Craven Cowards at Brandeis Cancel Ayaan Hirsi Ali Honor, Cave to Muslim Thugs’ Demands

infidel-ayaan-hirsi-aliOn the eve of the bloody anniversary of the Boston Marathon bombings, Brandeis University (just nine miles west of Boston)  said Tuesday that it would cave to Islamic thugs and bullies and  rescind an honorary degree that it had awarded to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a campaigner for women’s rights and a fierce critic of Islamic gender apartheid, creed apartheid and supremacism.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an extraordinary woman. Arguably one of the most brave and outspoken human rights activists of our time, Ali is a fierce defender of women’s rights in Islamic societies. Born in Mogadishu, Somalia,  and raised in Muslim countries, she suffered the misogyny and relentless oppression of daily life under the sharia and was forced to undergo the unimaginable pain and horror of  female genital mutilation.

“She escaped an arranged marriage by immigrating to the Netherlands in 1992 and served as a member of the Dutch parliament from 2003 to 2006. In parliament, she worked on furthering the integration of non-Western immigrants into Dutch society and defending the rights of women in Dutch Muslim society. In 2004, together with director Theo van Gogh, she made Submission, a film about the oppression of women in conservative Islamic cultures. The airing of the film on Dutch television resulted in the assassination of Mr. van Gogh by an Islamic extremist. At AEI, Ms. Hirsi Ali researches the relationship between the West and Islam, women’s rights in Islam, violence against women propagated by religious and cultural arguments, and Islam in Europe.” (source)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, under a death fatwa for the past decade, lives under police protection.

Ms. Ali was scheduled to receive an honorary degree from Brandeis University. Who is more deserving of recognition?  Almost as soon as the announcement was made, Muslim Brotherhood groups like Hamas-CAIR and their American sharia enforcers waged a jihad against this honor and demanded Brandeis to rescind the degree.

The Hamas group wrote:

“We believe offering such an award to a promoter of religious prejudice such as Ali is equivalent to promoting the work of white supremacists and anti-Semites. Granting her an honorary degree is unworthy of the American tradition of civil liberty and religious freedom represented by Justice Louis Brandeis and the great university that carries his name.

“While Ali is free to spew anti-Muslim hate in any venue she chooses, she does not have a similar right to be honored for that hate by a prestigious university.

“Whatever Ali has done in the area of human rights has been irreparably tarnished by her anti-Muslim and anti-constitutional rhetoric.

Vicious supremacists (some of whose leadership has been convicted of terror related crimes) have waged a covert war to impose the free speech restrictions under Islamic law on media and academia. And they have done it. There is a blacklist of voices of freedom, while our worst enemies are feted and paid obscene amounts to spew their hate and lies.

Brandeis caved to these thugs. Have they no shame? A university founded on Jewish values cancels a truth-teller.  Is there no one with any principles left? Even the sniveling NY TImes article would not stand up to this fascism. “Facing growing criticism….” Nonsense. It was Muslim thug groups, their leftist lapdogs and the usual suspects like Rashid Khalidi.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali canceled? And by whom? Clueless mental midgets doing the bidding of fanatical practitioners of the most vicious and extreme ideology on the face of the earth. No one is safe. No one. The Islamic leftist machine destroys anyone that stands in the way of their totalitarian goals.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali lived it. A woman of color, a Muslim from Somalia, she risked everything to be free and she turned her life over to educating the West of the systemic oppression and subjugation of women under Islam while forcing the Islamic world to answer for it.

But Brandeis would sooner partner with the Nazis at al Quds University.

America has come undone, lost our bearings. We must awaken our friends, neighbors, co-workers. We must teach our children. Silence in the face of this totalitarianism is sanction.

The university’s namesake, Louis Brandeis once said, “sunlight is the best disinfectant.” They have all but abandoned his principles or the idea of truth. Yes, Brandeis is in dire need of some disinfectant.

Geller Glick AliCaroline Glick, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Pamela Geller

Brandeis Cancels Plan to Give Honorary Degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Critic of Islam,” By Richard Perez-Pena and Tanzina Vegaapril, NY Times, 8, 2014

Facing growing criticism, Brandeis University said Tuesday that it had reversed course and would not award an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a campaigner for women’s rights and a fierce critic of Islam, who has called the religion “a destructive, nihilistic cult of death.”

“We cannot overlook that certain of her past statements are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values,” the university said in a statement released eight days after it had announced that Ms. Hirsi Ali and four other people would be honored at its commencement on May 18.

The university said that the president of Brandeis, Frederick M. Lawrence, discussed the matter with Ms. Hirsi Ali on Tuesday, and that she “is welcome to join us on campus in the future to engage in a dialogue.” Universities consider it important to make a distinction between inviting a speaker who may air unpopular or provocative views that the institution does not endorse, and awarding an honorary degree, which is more akin to affirming the body of a recipient’s work.

Attempts to reach Ms. Hirsi Ali late Tuesday by email and telephone were unsuccessful.

At first, it was bloggers who noted and criticized the plan to honor Ms. Hirsi Ali, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Within a few days, a Brandeis student started an online petition against the decision at Change.org, drawing thousands of signatures. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights and advocacy group, took note, contacting its members though email and social media, and urging them to protest to the university.

On Tuesday, a student newspaper, The Justice, reported on the controversy, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations sent a letter to Dr. Lawrence, referring to Ms. Hirsi Ali as a “notorious Islamophobe.”

“She is one of the worst of the worst of the Islam haters in America, not only in America but worldwide,” Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the group, said in an interview on Tuesday. “I don’t assign any ill will to Brandeis. I think they just kind of got fooled a little bit.”

In its statement, Brandeis said, “For all concerned, we regret that we were not aware of” Ms. Hirsi Ali’s record of anti-Islam statements, though those comments have been fairly widely publicized.

“You would think that someone at Brandeis would have learned to use Google,” said Rashid Khalidi, a professor of Arab studies at Columbia University, who said he thought Brandeis had arrived at the right position: not awarding a degree, but welcoming Ms. Hirsi Ali to speak.

Having drawn fire for inviting Ms. Hirsi Ali, Brandeis may now take criticism from other camps, whether for disavowing Ms. Hirsi Ali’s views, or for giving in to Muslim activists.

