. Every Jew who does that is a criminal. In this way they legitimise any form of punitive action against any Israeli, making even the most cruel slaughter of Jews an act of loyalty to the Palestinian People instead of a crime against humanity. Every Jew living in Israel is a criminal in their eyes. So they consider Gilad a criminal and their people in Israeli goals as innocent, loyal citizens of the rightful Palestinian State.

It's about time that the Palestinians recognise that the Jews have an equal right (perhaps more equal, but I won't quibble) to exist as a free nation in their own state in this territory which they call Palestine and the Jews call Israel.

That way they will have proper courts instead of folk justice. Civilized countries aren't governed by mass hysteria. Only the media can use hysteria to get people to take notice of an important issue. Hysteria isn't a way to govern a country. That's the way dictators govern.

Israel and her Arab neighbors

I would like to point out to the various pessimists on both the Israel side of the "Dialogue Table" that the two groups of people, the Israelis and the Arabs are discussing peace between them. Perhaps we're not sitting at a table but the UN is that table.

I remember when an Israel representative stood up to speak all the delegates of the Arab countries got up and walked out also some of their sympathisers.

I am favourably surprised at how Netanyahu speaks and all the Arab delegates listen to him and even comment on his speech. They don't agree of course but they are listening and hopefully they are figuring out a way to live at peace with the Jewish State.

When there's dialogue there isn't war. War starts when there's no dialogue. In spite of what anyone may think there is dialogue. We're not cursing each other and not threatening. I didn't hear a word of that in either Netanyahu's speech or Abas' speech.

At this point, even though I believe in dialogue, I'm getting used to the idea that a Palestinian State can be declared by the Palestinians before a dialogue takes, or before an official dialogue takes place.

The ultimate dialogue is only for fixing the borders of the two states, Palestine and Israel. It's not about the establishment of a Palestinian State. There's no doubt about that in anyone's mind.

Once there is a state dialogue over the borders, water rights etc. can take place. We already have an agreement on borders, the Oslo Agreement. Some people, Palestinians and Israelis would like to change that agreement. Changes can only be made when a Palestinian State comes into being, respected by Israel aswell as the world.

When Abbas visits Israel as a respected head of a state there is a basis for dialogue.

This will be inshalla.

The Origin of Anti Semitism

It always comes as a terrible shock for someone who sees themselves in one way to find that everybody else sees them in a completely different way, even in a way diametrically opposed to the way they see themselves.

The Jews see themselves as being kind, humane, generous, peace loving, sympathetic and more. The world sees them as aggressive, stubborn, sly, ambitious to the point of trampling over others, money grabbing and more.

A question about these negative characteristics was put to me quite bluntly by a charming lady tourist who hadn't had much contact with Jews untill her visit to Israel on bussiness. Her question came naturally after she had visited Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Memorial. She asked why the Jews were so hated.

Basically the only source of information available to most people about the Jews, untill they visit Israel is the Bible, specifically "The New Testament" which contains many references about the Jews taken from the "Old Testament" all these references describe the Jews in very negative terms. So most people who read the "New Testament" understand why the Jews are hated.

Obviously my lady tourist hadn't read much of the "New Testament". This is more common today than in past centuries, so she had no pre-concieved ideas of Jews, as people used to have in the past.

Today also the State of Israel does a lot to present the Jews as a positive, good nation, being quite a successful country, quite well known for it's contribution to science, agriculture, medicine etc and it's readiness to come to the aid of other countries in need as in Africa or in the wake of a natural disaster. In many cases Israel is the first country to send aid.

Before the "New Testament" appeared on the scene in about the 4th century of the Christian Era, at the time of St. Jerome and Constantine the Great the only book available that told about the Jews was the Tanach, known as the "Old Testament", since the advent of the "New Testament".
  

The Tanach had been read for at least 1000 years befor the "New Testament" appeared. It was a best seller already long before the time of Jesus. It was read extensively throughout the Greek and Roman world and was just as popular as other books of the time like The Illiad and the Odyssey or Plato's Dialogues.

The Tanach contains descriptions of both good and bad deeds performed by people in general and the Jews in particular. This is as it should be in a book that purports to give a true account of history as it related to the Jews and the Land of Judea,

Before the "New Testament" people who read the Tanach knew that there were many good Jews, like Abraham who sometimes faltered because of temptation and did bad things, like sending his wife Sarah to Pharoah in exchange for good treatment from the Egyptians, or Jacob who did many good things like having mercy on Esau, but who erred in being decietful and taking his brother Esau's birthright.

Nobody appears perfectly good in the Tanach excepting the Angels and nobody appears completely bad even Satan who tries to prove that Job is loyal to God only because of his wealth and large family.

Ant-Semitism didn't exist untill the "New Testament" appeared. Nobody saw the Jews as better or worse than any other nation. In fact according to the large numbers of converts to Judaism in 1st century of the Christian Era it's quite clear that people admired the Jews and wanted to be a part of the Jewish Nation.

The "New Testament" by it's very name presents a new alternative negative description of the Jews by means of bringing only Tanach quotations that describe the Jews as sinners and people diobedient to their own God, who in the "New Testament" becomes the father of Jesus, making those who believe this the protectors of the honor of the Father and the judges and rightful persecutors of those who have been disobedient to Him, namely the Jews.

The "New Testament" takes the place of the Tanach as the official description of the Jews and their history and the Tanach is relegated to the secondary position as the "Old Testament".

According to the "New Testament" the Tanach is at best only a description of the future true book which is to come, namely, the "New Testament". The Jews are at best a group of people whose sins have made it necessary for God to send His own son to absolve them.

The more sinful the Jews appear to be, the more pure the Christians. The New Testament cannot describe the Jews as being good and kind etc because then Christianity would be a secondary religion. Belief in Jesus would only be the secodary way to qualify as a child of God. The primary way would be to be a Jew.

It's an honor to be a Jew but it requires a more strict adherence to righteous behavior than is required in Christianity or in Islam.

Every prophet warns Jews of their special task and they even call curses down on us if we don't observe the high moral behaviour set out in the Tanach.

The prophet's censure of backsliding applies to backsliding from a very high moral standard to a lesser moral standard, not from morality to immorality as presented in the "New Testament".

The day of Judgement is for moral people who must constantly be careful not to lessen their morals. It's not a day of judgement for a bunch of criminals. It's a day of Judgement to review our current moral level.

We don't need a day of Atonement for crimes like theft or murder, God forbid. Only punishment can atone for those crimes. We need a day of Atonement to help us go higher on the ladder of moral behaviour, to help us reach out even to the ultimate high standard of morality of God Himself.

According to the "New Testament" those who believe in the saving power of Jesus on the cross are perfect and don't need a day of judgement or a day of atonement.

Sad to say it's our own learned rabbis who have forgotten to explain what is meant by a sinner standing before God. Sinners who've committed really bad crimes don't stand before God, only moral people who want to be more moral.

Our rabbis have been teaching us incorrectly and Christians have followed their way of teaching for thousands of years.

By considering ourselve a stiff necked people it shouldn't surprise us that Christian priests teach this to their flock. They enhance the goodness of Christianity by doing that.

As long as our rabbis and Christian priests continue to teach negative descriptions of the Jews there isn't a hope that Anti Semitism will vanish.

In my opinion the State of Israel is the most righteous nation in the world but nobody's going to acknowledge that because it's a Jewish state and everybody, especially devout Christians have learnt about the Jews from the "New Testament" and the Koran and "knows" the lie that "the Jews are liars, cheats, betrayers of God etc etc."

We need a dialogue with Christianty and Islam at long last. This dialogue must start with putting our cards on the table. We must start explainng the "New Testament" as the second Bible and the Tanach as the first Bible.

We need to explain what the prophets mean when they "O you nation of sinners,when will you return to the Lord." We have to start figuring out what really was the sin that that the prophets are referring to.

We must stop teaching non Jews the traditional rabbinic interpretation of the Bible. The time is long overdue for a complete revue of Jewish Biblical teaching.

If we don't explain what the Bible means then the non Jews are going to give their explanation. We must first see ourselves in a good light before we can expect non Jews to see us in a good light. It's not enough to demonstrate how humane and peace loving is the state of Israel. We need to explain how this humanitarianism harmonises with the dastard, disgusting picture portrayed in negative verses of the Tanach and the "New Testament" which presents only the negative verses.

It's all very well for our leaders to quote from Isaiah and Micah about their dream of world peace and say "look these guys were Jewish". 

Non Jews didn't learn that chapter in Sunday School, it's not even quoted in the "New Testament", at best most people think that Jesus said it and  don't believe the Israeli leader who quoted it.

They learned the curses in Sunda school. We always read those qurses quietly as if they won't be noticed and that's the part of the Bible they notice most. It's about time we started explaining what those curses are all about.

We owe Christians and Moslems an explanation of how we appear to be such sinners in the Bible and the Koran yet such humanitarians today. We must explain that there's no difference between the morality of the Jews living today and the morality of the Jews at the time of Jesus. We've always been a moral nation. We didn't suddenly become moral when the State of Israel was established.

Sad to say Jewish scholarship as great as it is, has let us down in this respect. It hasn't addressed itself properly to the Christian world. I look for explanations in vain. When asked why people hate the Jews we get shrugged shoulders and side stepping answers.

It's about time we called a spade a spade and put the "New Testament" descriptions of Jews in their correct perspective.