Even some of Ms. Hirsi Ali’s critics say they understand her hostility to Islam, given her experiences, though they think she goes too far. A native of Somalia, she has written and spoken extensively of her experience as a Muslim girl in East Africa, including undergoing genital mutilation, a practice she has vigorously opposed, and her family’s attempts to force her to marry a man against her wishes.

She moved to the Netherlands as a young woman, and she was later elected to the Dutch Parliament. She wrote the screenplay for “Submission,” a 2004 film critical of the treatment of Muslim women. Shortly after its release, the director, Theo van Gogh, was murdered on an Amsterdam street by a radical Islamist, who pinned to the victim’s body a threat to kill Ms. Hirsi Ali as well.

“She has her very real personal story, she has her views, and she’s free to say what she’d like to say,” said Maya Berry, executive director of the Arab American Institute, an advocacy group. “But for an institution like Brandeis to choose to honor someone like this is really disappointing.”

In 2007, Ms. Hirsi Ali gave an interview to The London Evening Standard that was, by her own telling, the most unvarnished public expression of her views to that point, including the “cult of death” comment. She advocated the closing of Islamic schools in the West and said that “violence is inherent in Islam” and that “Islam is the new fascism.”

Later that year, in an interview with Reason, she said, “I think we are at war with Islam,” and said it must be defeated. “It’s very difficult to even talk about peace now,” she said. “They’re not interested in peace.”

Western leaders like George W. Bush and Tony Blair were striking a very different tone, insisting that they were at war with terrorist factions, not Islam as a whole.

Brandeis said last week that it intended to confer honorary degrees on five recipients, including Ms. Hirsi Ali. One of the recipients is Jill Abramson, the executive editor of The New York Times.

Pamela Geller is the Editor of PamelaGeller.com

Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Craven Cowards at Brandeis Cancel Ayaan Hirsi Ali Honor, Cave to Muslim Thugs’ Demands

  1. MUHAMMAD – THE PERFECT EXAMPLE FOR MANKIND

    THE PERFECT MUSLIM

    And surely thou hast sublime morals
    (Surat Al-Qalam 68:4).

    Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar
    (Surat Al-Ahzab 33:21).

    Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly.

    ALLAH’S ARITHMETIC: 54 INTO 9 GOES NICELY

    THE WANKING PERVERT FROM MECCA

    A marriage is engaged in by 2 consenting adults.
    Do you really believe a 6 year old child would desire to marry a 51 year old man?
    Do you think that is what she would choose?
    Do you think a 9 year old girl would desire to have sex with a 54 year old?

    The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the “Holy Prophet” of Mecca married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and WANKED BETWEEN HER THIGHS FOR 3 YEARS and consummated/RAPED her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.

    MUHAMMAD: HIS SEX LIFE, SEX ABUSE & CHILD MOLESTING

    Muslims believe that the Koran is the eternal word/laws of god to acts as a divine guidance for mankind about how to live a moral, righteous life. Prophet Muhammad, the highest perfection of human life and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct in Islamic belief, emulated the guidance of Allah perfectly. Let us investigate how did the prophet live Islam; how did the prophet apply the eternal teachings of God in his daily life? In this search for the historical Muhammad, we will utilize the Islam’s holy books, its own writings.

    MUHAMMAD’S MOLESTATION OF BABY AISHA

    Muhammad fantasized about baby Aisha before soliciting her from her father.
    Sahih Bukhari 9.140
    Narrated ‘Aisha:
    Allah’s apostle said to me, “you were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, ‘uncover (her),’ and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), ‘if this is from Allah, then it must happen.
    AISHA’S FATHER DID NOT APPROVE AT FIRST
    Aisha’s father, Abu Bakr, wasn’t on board at first, but Muhammad explained how the rules of their religion made it possible. This is similar to the way that present-day cult leaders manipulate their followers into similar concessions.
    Sahih Bukhari 7.18
    Narrated ‘Ursa:
    The prophet asked abu Bakr for ‘Aisha’s hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said “but I am your brother.” the prophet said, “you are my brother in Allah’s religion and his book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry.”

    MUHAMMAD WOULD THIGH WITH BABY AISHA

    HOW TO THIGH & GET HIGH

    Now let us see how thighing is practiced on a female child & who began this evil practice. According to an official Fatwa issued in Saudi Arabia, the prophet Muhammad began to practice thighing his child-bride, Aisha when she was 6 years old until she reached 9 years of age (Fatwa No. 31409). The hadith mentioned the prophet Muhammad started performing literal sex with Aisha ONLY when she reached the age of 9 (Sahih al-Bukhari, book 62, hadith No. 89).

    Muslim scholars collectively agree, a child becomes an adult, available for sexual intercourse as soon as she reaches the age of nine. Likewise, the Shari’a allows any of the faithful to marry a six-year-old child.

    According to the fatwa, the prophet Muhammad could not have sex with his fiancée, Aisha when she was six due to her small size & age. However, the fatwa said that at age six, he would put his penis between her thighs and massage it gently because he did not want to harm her.

    Imagine a man of 51 removing the clothes of a 6-year-old girl and slipping his erect penis between her thighs, rubbing her until he ejaculated and his semen ran down her thighs. To this day, this is considered a benevolent act on the part of the adult male “not wanting to harm her.” What harm could be inflicted upon a young girl mentally and emotionally if not a grown man showing her his penis and stripping her of her clothes and rubbing his male organ between her legs?

    Of course the twisted mind that does such an evil to a female child, would not hesitate to ejaculate on her body. And if this sexually perverted evil frame of mind committed such an act upon a child, the pedophile would not stop at ejaculating on her. His evil desire would go further and rape the child before she was a mature adult. This is exactly what Muhammad did to Aisha when she was yet a child of 9.

    Before she reached puberty, he began to have sex with her. Let us see what the fatwa said about the prophet of Islam and his child-bride, Aisha.”Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the one after whom there is no [further] prophet. After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwas (religious decrees) reviewed the question presented to the grand Mufti Abu Abdullah Muhammad Al-Shamari, with reference number 1809 issued on 3/8/1421(Islamic calendar).