I apologise if this attempt doesn't do the job but that's the only thing I'm capable of, being just a simpleton from Krugersdorp, trying to explain something that is difficult to people who don't want to hear. That is the way of simpletons, they don't understand that nobody really wants to hear these things.

Democracy and Anti - Democracy

The demonstrations taking place throughout the country and the publicity they've been getting makes it seem that the whole country is demonstrating and supports the demonstrators in their demands: cheaper housing, more help for young parents in bearing the cost of pre-school education and higher salaries for doctors.

From time to time other groups, like the elderly, holocaust survivors and the handicapped also participate.

Demonstrations are great because they bring problems to light and they might influence members of parliament to vote against the government which would bring about an election, but a democratic government doesn't resign because of a demonstration.

In the case of totalitarian governments, like you have in the Arab countries where many demonstrations have taken place recently, demonstrations are the only way to change the government.

If the government resigns because of this demonstration we would be like those totalitarian societies. It would mean the end of democracy in Israel. In a democracy We need to know that a true majority of the people aren't satisfied with the government before it resigns.

Demonstrations are legitimate and the government must listen to their complaints and possibly investigate making some laws to take care of the complaints. But resigning, definitely no, that would be anti-democratic.

A majority is decided according to the number of members of parliament who support or are against the government. That is democracy. Those members of parliament have been elected by the people and they constitute the will of the people.

A mass of people demonstrating doesn't constitute the will of the people.

Thank God we are a democracy, that's why I like to live in Israel.

People who demonstrate in a democratic society do so because they know that they can't topple the government by a representative majority of members of parliament.

Here, in Israel, a democratic society, a group of people are trying to topple the government by undemocratic means. It won't work because we aren't a totalitarian society as some tycoons who are supporting this demonstrations think we are.

As I say I don't oppose demonstrating for more benefits, higher salaries etc but I do oppose demonstrating to topple the government. That is an attempt to ruin democracy.

It's about time that the opposition went out to the electorate and worked at trying to woo more of them to support them in the next elections rather than throwing their weight with the tycoons in organizing gigantic demonstrations in an attempt to topple the government undemocratically.

I'm not in favor of Netanyahu's government and their policies but I am much less in favor of trying to topple them by undemocratic means. In fact I fear such means and will definitely not participate even though I agree that the cost of living is high and that we earn too little for the work we do.

No matter how many people demonstrate and no matter how violent they are      there's no way of knowing that they represent the majority of the people.  

If the people don't believe in the government which they've elected then obviously they must elect another government who they do believe in.

Democratic governments, however only resign when a vote in parliament goes against them, which means that they don't have a majority. A mass protest, no matter how big, can't prove to the government  that they don't have a majority to govern.

Religious laws aren't made to be kept

Today,as usual, I received my usual supply of emails about how primitve Sharia law is.  

I personally don't think that quoting Muslim law really reflects the way Muslims generally behave.

The law, particularly religious law, is an ideal and there is an enormous gap between the way people live and the ideal set out in religion.

Normal people don't try to achieve the ideal. This is true for all religions.

We can spend hours trying to theorize why religions, in the name of god, make such laws. Most of them are exremely primitive, like the one my friend quoted, and no matter how much time we spend trying to figure out their purpose we'll never get to the end of it. It's therefore a pretty useless endeavour.

The important thing to understand about laws is that people must only obey laws which they can understand or at least have a reasonable appreciation of the purpose of carrying them out. For example I have a good idea why there's a law forbidding me to park my car in certain places so that even when I don't completely understand why a paricular place has no parking I still keep that law.

But the law of marrying a child or the law of not eating pork etc. etc doesn't really make sense in any circumstances.

It's crazy, in my opinion to try to carry out those laws, to carry out laws that I don't understand the purpose, is madness (excuse me all you religious people).

People should not, under any circumstances try to carry out those laws, they should not try to live up to something that claims to be an ideal just because someone said it was given by god.

Those laws are inscrutable. Only god knows why they should be followed.

No human being should try to follow a law which is inscrutable.

We follow laws today, in modern society, not becaus they are god given but because we understand why they need to be followed. We understand purpose of laws that we keep.

Many religious laws aren't understandable and are therefore best simply neglected, as we say in Judaism, untill the Messsiah comes to explain those laws to us.

Imagination and reality

Reality is all around us. All we need to do is to look at it, accept it as it is, live in it, making it part of our lives and it becomes the essence of our happiness and enjoyment of life.

Being blind to reality, creating a fictitious image of what we think is reality, in our minds only leads to constant disappointment and misery for ourselves and for others who we falsely regard as causing the obliteration of our image and hence disappointment.

Seeing that a false image exists in our minds only, while reality is everywhere, there is a constant clash between the two, the false image and reality. The result is a feeling of disappointment accompanied by anger and eventually taking action which can harm reality.

Allow me to give you an example from real life.

A person, with a poor self image usually thinks that others also have a poor image of him but he doesn't try to change the way he sees himself, instead he tries to change the way he thinks others see him.

He does this by creating, in his mind; a situation which he believes will bring accolades of admiration from those around him.

Many people like this, choose an imaginary tour which, they believe, few people before them have done, say a tour of Israel, which is famous for its wars, generals, archaeologists, luxury cars and luxury hotels.

For example a winning combination for an imaginary tour that one can tell the folks back home about, would be a tour guide who is also a general and an archaeologist who picks you up, in a stylish debonair flourish at the airport and whisks you to a 5 star hotel where you sip cocktails by the pool while listening to the "general" telling his great exploits of heroism in a charming, broken English with a Hebrew accent.

What happens when the image is shattered? What happens when, instead of a general a very ordinary, elderly guy (myself) appears to drive and guide you for the next 7 days. No flourishes and no airs only plain information and a few stories about historical events in Israel?

At first you are sick with disappointment and you feel like canceling the whole tour but you can't because the guide (myself) absolutely fulfills the contract you have prepaid, leaving you no grounds for a refund. You decide to let him guide you but you suffer because he gives you no cause for dissatisfaction and dismissal, in fact he's quite good, but you suffer because the image you had has been shattered and as far as you're concerned this tour guide (myself) has shattered it.

You bide your time to punish this tour guide for shattering your dream. Finally when the tour is long behind you, you send a letter to the agent telling them how boring and disappointing this guide was, you even manage to find some points which smack of inefficiency.

You have had your revenge on the person who shattered your dream and you have damaged the good name the tour guide (myself), who in fact gave you nothing but good, honest service.

Your intention was simply to cause hurt and you have done that and nothing else. But you have had your revenge and now you feel better.

I write this out of a feeling of hurt having received painful blows in return for love and kindness.

This is a rare event. Not many people are fortunate enough to meet a person who they treat with kindness and gives them blows and hurts them in return.

Ultimately I feel elevated because I have transcended the feeling of hurt and can look down on it as an eagle looks down on a dying creature. He doesn't feel even one iota of sadness. He just accepts it because that is the reality of the world.

Reality is all around us. All we need to do is to look at it, accept it as it is, live in it, making it part of our lives and it becomes the essence of our happiness and enjoyment of life.

Tyranny and Anti-Semitism

My friend Matthew wrote:
"I concur with this article and the concerning trend it alerts us to. The irony is that the Left Wing American Jewish Community and Academics who are afraid to support Israel because they might sacrifice academic advancement are the same people who will turn to Israel to ask her to save them and provide them a place of refuge when the persecution escalates from academic and professional intimidation to mass murder and genocide.

History has proven that one consistently precedes the other."

This reminded me of one of Aesop's Fables:
The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny.
The Wolf and the Lamb A WOLF, meeting with a Lamb astray from the fold, resolved not to lay violent hands on him, but to find some plea to justify to the Lamb the Wolf’s right to eat him. He thus addressed him: “Sirrah, last year you grossly insulted me.” “Indeed,” bleated the Lamb in a mournful tone of voice, “I was not then born.” Then said the Wolf, “You feed in my pasture.” “No, good sir,” replied the Lamb, “I have not yet tasted grass.” Again said the Wolf, “You drink of my well.” “No,” exclaimed the Lamb, “I never yet drank water, for as yet my mother’s milk is both food and drink to me.” Upon which the Wolf seized him and ate him up, saying, “Well! I won’t remain supperless, even though you refute every one of my imputations.”  Translated by George Fyler Townsend. Aesop's Fables (p. 15). Amazon Digital Services, Inc..

Ant-Semites are a real bunch of tyrants. Just like the lion in Aesop's Fable, above or the original Nazis themselves they are branding the Jews "Nazis" just to find a pretext for their hate campaign, which, if tolerated could become a tyranical regime.

Anti-Semitism seems to be just a part of a much bigger movement with aims much more far reaching than causing inconvenience to Jewish students on Berkely campus.

This movement has added anti-Israel to it's objectives and that also isn't it's main objective but also another part of it's main objective, which is to establish a tyrannical regime wherever and whenever possible.

People joining these anti-Semitic and anti-Israel organisations would strongly deny that they intend to establish a totalitarian state somewhere. They would insist that they oppose totalitarianism. They are unwittingly throwing their weight behind totalitarian forces.

But my friend Matthew is right; when they find themselves persecuted by the tyranny they've have unwittingly helped to establish they will seek the help of non tyrannical states like Israel.

About Me

My lifestory.

My meditation.
Make the best of life.

My lifestory.

I considered myself lucky from the day I was born, well from as early as I can remember thinking, which must have been about the day I was born in Krugersdorp.