    The inquirer asked the following: ‘It has become wide spread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufakhathat of the children (mufakhathat literally translated means “placing between the thighs of children” which means placing the male erected penis between the thighs of a child). What is the opinion of scholars knowing full well that the prophet, the peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha – the mother of believers ?’

    After the committee studied the issue, they gave the following reply: ‘It has not been the practice of the Muslims throughout the centuries to resort to this unlawful practice that has come to our countries from pornographic movies that the kofar (infidels) and enemies of Islam send. As for the Prophet, peace and prayers of Allah be upon him, thighing his fiancée Aisha. She was six years of age and he could not have intercourse with her due to her small age.

    That is why the prophet peace and prayers of Allah be upon him placed his penis between her thighs and massaged it lightly, as the apostle of Allah had control of his penis not like other believers'” (Fatwa No. 31409).

    Thighing of children is practiced in many Arab and Muslim countries, notably in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, and the Gulf countries. Also evil practices like altamatu’a bil almuka’aba (pleasure from sexual contact with her breasts), altamatu’a bil alsagirah (pleasure from sexual contact with a baby girl), altamatu’a bil alradi’ah, (pleasure from sexual contact with a suckling female infant), (Reported by Baharini Women’s Rights Activist, Ghada Jamshir)

    AISHA WASHING SEMEN FROM MUHAMMAD’S CLOTHES

    From the Hadith of Bukhari:

    Volume 1, Book 4, Number 229:

    Narrated ‘Aisha:

    I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).

    Volume 1, Book 4, Number 231:

    Narrated Sulaiman bin Yasar:

    I asked ‘Aisha about the clothes soiled with semen. She replied, “I used to wash it off the clothes of Allah’s Apostle and he would go for the prayer while water spots were still visible. ”

    ALLAH & MOHAMMED SANCTIONED THE RAPE OF FEMALE CAPTIVES:

    RAPE JIHAD:

    Sahih Muslim Book 08. N 3371Marriage

    Chapter: Al-Azl (incomplete sexual intercourse): Coitus Interruptus.

    Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (May peace be upon him) mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (May peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women;

    and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them.
    So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him?

    So we asked Allah’s Messenger (May peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.

    REMEMBER:

    ISLAM TEACHES THAT RAPE IS ORDAINED OF GOD

    ALLAH & MOHAMMED SANCTIONED RAPE

    Al-‘Azl
    Al-‘Azl, (العزل) also known as coitus interruptus, is the practice of having sexual intercourse with a woman but withdrawing the penis before ejaculation. Apparently al-‘Azl with female captives and slaves was a pretty important topic for Muhammad and his companions as evidenced by the abundance of Hadith material on the subject.
    Practiced during Muhammad’s lifetime & ALL OVER EUROPE TODAY
    Narrated Jabir: We used to practice coitus interruptus during the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle .
    Sahih Bukhari 7:62:135
    Narrated Jabir: We used to practice coitus interrupt us while the Quran was being revealed. Jabir added: We used to practice coitus interruptus during the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle while the Quran was being Revealed.
    Sahih Bukhari 7:62:136
    When RAPING your captive, it’s better if you do not pull out at the end
    THIS IS ISLAM

    Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah’s Apostle he said, “O Allah’s Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus(RAPE WITHOUT PREGNANCY)?” The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to PULL OUT. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”

    Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432

    Abu Said said, “We went with Allah’s Apostle, in the Ghazwa of Barli Al-Mustaliq and we captured some of the ‘Arabs as captives, and the long separation from our wives was pressing us hard and we wanted to practice coitus interruptus. We asked Allah’s Apostle (whether it was permissible). He said, “It is better for you not to do so. No soul, (that which Allah has) destined to exist, up to the Day of Resurrection, but will definitely come, into existence.”
    Sahih Bukhari 3:46:718

    THREE YEAR OLD BRIDES

    When Jesus of Nazareth accused the Pharisees of His day of being Satan’s spiritual children, He fully realized what they were capable of. Second century Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, one of Judaism’s very greatest rabbis and a creator of Kabbalah, sanctioned pedophilia — permitting molestation [raping] of baby girls even younger than three! He proclaimed, “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and a day is permitted to marry a priest.” (1) Subsequent rabbis refer to ben Yohai’s endorsement of pedophilia as “halakah”, or binding Jewish law. (2) Has ben Yohai, child rape advocate, been disowned by modern Jews? Hardly. Today, in ben Yohai’s hometown of Meron, Israel, tens of thousands of orthodox and ultra-orthodox Jews gather annually for days and nights of singing and dancing in his memory.
    References to pedophilia abound in the Talmud. They occupy considerable sections of Treatises Kethuboth and Yebamoth and are enthusiastically endorsed by the Talmud’s definitive legal work, Treatise Sanhedrin.

    THE PHARISEES ENDORSED CHILD SEX

    The rabbis of the Talmud are notorious for their legal hairsplitting, and quibbling debates. But they share rare agreement about their right to molest three year old girls. In contrast to many hotly debated issues, hardly a hint of dissent rises against the prevailing opinion (expressed in many clear passages) that pedophilia is not only normal but scriptural as well! It’s as if the rabbis have found an exalted truth whose majesty silences debate.
    Because the Talmudic authorities who sanction pedophilia are so renowned, and because pedophilia as “halakah” is so explicitly emphasized, not even the translators of the Soncino edition of the Talmud (1936) dared insert a footnote suggesting the slightest criticism. They only comment: “Marriage, of course, was then at a far earlier age than now.” (3)
    In fact, footnote 5 to Sanhedrin 60b rejects the right of a Talmudic rabbi to disagree with ben Yohai’s endorsement of pedophilia: “How could they [the rabbis], contrary to the opinion of R. Simeon ben Yohai, which has scriptural support, forbid the marriage of the young proselyte?” (4)

    OUT OF BABYLON

    It was in Babylon after the exile under Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC that Judaism’s leading sages probably began to indulge in pedophilia. Babylon was the staggeringly immoral capitol of the ancient world. For 1600 years, the world’s largest population of Jews flourished within it. [Ashkenazik Shinar (‘sin’) was a stone throw away from Sodom and Gomorrah – Any questions?]
    As an example of their evil, Babylonian priests said a man’s religious duty included regular sex with temple prostitutes. Bestiality was widely tolerated. So Babylonians hardly cared whether a rabbi married [raped] a three year old girl.
    But with expulsion of the Jews [‘Edomites, Pharisees, Ashkenazim, Khazars, Sephardim’] in the 11th century AD, mostly to western Christian lands, Gentile tolerance of Jewish pedophilia abruptly ended.
    Still, a shocking contradiction lingers: If Jews want to revere the transcendent wisdom and moral guidance of the Pharisees and their Talmud, they must accept the right of their greatest ancient sages to violate children. To this hour, no synod of Judaism has repudiated their vile practice.

    SEX WITH A “MINOR” PERMITTED

    What exactly did these sages say?
    The Pharisees justified child rape by explaining that a boy of nine years was not a “man” Thus they exempted him from God’s Mosaic Law: “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” (Leviticus. 18:22) One passage in the Talmud gives permission for a woman who molested her young son to marry a high priest. It concludes, “All agree that the connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not.” (5) Because a boy under 9 is sexually immature, he can’t “throw guilt” on the active offender, morally or legally. (6)
    A woman could molest a young boy without questions of morality even being raised: “…the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act.” (7) The Talmud also says, “A male aged nine years and a day who cohabits with his deceased brother’s wife acquires her (as wife).” (8) Clearly, the Talmud teaches that a woman is permitted to marry and have sex with a nine year old boy.

    SEX AT THREE YEARS & ONE DAY

    In contrast to Simeon ben Yohai’s dictum that sex with a little girl is permitted under the age of three years, the general teaching of the Talmud is that the rabbi must wait until a day after her third birthday. She could be taken in marriage simply by the act of rape. [these were the ‘precursors’ of Hillary, Pelosi, Kagan, Napolitano, Ginsburg, Boxer, Albright, Abzug, Goldman, Livni, ad nauseam]
    R. Joseph said: “Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his.” (Sanh. 55b)
    “A girl who is three years of age and one day may be betrothed by cohabitation …” (Yeb. 57b)
    A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her she becomes his. (Sanh. 69a, 69b, also discussed in Yeb. 60b)
    It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai stated: “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phineas (who was priest, the footnote says) surely was with them.” (Yeb. 60b)
    [The Talmud says such three year and a day old girls are] “… fit for cohabitation … But all women children, that have not known man by lying with him, it must be concluded that Scripture speaks of one who is fit for cohabitation.” (Footnote to Yeb. 60b)
    The example of Phineas, a priest, himself marrying an underage virgin of three years is considered by the Talmud as proof that such infants are “fit for cohabitation.”
    The Talmud teaches that an adult woman’s molestation of a nine year old boy is “not a sexual act” and cannot “throw guilt” upon her because the little boy is not truly a “man.” (9) But they use opposite logic to sanction rape of little girls aged three years and one day: Such infants they count as “women,” sexually mature and fully responsible to comply with the requirements of marriage.
    The Talmud footnotes 3 and 4 to Sanhedrin 55a clearly tell us when the rabbis considered a boy and girl sexually mature and thus ready for marriage. “At nine years a male attains sexual matureness… The sexual matureness of woman is reached at the age of three.”

    NO RIGHTS FOR CHILD VICTIMS

    The Pharisees were hardly ignorant of the trauma felt by molested children. To complicate redress, the Talmud says a rape victim must wait until she was of age before there would be any possibility of restitution. She must prove that she lived and would live as a devoted Jewess, and she must protest the loss of her virginity on the very hour she comes of age. “As soon as she was of age one hour and did not protest she cannot protest any more.” (10)
    The Talmud defends these strict measures as necessary to forestall the possibility of a Gentile child bride rebelling against Judaism and spending the damages awarded to her as a heathen – an unthinkable blasphemy! But the rights of the little girl were really of no great consequence, for, “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (three years and a day) it is as if one put the finger into the eye.” The footnote says that as “tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.” (11)
    In most cases, the Talmud affirms the innocence of male and female victims of pedophilia. Defenders of the Talmud claim this proves the Talmud’s amazing moral advancement and benevolence toward children; they say it contrasts favorably with “primitive” societies where the child would have been stoned along with the adult perpetrator.
    Actually, the rabbis, from self-protection, were intent on proving the innocence of both parties involved in pedophilia: the child, but more importantly, the pedophile. They stripped a little boy of his right to “throw guilt” on his assailant and demanded complicity in sex from a little girl. By thus providing no significant moral or legal recourse for the child, the Talmud clearly reveals whose side it is on: the raping rabbi.

    PEDOPHILIA WIDESPREAD

    Child rape was practiced in the highest circles of Judaism . This is illustrated from Yeb. 60b:
    “There was a certain town in the land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Romanos who conducted an inquiry and found in it the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day, and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest.”
    The footnote says that she was “married to a priest” and the rabbi simply permitted her to live with her husband, thus upholding “halakah” as well as the dictum of Simeon ben Yohai, “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest.” (12)
    These child brides were expected to submit willingly to sex. Yeb. 12b confirms that under eleven years and one day a little girl is not permitted to use a contraceptive but “must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner.”
    In Sanhedrin 76b a blessing is given to the man who marries off his children before they reach the age of puberty, with a contrasting curse on anyone who waits longer. In fact, failure to have married off one’s daughter by the time she is 12-1/2, the Talmud says, is as bad as one who “returns a lost article to a Cuthean” (Gentile) – a deed for which “the Lord will not spare him.” (13) This passage says: “… it is meritorious to marry off one’s children whilst minors.”
    The mind reels at the damage to the untold numbers of girls who were sexually abused within Judaism during the heyday of pedophilia. Such child abuse, definitely practiced in the second century, continued, at least in Babylon, for another 900 years.