I lay, tightly wrapped in lovely white, starched sheets in a cot facing a wall covered in plaster with a pleasant light green coloured, wavy hair comb design, whose lines my eyes traced eagerly in the hope of finding their beginning or their end. I found neither and came to the conclusion that good things are circular; a good painting never ends, neither a good song or a good feeling. Bad things had beginnings and ends.

Today I can only guess that someone had placed me, lying on my right side, facing the wall, without any possibility of turning around because they thought it healthy, but to this day my right leg is weaker than my left leg because of the numbness it suffered then.

I loved learning so I eagerly awaited my first school day because someone had lied to me that school is a place to learn things. From the moment I found out the truth, that school is just a place to regurgitate what your teachers told you I began to suffer. But I knew that suffering, like all bad things came to an end, so 12 years of suffering past over me.

My suffering was the result of a radical discrepancy between what I was supposed to learn at school and what I learned on my own; one didn't get good grades from learning things not taught in school.

I became a teacher to rectify this situation for the next generation but I gave it up after 10 years and settled in Israel where I became a tour guide.

I have lived in Jerusalem, at exactly the place I'd always dreamed of living, namely, Mt.Scopus, overlooking the mountains of Moab and I've managed to see my 4 sons grow up. This also is a never ending process.

I have a wonderful wife and I'm madly in love with her, a granddaughter by the name of Tamar, who is just like me, a grandson by the name of Ophir, another by the name of Alon and now the latest addition is Eitan.

I love my work and even after 35 years of guiding I still feel as if I'm always going out on my very first tour.

My meditation

I believe that there are many people who follow my philosophy of life, some do it conciously, like myself but some people do it automatically and are happy without ever knowing why, they just accept it as the natural way of life.

People like myself who have to conciously learn this philosophy have to work at it all their lives and even then they don't achieve complete happiness. That is a very  idealistic situation.

It's helped me feel better but the moment I stop and try to live without it I go back into depression. It's like a tablet that one takes almost every minute of the day.

I have printed my meditation on my business card. I don't suggest that it'll help everybody or that it'll help quickly or permanently but it changed my life.

It goes like this:

"Whatever befalls me will not disturb my mental joy because being unhappy I will not accomplish what I want and my virtue will diminish."

I think that only if a person really wants to heal his sadness this will help him but if he doesn't really want to heal his sadness it won't help.

I also recommend reading a book by the Dalai Lama called "Healing anger". I found it very difficult to read and understand but after reading it about 3 times it helped me, even though I didn't completely understand it.

Complete understanding like complete happiness is a goal to strive for all our lives and very few people achieve it but it is possible and it is worthile trying to achieve it.

Make the best of life

Everything in life is so sudden and so surprising, we simply don't know what's going to happen next.

We just have to accept and respect and adjust to living in the new situation.

Let's all try to enjoy those close to us, to be kind to them and give them encouragement in everything they di,

Let's enjoy our kids and our family for a good long life

 

My hero Adam

In describing a person who performs actions that are admired and appreciated by society we often use the word "hero"*.

Psychologists and philosophers have had many debates on what constitutes a hero. Usually they take three factors into account: 1) the deed performed. 2) the motivation for its peformance and 3) the reward for it's performance.

But really what makes a person a hero is none of these because in most cases it's not what the hero has done which makes him a hero, neither is it what has motivated him and often not the reward.

In fact what makes a person a hero is what he has sacrificed in order to do the thing for which he is admired.

Most heros have sacrificed something important to them on their way to becoming a hero; some have sacrificed wealth, others family, nourishment, pleasure etc. but the greatest sacrifice is considered to be life.

But there is one thing for sure; a person cannot sacrifice something he doesn't have. He can sacrifice life because he has life.

Therefore, although some heros have sacrificed their lives only one hero in all of history could have sacrificed something much more important than life and that is everlasting life - immortality- eternity.

That sacrifice was made by Adam. He was the only one who ever had immortality and he sacrificed it.

Greater still he sacrificed immortality for all mankind. His sacrifice of immortality brought death into the world. The greatest problem facing mankind.

Without Adam's sacrifice of immortality we would have been immortal. But without it we wouldn't have come into existence.

Instead of admiring Adam for the sacrifice he made to bestow life on us, however we malign him as the originator of sin, the one who robbed man of eternal life, forgetting that in fact he besowed life on man.

Religion has been insisting on this sin and exists as a way to regain immortality, which is deception.

Nevertheless religion's entire function since then has been to regain immortality. It harps on this "blessed" task and even takes on the job of judging people to damnation if they don't follow religious ideas.

In our avid search for ways of atoning for Adam's "sin" we don't take the trouble to examine the heroic act he performed and how it actually brought us into life and taught us the importance of love of one another, most of all the account of Adam and Eve is a lesson that teaches us to make tremendous efforts to love our spouses especially for the husband to love his wife.

The husband must be as prepared as Adam was in sacrificing immortality when it comes to loving a woman. Through this love human beings are brought into the world.