    A FASCINATION WITH SEX

    Perusing the Talmud, one is overwhelmed with the recurrent preoccupation with sex, especially by the most eminent rabbis. Dozens of illustrations could be presented to illustrate the delight of the Pharisees to discuss sex and quibble over its minutest details.
    The rabbis endorsing child sex undoubtedly practiced what they preached. Yet to this hour, their words are revered. Simeon ben Yohai is honored by Orthodox Jews as one of the very greatest sages and spiritual lights the world has ever known [!!!]. A member of the earliest “Tannaim,” rabbis most influential in creating the Talmud, he carries more authority to observant Jews than Moses.
    Today, the Talmud’s outspoken pedophiles and child-rape advocates would doubtlessly spend hard time in prison for child molestation. Yet here is what the eminent Jewish scholar, Dagobert Runes (who is fully aware of all these passages), says about such “dirty old men” and their perverted teachings:
    “There is no truth whatever in Christian and other strictures against the Pharisees, who represented the finest traditions of their people and of human morals.” (14)

    AREN’T THE WORDS OF JESUS MORE APPROPRIATE?

    “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” (Matthew 23:27, 28.)
    Endnotes:
    1 Yebamoth 60b, p. 402.
    2 Yebamoth 60b, p. 403.
    3 Sanhedrin 76a.
    4 In Yebamoth 60b, p. 404, Rabbi Zera disagrees that sex with girls under three years and one day should be endorsed as halakah.
    5 Sanhedrin 69b.
    6 Sanhedrin 55a.
    7 Footnote 1 to Kethuboth 11b.
    8 Sanhedrin 55b.
    9 Sanhedrin 55a.
    10 Kethuboth 11a.
    11 Kethuboth 11b.
    12 Yebamoth 60b.
    13 Sanhedrin 76b.
    14 Dagobert Runes, A Concise Dictionary of Judaism, New York, 1959.

    “THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD

    The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud published in 1935 was “Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices” by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M.A., Litt.D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A.’, Ph.D., Maurice Simon, M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr. J.H. Hertz wrote the “Foreword” for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.

    The world’s leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness. It is almost a word-for-word translation of the original texts. In his famous classic “The History of the Talmud,” Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the celebrated Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise states:

    “THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD. During the twenty centuries of its existence…IT SURVIVED IN ITS ENTIRETY, and not only has the power of its foes FAILED TO DESTROY EVEN A SINGLE LINE, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time. IT STILL DOMINATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEOPLE, WHO VENERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH…”

    The following are but a few of the many similar quotations with footnotes from the Soncino Edition of the Talmud, the “sort of book” from which Jesus allegedly “drew the teachings which enabled him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious” subjects:

    SANHEDRIN, 55b-55a: “What is meant by this? – Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that (2) What is the basis of their dispute? – Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt (upon the actual offender); whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty (in that respect) (3). But Samuel maintains: Scriptures writes, (And thou shalt not lie with mankind) as with the lyings of a woman (4). It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Pederasty at the age of nine years and a day; (55a) (he) who commits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally: or a woman who causes herself to be bestiality abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment (5).”

    This “divine truth” which “a whole people venerate” of which “not a single letter of it is missing” and today “is flourishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its history” is illustrated by the additional verbatim quotations which follow:

    SANHEDRIN, 55b: “A maiden three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; (if a niddah) she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon (a person afflicted with gonorrhea).”

    (footnotes) “(2) His wife derives no pleasure from this, and hence there is no cleaving. (3) A variant reading of this passage is: Is there anything permitted to a Jew which is forbidden to a heathen. Unnatural connection is permitted to a Jew. (4) By taking the two in conjunction, the latter as illustrating the former, we learn that the guilt of violating the injunction `to his wife but not to his neighbor’s wife’ is incurred only for natural but not for unnatural intercourse.”

    SANHEDRIN, 69b “Our rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son (a minor), and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her, -Beth Shammai says, he thereby renders her unfit for the priesthood (1). Beth Hillel declares her fit…All agree that the connection of a boy nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not (2); their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old.

    KETHUBOTH, 11a-11b. “Rabba said, It means (5) this: When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (6), it is as if one puts the finger in the eye (7), but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown up woman, he makes her as `a girl who is injured by a piece of wood’ “.
    (footnotes) “(5). Lit., `says’. (6) Lit., `here’, that is, less than three years old. (7) Tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.”

    KETHUBOTH, 11a-11b. “Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown up woman makes her (as though she were ) injured by a piece of wood (1). Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.”
    (footnotes) “(1) Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.”

    ABODAH ZARAH, 36b-37a. “R. Naham b. Isaac said: They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it would cause defilement by seminal emission (2) so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with it…From what age does a heathen child cause defilement by seminal emission? From the age of nine years and one day. (37a) for inasmuch as he is then capable of the sexual act he likewise defiles by emission. Rabina said: It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl (communicates defilement) from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux.

    SOTAH, 26b. “R. Papa said: It excludes an animal, because there is not adultery in connection with an animal (4). Raba of Parazika (5) asked R. Ashi, Whence is the statement which the Rabbis made that there is no adultery in connection with an animal? Because it is written, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog etc.; (6) and it has been taught: The hire of a dog (7) and the wages of a harlot (8) are permissible, as it is said, Even both of these (9) – the two (specified texts are abominations) but not four (10)…As lying with mankind. (12) But, said Raba, it excludes the case where he warned her against contact of the bodies (13). Abaye said to him, That is merely an obscene act (and not adultery), and did the All-Merciful prohibit (a wife to her husband) for an obscene act?”

    Of the “sacred” Talmudic teachings of the “Sages,” preserved since 500 A.D. and taught more widely today than ever before in Talmud-Torah schools in the U.S.A., perhaps nothing better illustrates “fools” with “reprobate minds” than the teaching in the Talmud book of Yebamoth that spittle on the top of the bed curtain proves that a wife has been guilty of adultery, as only lying down face upwards could she have spit up on it. Spitting several feet straight up! The Talmud states: “When a peddler leaves a house and the woman within is fastening her sinnar [breech-cloth] … . If spittle is found on the upper part of the curtained bed she must, said Rabbi, go.” Footnote: “Even if there were no witnesses that misconduct took place.” Further footnote: “Only the woman lying face upwards could have spat on the spot. Intercourse may, there fore, be suspected.”

    TRUETORAHJEWS.ORG

    [email protected]
    Contact Us
    © 2011 True Torah Jews, All Rights Reserved
    True Torah Jews
    183 Wilson Street,
    PMB 162,
    Brooklyn, NY 11211
    [email protected]
    Main telephone line 718-841-7053
    Fax 718-504-4513
    Yiddish Hotline קול נטרונא 718-873-0055
    Ask The Rabbi 888-560-9634

    We are Talmudic Jews, and so are all religious Jews today. Let me explain the relationship of the Torah and the Talmud, so you understand that they are both equally revered by all Orthodox Jews without exception. When G-d gave us the Torah, He also gave us an explanation of its laws, to be transmitted orally from generation to generation. For example, the Torah prohibits work on the Sabbath, but does not say exactly what “work” means. G-d explained to Moses orally that it means carrying objects in the street, lighting fires, tying knots, slaughtering animals and so on. The Torah says to take the fruit of the goodly trees on Succoth, but does not say which fruit. Oral tradition explains that it is the ethrog or citron. If you think about it, most of the laws in the Torah are impossible to observe without more explanation.

    These explanations were passed down from teacher to student for about 1500 years, until around the year 200 of the common era. At that time the Sages became afraid that the laws would be forgotten, and they decided to write them down. This written work was called the Mishnah, and is the backbone of the Talmud. Even this Mishnah was written in a concise style and left much room for oral explanation, which went on being passed down for another 300 years. At that time it was written down, again out of fear of being forgotten, as the Talmud. All of Jewish law today is based on the Talmud, and is kept by all observant Jews. There have been breakoff sects in history – once in about 300 BCE and another in about 700 CE – who rejected the orally transmitted laws. But they are almost non-existent today.

    Zionism is a political movement founded more than 100 years ago by Jews who had already turned their backs on the entire Jewish religion, Torah and Talmud alike. They were joined by some religious Jews who wanted join them in building a state, while at the same time retaining the beliefs and practices of Judaism. Understandably, this required a good deal of manipulation of the texts to suit their purposes.

    They use the pieces of the Bible and Talmud they want, and ignore the rest. There was a period in ancient history when Jews were permitted to fight wars, for example the period of Joshua, King David etc. TheTorah has laws relating to war, and the Talmud, just as it explains all the laws of the Torah, explains these laws as well. The Zionists see these wars as their precedent. But they are ignoring the fact that these wars were fought by Divine command. From the year 69 and onward, when the Temple was destroyed and our exile began, Jews have been forbidden to fight any wars. The Talmud says that explicitly, but the Zionists ignore it. The Talmud says explicitly that Jews may not reconquer the land of Palestine. The Zionists ignore that too.

    The Bible and Talmud have a lot of material on the final redemption, when G-d will bring peace to the world and restore the Jews to their ancestral land. The Zionists, through their ignorance of the sources, have misconstrued this as a political or military effort. However, the true Jewish belief, which Jews have held throughout the centuries, is that first G-d will send the messiah, a Jewish leader who will bring all the Jews to keep the laws of the Torah and will be recognized by the entire world as the messiah. Then the process of gathering the Jewish exiles will begin, peacefully, since the non-Jews will also agree that this messiah is a messenger of G-d. No one will be killed or forcibly expelled.

    In short, secular Zionists have no respect for any Jewish text. Religious Zionists have respect for all the same Jewish texts that we respect, only they have perverted their meaning and ignored key passages. One of the major goals of Jews Against Zionism is to reach our fellow Jews who are ignorant about the subject and have been confused by Zionist interpretations of Jewish texts, and to show them the true meaning of those texts.

    We don’t support the State of Israel, and that is precisely because of our concern for the nation of Israel, that is the Jewish people and their historic religion and belief system. We don’t want Jews to be in danger in the Middle East or anywhere else, and we believe that the State endangers them. We don’t want the Jewish belief system to change, and we believe that Zionism is changing it.

  2. SETTLE DOWN & BE QUIET!

    The Persian conquest of Jerusalem in 614CE compared with
    Islamic conquest of 638CE.
    Its Messianic nature and the role of the Jewish Exilarch
    By Ben Abrahamson and Joseph Katz

    [KAABA WAS BUILT BY JEWS]

    Upon the overthrow of the revolt and interruption of communication with Israel, Hananiah set about arranging the calendar, which hitherto had been the exclusive prerogative of the Israeli patriarch. Hananiah even considered the possibility of erecting a Jewish Temple in Nehardea, similar to the ones Onias IV had erected in Heliopolis in Egypt, and in Mecca in Arabia.59 The former had been closed up by the Romans; the later had fallen into idol worship and superstition. Fearing that Babylon may fall the way of Arabia, the Israeli authorities replied:

    “If you persist in your intention, seek for yourselves another hill, where Ahijah [the Exilarch] can build you another temple, where Hananiah can play the harp for you [he was a Levite, who were the musicians of the Temple], and confess openly that you have no more share in Israel’s God.”60 This episode made such a strong impression upon the public mind that there are several accounts of it.61

    59 See the Author’s essay on “The Prophet Muhammed as a descendant of Onias III”

    These two temples were built about the time that Judah the Maccabee rededicated the Temple in Jerusalem. This could explain the Hadith where is says they were built forty years apart:

    “Narrated Abu Dhaar: I said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Which mosque was built first?” He replied, “Al-Masjid-ul-Haram.” I asked, “Which (was built) next?” He replied, “Al-Masjid-ul-Aqs-a (i.e. Jerusalem).” I asked, “What was the period in between them?” He replied, “Forty (years).” He then added, “Wherever the time for the prayer comes upon you, perform the prayer, for all the earth is a place of worshipping for you.” Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 636:

    MOHAMMED’S MOTHER WAS JEWISH!

    THIS MAKES HIM A JEW

    MOHAMMED BASED HIS QURAN ON THE JEWISH TORAH/TALMUD

    ISLAM IS A SECT OF TALMUDIC JUDAISM?

    The Mother of Mohammed, Amina was of Jewish birth. Von Hammer.