Adam is not only the first man. He is also the first hero because he brought marital love into the world and sacrificed eternity to do it.

*Wherever the masculine is used it refers also to the feminine

.

Antisemitism in Italy

Before reading this blog read the description of how antisemitism is rife in Italy in the article in Yediot newspaper.

The problem with hatred is that hatred breeds hatred and these days Jews don't take a beating without fighting back like they did in the "good old days". I'm not in favor of painting graffitti like "Am Israel Hai" but that's one sort of reaction that one never saw before.

I much prefer urging support for Israeli products and for loudly voicing support for Israel and for the justice which the country offers to all.

There will always be thugs whose way of life is threatened by a just state like Israel and they will never stop harassing the Jews because we don't let injustice thrive. We are it's greatest threat.

Countries like Italy that support the thugs strengthen them and finally find themselves with deep problems of criminality which finally will lead to their downfall. Thugs turn on their own supporters.

When a country doesn't fight injustice as the Arab countries have been doing for centuries, injustice turns itself against the country itself and head for disaster.

Catastrophe doesn't await Israel but those countries that seek her demise and eventually Israel turns out to be a desirable country for foreign investment because the whole world around her is in turmoil. Israel eventually becomes a safe haven.

Only one holy place and we don't know where it is.

Every day, before I take a group out on a tour I need to consider whether we'll be visiting any holy places, so that I can advise them to wear long trousers for men, skirts below the knees for women and shoulders covered for everyone because these things are considered unholy and the wearer will be forbidden to enter the holy place, a church, mosque or synagogue.

One could even visit several holy places in one day and not enter any of them because he or she isn't dressed properly..

But is it really correct to declare many places holy? Isn't there after all, only one holy place, namely the holy place is the place that God has chosen to reveal Himself to human beings and He only chose one place.

It's preposterous to think that every time we build a church, synagogue or mosque we have a new holy place. Because we and not God decide that the church, synagogue or mosque we've built is where He should reveal Himself.

How dare we mortals decide where God should or should not appear. What kind of a God can He be if He doesn't choose His own holy place?

Of course there can be only one holy place. That is the one He chose and he hasn't even told us where that place is. All we know is that somewhere on this planet there is a place that God has chosen for His holy place and we don't know where it is.

The churches, mosques and synagogues we have built aren't His holy places because firstly there can be only one holy place and secondly the fact that humans have built it disqualifies it.

Take the Dome of the Rock for example; According to the Moslems that is God's holy place. The Jews aren't sure, they also think it mighit be God's holy place but Jews consider that it might be somewhere else. Moslems are dogmatic about it and even consider it blasephemous to suggest that it's not His holy place.

We have a way of speaking about holy places that makes one think that each religion has its own holy place. But this is absured, because if there is only one God and only He can choose His holly place, He's only chosen one holy place.

So we should change our way of speaking; instead of saying "The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is the Christian holy place" we should say "According to the Christians the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is God's holy place." According to the Moslems the Dome of the Rock is God's holy place."

Saying these things like this we sharpen the subject of the conflict between Jews, Christians and Moslems. Instead of using semantics to hide conflict among the religions we should use semantics to clarify the conflict, that way we might reach a concerted opinion acceptable to all, namely that nobody knows where is God's holy place. All are wrong in claiming this or that place as holy. God Himself doesn't want man to know His holy place because as you can see we end up with never ending conflict where there shouldn't be any confluct at all.

The lie of Immortality

I've nocked my head against some very hard ones by telling them that immortality is a lie. My head is getting tougher by the day, however, and I won't stop telling people that immortality is a lie.

It's not good and it's not even passively bad. It's not something we can say is okay, it's not something that doesn't do any harm. It's very bad, actively so and it does a lot of harm and it's been busy doing its mischieve for many an age, at leas since Adam.

Adam was indeed born immortal but he died and that's the end of it. Instead some people have been telling us that we can achieve immortality and we are so eager to believe this lie that we embrace the liars with love and honor.

Who could have figured out a lie like this? Only someone who wants to encourage people to accept physical death could have wanted to convince man that he can achieve spiritual immortality.

These are the tyrants of the world who need armies of hundreds of thousands to rush to their death to capture the riches that feed the tyrant's megalomaniac urge for power and wealth.

How they succeed over and over again in every generation is truly the most amazing feat ever achieved. As long as we believe this evil lie men will make war. They go down on their knees before the battle and commit their souls to the Lord.

Let's put a stop to this ridiculous performance. We can stop it and make the world a better place..

Ben Gurion's Mistake

Now that the Palestinians are planning to announce their state in September this year I thought you'd like to hear my new thoughts on Ben Gurion's declaration of the Jewish state in 1948.

Ben Gurion's state accepted the same borders as those set out by the United Nations in it's decision of the 29th November 1947, the Partition Plan.