    “Mohammed, who was the only son of Abdallah, a Pagan, and Amina, a Jewess, and was descended from the noble but impoverished family of Hashim, of the priestly tribe of Koreish, who were the chiefs and keepers of the national sanctuary of the Kaaba, and pretended to trace their origin to Ismael, the son of Abraham and Hagar, was
    born at Mecca, August 20, A.D. 570 …’

    At that period, there were many “Jews’ in that area. Again from The History Of
    The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon, volume 5, page 202:

    “Seven hundred years before the death of Mahomet the Jews were settled in
    Arabia; and a far greater multitude was expelled from the Holy
    Land in the wars of Titus and Hadrian. The industrious exiles
    aspired to liberty and power: they erected synagogues in the cities, and
    castles in the wilderness; and their Gentile converts were confounded with the
    children of Israel [Jews] …”

    Waves of Israelites to Arabia bringing Judaism in various stages of development

    The traditional view of Arabian history centers on Yemen. It is assumed that a fairly developed civilization grew in the south of the Arabian Peninsula. For several hundred years it grew rich by exporting gold, frankincense and myrrh to the Roman Empire; as well as controlling the overland routes to India and the East. The first collapse of the Marib dam around 450 CE; the decline of the use of frankincense due to the Christianization of Rome; and the Rome success bypassing the desert by using a sea route led to the collapse of southern Arabian society. This in turn led to waves of immigration from the South to North, from the city to the desert.

    Dr. Günter Lüling proposes an alternative paradigm.[1] He proposes a “more historical picture of Central Arabia, inundated throughout a millennium by heretical Israelites”. He envisions waves of Israelite refugees headed, North to South, to Arabia bringing with them Judaism in various stages of development. Linguistic and literary-historical research in the Qur’an tends to support the notion of a more northerly origin for linguistic development of Arabic.[2] Here is a brief summary of three of these waves of Judaic immigration: Herodian, Sadducean and Zealot (explained in more detail elsewhere).[3]

    During the time of Ptolemy, the native population of Cush originally inhabited both sides of the Red Sea: on the east, southern and eastern Arabia; and on the west, Abyssinia (Ethiopia-Eritrea). During the reign of Ptolemy VI Philometor (r 181–145 BCE), the Jewish High Priest Onias IV built a Jewish Temple in Heliopolis, Egypt and also one in Mecca, Arabia. He did this to fulfill his understanding of the prophecy of Isaiah 19:19, “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord (Heliopolis) in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border (Mecca) thereof to the
    Lord.” The border of Ptolemy’s empire was in Arabia.

    The first wave of immigrants came with the success of the Maccabean, later Herodian, Judeo-Arab kingdom. Romanized Arabs (and Jews) from the trans-Jordan began migrating southward. The Tobiads which briefly had controlled Jerusalem extended their power southward from Petra and established the “Tubba” dynasty of kings of Himyar. Yathrib was settled during this period.

    The second wave of immigrants came before the destruction of the Temple, when refugees fleeing the war, as well as the Sadducean leadership, fled to Arabia. Khaibar was established as a city of Sadducean Cohen-Priests at this time.

    The third wave of immigrants were mostly refugees and soldiers from Bar Kochba’s revolt – fighters trained in the art of war and zealously nationalistic – sought refugee in Arabia.

    This last wave of immigrants included people who are known in Islamic literature as the Aus and the Khazraj. Around 300 CE, they were forced out of Syria by the rising strength of Christian Rome, and the adoption of the Ghassan leader, Harith I, of Christianity. At first the Aus and Khazraj lived on the outskirts of Yathrib. According to Islamic sources, the Khazraj, headed by Malik ibn Ajlan, sought and obtained military assistance from the Bani Ghasaan; and having enticed the principal chiefs of Yathrib into an enclosed tent, massacred them.[4] Then the citizens of Yathrib, beguiled into security by a treacherous peace, attended a feast given by their unprincipled foes; and there a second butchery took place, in which they lost the whole of their
    leaders.[5]

    References

    1.”A new Paradigm for the Rise of Islam and its
    Consequences for a New Paradigm of the History of Israel” by Dr.
    Günter Lüling; Originally appeared in The Journal of Higher Criticism Nr.
    7/1, Spring 2000, pp. 23-53.

    2.Hagarism, Crone and Cook

    3.See the authors essays “The Prophet Muhammed as a
    descendant of Onias III” and “From Bar Kochba to the Prophet
    Muhammed”

    4.See Katib at Wackidi, p. 287.
    5. “Life of Mohamet I”, by Sir Walter Muir, Chapter III, Section 6

    CIRB-HEZBOLLAH
    Sunday, October 3, 2010
    Islam and Judaism: the early years – Papers by Ben Abrahamson and Joseph Katz
    http://www.alsadiqin.org/en/index.php?title=Islam_and_Judaism:_the_early_years
    “Islam and Judaism: the early years” a series of articles, using a historiographical approach, stating that Jews and Muslims were originally friends.

    References
    Retrieved from “http://www.alsadiqin.org/en/index.php?title=Islam_and_Judaism:_the_early_years”
    Category: Islam and Judaism

    Ben Abrahamson

    Bio

    I am an orthodox Chassidic Jew from Israel who works as an historian, a consultant, to an important Rabbinical Court in Jerusalem.

    Most of the people here know me from my endless discussions about the similarities between Islamic and Jewish customs. I enjoy talking about the Haddith, the histories of Tabari, Ibn Hisham and Al-Waqidi, and the kings of Himyar, as I much as I enjoy discussing the Midrash Rabbah, the Midrashei Geulah, Rambam, Tosefos or the Shulchan Aruch.

    I love to talk about common prayer customs, architecture and calendars.

    But it is clear to me that there is more to this than just similarities, they obviously go back to a common root, a common faith.

    In our literature we are taught that there is common faith, a fundamental “religion” which all men are born into. There is a basic faith that is obligated on all mankind. Jews have called this yireh shomaym, ger toshav or bnei noah in Hebrew, theosebeia in greek, and according to school of Rabbi Benamozegh, this fundamental “religion” is also called by the name Islam.

    In the Holy Torah, everywhere the word “Kenite” used, it is translated to Aramaic, it is called Salamai, or Muslamai. Some suggest this refers to the great numbers of non-Jewish believers who came to sacrifice the Qurban Shlamim in Jerusalem together with the Jews. Salamai, Musalamai, Muslims. This could be a clear indication in our literature that Islam is an ancient religion, dating back to second temple times, at least. And if Islam’s roots are the same as what we call bnei noah, then it is much older, it is the religion of Noah, and Adam himself.

    The closeness of Islam and Judaism was always understood by Biblical Scholars up until recent years. The close relationship between Jews, the ten lost tribes, the Arabs and Rachabites was all assumed. With the advent of German revisionists, Wellhausen and Büchler, and others, this all changed. They introduced ideas that Islam started with Moon or rock worship, or a falling asteroid. Devout Jews know that this is not true.

    It is a fact of Jewish Law that we believe that Muslims are perfect monotheists. They worship the same God that we do.

    **************************************************************************************

    OK!

    DO YOU NOW SEE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN TALMUDIC JUDAISM & ISLAM?

    ALL serious students of Mohammedanism MUST study this document:

    The Persian conquest of Jerusalem in 614CE compared with
    Islamic conquest of 638CE.
    Its Messianic nature and the role of the Jewish Exilarch
    By Ben Abrahamson and Joseph Katz

    GOOGLE IT ON THE WEB.

    JEWS ARE NOT UNITED BY A LOVE OF ISRAEL, BUT BY A HATRED OF CHRISTIANS

    It is now official… Jews are the world’s greatest HATERS

    And it is Christians whom they HATE.

    Michael Medved
    Host of the Michael Medved show
    Co-founded Pacific Jewish Center, an Orthodox synagogue in Venice, California,
    with his friend and teacher, Rabbi Daniel Lapin.
    For fifteen years, Medved served as president of PJC, which states that its mission is outreach to unaffiliated and disconnected Jews.

    Medved does prove he understands the Jewish mind. He states,

    “For most American Jews, the core of their Jewish identity isn’t solidarity with Israel; it’s rejection of Christianity.”

    A “rejection of Jesus” Medved tell us, “has replaced acceptance of Torah”

    In fact Medved states

    “We accept atheist Jews, Buddhist Jews, pro-Palestinian Jews, Communist Jews, homosexual Jews, and even sanction Hindu-Jewish meditation societies.”

    For all this acceptance and tolerance on the part of Jews, Medved informs that

    “Jews for Jesus,” however, or “Messianic Jews” face resistance and exclusion everywhere. ”

    “Many Jews therefore view enthusiastic Christian believers—no matter how reliably they support Israel and American Jews—as enemies by definition,” says Medved.

    “Rather than acknowledge the key role played by Christian Zionists (prominently including Harry Truman) in establishing and sustaining the U.S.-Israel alliance,” which Medved seems to indicate would deserve never-ending Jewish appreciation, but instead there is never-ending condemnation as, “liberal partisans love to invoke 2,000 years of bloody Christian anti-Semitism.”

    “The liberal belief that Jews should be pro-choice and pro–gay marriage has nothing to do with connecting to Jewish tradition and everything to do with disassociating from Christian conservatives,” as Medved provides an inrational explanation of the mind of an irrational Jew.

    “According to this argument, Catholic and evangelical attempts to ‘impose’ their values on social issues represent a theocratic threat to American pluralism”, a pluralism Medved ironically notes, “has allowed Judaism to thrive.”

    In the final analysis, Medved informs us,

    “They should recognize that Jews, like all Americans, vote not so much in favor of politicians they admire as they vote against causes and factions they loathe and fear.”

    Hate drives the Jewish heart. Not a surprise for a group who rejected a Jew who told us to love one another.

  3. Dave1 says:

    Here we go again with the same old shit(Who is more deserving of recognition)Seems she has done what she set out to do on her own. An honorary degree from some liberal shit university won’t change any thing. She will still be an damn Muslim of Islam . So I myself don’t really care what she does or what happens to her. She is a Muslim of Islam so why not do her fighting in her Muslim Islamic country where Sharia law is in active and quit stiring shit up here in the USA we have bigger problems than some shit that didn’t get her promiced honorary degree.
    So Pamela how will the out come of this effect you so personaly you write an article about it? Are you a member of Islam or one of the fence riders?

    • Marilyn Z says:

      I cannot believe you just said that. The POINT being…we have a problem in this country with Sharia Law…they are pushing it everywhere. Where have you been? That honorary degree means little to this good woman…her purpose is to warn everyone about how bad this set of laws is. It is a NIGHTMARE.

      I have already written the Brandeis officials about this. We all need to let people know that they are wrong when they cave to CAIR.

      • Beattyc5 says:

        Maryilyn Z, Dave1 is one of the “pussies” who are afraid to stand up against what extremist Muslims are trying to do this country – he is obviously in the Obama camp: “hey, lets play nice with the nasty Muslims and maybe they will like us”. Idiot.

        • Dave1 says:

          Hey beattye5 I don’t answer liberals post’s because they always attack when they don’t understand something or can’t prove what they claim. But I will ask what have you done against Islam lately dick 4????

          Ya Marilyn I said it and I meant it.A muslim is a muslim I don’t care man or woman or what people think they are speaking up against.Read their shit book quran and you will find it’s ok for the bastards to lie to deseave other religious people. Writing the liberal Brandeis officials is a nice thought ,but if they cared about what others thought they would have never with drew her honerary degree would they.
          One other thing Marlyn,We have no problem with Sharia Law here in the USA ,YET! The problem we have is with people electing slave masters that are letting Islam Muslims rule them.
          With out people electing people that let Islam be pushed in this country they could do nothing.THEY PLAN TO RULE THE EARTH, I thought everyone was aware of that. This Muslim that claims to be educating Americans against Sharia Law and peoples rights,for Christ sakes she’s a muslim she is just keeping Sharia Law and women rights in the lime light for later political gains. Watch she will run for some political office here in the USA and women will be douped into voting her into office because of what she is doing,once she’s in the coop the chickens will scatter. Wait and see. I have been wrong before but these slimballs will stoop to doing anything and most of the American women are easly fooled.I say Hillary as proof.Last of all Marilyn they can not be stopped by words or laws for they are not people of honor or good.

Leave a Reply