These borders encompassed the part of the Partition Plan offered to the the Jews, not the part of the partition offered to the Arabs.

Ben Gurion's mistake was his acceptance of only half of of Palestine. The Arabs, rightly, did not accept their half of Palestine, because they rightly maintained that their homeland, Palestine couldn't be divided.

They claimed the Jewish half and were prepared to go to war to conquer what they felt was their by historic right.

They went to war to conquer the part of Palestine which they considered should have belonged to them, namely the part of Palestine which the UN decided should be Jewish, the same part as Ben Gurion accepted as Jewish.

The first of these wars in 1948, known as the war of Independence, ended with Jordan in control of the West Bank of the Jordan River.

Basically this is the same as the part the UN allotted to the Arabs, namely the pre-67 territory, known as such because Israel conquered it in the 6 day war of 1967, another war launched by the Arabs to conquer the territory which they considered rightfully theirs.

Now the Palestinians, consistent to their belief that all of Palestine should belong to them, plan to declare a Palestinian State in that pre 67 territory.

For the first time in the history of the Middle East conflict the Palestinian aren't going to war to conquer the territory they consider rightfully theirs. Instead, by declaring a Palestinian State in the Pre 67 territory they are relinquishing their claim to the other half of Palestine occupied by the Jewish State in terms of Ben Gurions declaration of Independence.

This is truly amazing after 6 wars they are relinquishing their demands of 1948. We should be jumping for joy.

In declaring a Palestinian State the Palestinians are, for the first time, recognizing Jewish sovereignty over the part of Palestine allotted by the UN to the Jews and which the Jews, as stated by Ben Gurion, accepted as the Jewish State.

Now if we, through the mistake of Ben Gurion, relinquished part of Palestine in 1948 what basis do we have for rejecting the Palestinian claim on that pre 67 Jordanian territory, the West Bank.

Ben Gurion's mistake caused the forfeiting of any claim on the pre 67 territory.

The only excuse I can offer for Ben Gurion's stupidity, sorry I don't have a better word is that he and the Jews were ridden with fear of a war with Arabs. He thought he'd avoid war.

I am very sorry that he and unfortunately till now the Jews are motivated by fear. This is a recipe for catastrophe. Catastrophe is the only word to describe the incidents of war in the last 63 years. Now it must come to an end. Unfortunately there is still too much fear amongst Jews themselves to agree to this plan. It's tragedy upon tragedy and catastrophe upon catastrophe. How do we escape from grip of catastrophe.

It is now too late to undo Ben Gurion's mistake. He has made it illegal for the Jewish People to hold on to pre 67 territories He gave them up in 48, that's why we have to give them back. 

The Fruit that Adam ate

Considering that Adam gave up immortality in return for the fruit which he ate it’s not reasonable to consider the fruit was a simple apple.

No matter how tasty apples are and I love apples, I refuse to believe that Adam gave up eternity just to eat an apple.

I believe that he must have eaten a fruit far more precious than an apple. It must have been such a precious fruit that that it outweighed even the preciousness of immortality.

The only fruit that is more precious, in my opinion, and more tasty than immortality is the fruit of the woman, namely her reproductive organs.

To die in the arms of a beautiful woman has been the wish of many a full blooded male. Sad to say some men have caused terrible pain to woman on whom they cruelly forced their ardor when the woman they loved didn't love them in return.

This was not the case with Adam and Eve. The Bible makes it clear that they loved each other dearly and that should be a comfort to us, the descendents of that marriage. We were born out of a relationship of love not one of violence and cruelty. This is why we should learn to live up to our loving ancestry and love one another.

Eve's temptation of Adam wasn't a bad thing. She didn't tempt him out of lust guided by the desire to achieve pure physical pleasure. She tempted Adam because they were alone and needed to stick together, to comfort each other.

Sure the snake represented evil; it's obvious that he did something bad to Eve. This is why she needed Adam to show her love, kindness and affection. Adam's love saved Eve from being forever in the arms of the evil snake.

Adam is the great hero of the world. He gives up immortality to save Eve. He does this by giving her love and shows her that there can be goodness in the mortal world.

Sure he sinned in the eyes of God and God punished him and Eve but he had saved Eve, the woman of his dreams, who he loved and who procreated the world together with him.

The Holy Place

The great question facing religion today as always is: "  Where is God's holy place?"

The question appears in the book of Psalms in a very clear way and virtually screams out of every word  of the Bible. I would go so far as to say that the purpose  of the Bible is to reveal the holy place of God.

A person who doesn't seek the answer to this question will be quite disappointed and will wonder why the Bible is such a popular book.

It's popular because there are obviously many people at all times in history, primitive times and modern, who want to know where is God's holy place.

Of course the Bible doesn't tarry with the answer and gives it straight away; God's holy place is the Garden of Eden.

There's no beating around the bush. Plane and simple, the holy place of God is The Garden of Eden and Man was in it and as long as he was perfectly good he was entitled to be there and like everything else over there he was immortal.

The Bible encourages man to search of immortality by searching for God's Holy Place.

I think that one can safely say that, in the physical world, the world of the 5 senses, man has resigned himself to the fact of death. Modern science may lengthen the span of life but I don't think any scientist thinks that immortality is attainable in the physical world.

All religions, however, promise immortality – of the soul. According to them man has a soul and if he is religious it is immortal. If he isn't religious – well, either he doesn't have a soul or, anyhow it doesn't  matter because a soul that isn't immortal isn't worth having.

This is the basis for the religious justification of the death penalty and in fact for all punishment. Because by committing a crime a person damages his soul and it needs to be repaired by punishment or, sadly, if the crime is so bad that the soul can't be repaired then the person must die physically.

Having chosen to eat the fruit of Eve man is expelled from The Garden of Eden. In other words the eating of the fruit of Eve has made him imperfect and not entitled to be immortal.

Religion, however, comes to his rescue, to save his soul, as it were. It offers him an alternative holy place and a myriad of tools for repairing his damaged soul; sacrifices, ceremonies, prohibitions of certain types of behavior, foods, cloths etc.

Come for a tour with Leon

Jerusalemwalks.com

Tel: 0523801867

Bibi's speech

I've heard that Bibi gave a good speech in congress.

It appears that he stated Israel's case clearly and in so doing became the first Israeli leader in the brief history of modern Israel to call a spade a  spade.

Israel has never been prepared to concede to Arab demands. That isn't news. It's also not news that Israel is prepared to give up territory.

But Israel has always been nervous about stating her case. Even now, after Bibi's speech, journalists in Israel are writing articles that express the nervousness of the Israelis. While at the same time journalists in the US are praising Bibi for his courage.

But Bibi did say a new thing, which everyone feels in their hearts but never shouts it aloud, untill Bibi said it.

It is his statement that we would be the first state to recognize the new Palestinian state if it came about through discussions and if it fulfilled Israel's conditions.

This in fact has always been my answer to tourist's questions about the prospects for peace in the Middle East.

I've always said that we want a Palestinian state, even more than the Palestinians want a Palestinian state.

We aren't only willing to give them territory. We desperately want to give them territory.

But these two wants are subject to conditions which in fact are quite easily fulfilled.

The Arab world must acknowledge Israel's right to exist and must open their hearts and borders to cooperation with Israel.

The best thing that can happen is for Israel - Arab cooperation to thrive.

This is what is lacking. It wasn't achieved in the peace agreements between us and Egypt and us and Jordan.

There needs to be determined willingness, on the part of the Arab world to allow Israeli culture, science and technology to enter their countries.

Only an enthusiastic exchange of culture can bring about peace. Exchange of territory will come about after there is peace and cooperation. It is the result of peace not the cause of peace.



The 63rd Independence day

Sitting under the shady pines, next to the wheat field, near Modiin, I meditated about the contrasting colors of white, green, yellow and blackish dark brown. I sat on the white chairs, which were as out of place in all this natural scene as sitting was out of place. I really wanted to run and saw myself, in my imagination running into the yellow wheat waving gently in the hot sun calling me to gather handfull on handfull, to winnow and thresh and make bread, into which I would dig my old teeth, ripping soft, warm chunks of delicious, whole wheat bread to nourish my starving body.

The cars fled wildly past the wheat field and we tranquilly barbecued our meat and played volleyball shouting happily that this or that one missed a strike and lost a point. Our stomachs were full and so were our minds but we sat tranquilly under the pines by gentle wheat barbecuing and barbecuing until the chocolate cake came, then the coffee and finally the watermelon.

It was a day of independence, the 63rd.

Arab unity and the peace process

The show of unity between Hamas and PLO has all the trappings of peace and hamony; handshaking, kissing on both cheeks, words of good intent towards each other and of course hints at joint action against Israel.

The show has achieved all round response from Israeli leaders, even Mr Perez, our veteran president and eternal optimist, has warned of the dire dangers that the moderate PLO is being manuouvred to an extremist anti Israel position by Hamas.

According to the common opinion, (Perez, Netanyahu, Barak and the general public) unity between the Arabs is bad for Israel. This is based on a principle that an enemy divided is easier to vanquish than an enemy that stands united in itself.

This is probably good strategy for two armies against each other on the battlefield but not for a dozen different nations attacking us at different times from different directions in a myriad different ways.

One enemy is better than a dozen different enemies.

We should rejoice at Arab unity because it's easier to deal with one enemy, either making war against him or making peace with him.

If this agreement between Hamas and PlO really succeeds it offers hope of either final victory over a single Arab nation or a peace agreement with them.