Comments on: Dialogue–or Private Atonement?

By: Eva Smagacz

Eva Smagacz — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Reading the above thoughts of Phil Weiss I reflected on killings of Jews in Poland during the second World War:

How much Polish people knew?

And did they yelp with glee as Sword of Gideon would have it, or did they do what Phil Weiss describes in his post, and similar to what my family described: The huddled together in small groups repeating the stories in the endless cycle of moral horror, but would lie their lives resisting the Germans to liberate Poland, and not rush in defence of the Jews.

Are we looking at similar, human phenomenon? Is this passive soaking up of horrors without lifting of a finger to actually make a difference what allowed Germany to become Nazis, and allowed Nazis to become genocidal killers?

Have Jews just acquired the answer why Holocaust happened in the "most civilized, most liberal, country" of Europe?

Am I complicit in crimes against the Palestinians?

By: anon

anon — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Now, Phil, circle back to your deduction that the US Government
establishment is as much Jewish as not (despite the 2% physical demography), and the not depends on Jewish money to stay at the helm.

By: anon

anon — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Eva, as you know, Poland was divided up between HItler and Stalin.
Is Israel divided up so?

By: Ed

Ed — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Duel loyalties lead to duel identities. One knows right from wrong, the other refuses to make the right choice, because it is inconvenient to "group interest" (group interest being defined as stubbornly grasping to any group advantage, and granting no quarter, irregardless of "right or wrong", with right or wrong further being defined as completely subjective. It's all very lawyerly.)

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

Most Jews don't know, because they've ONLY been confronted, rather than educated/informed.

And, the liberal ones that do know, humbly know that they only know a sliver, and therefore don't desire to undertake to guess wrong with literally dire consequences.

Your confusion on your position and goal, is a disaster Phil.

If you are a solid advocate for a civil single state, then work for it, in the mature way that it might actually occur (peaceably). (By building inter-community relations, RATHER than judgemental and presumptious agitation.)

You do know that I think you are actually negligent in making this issue such a focus of yours, and not reading on multiple perspectives on the history, currently (not your childhood memory of Exodus).

And, I think you are negligent in ignoring the chain of relationships that leads to inhumane terror targeting Jews, as in the Habad House in Mumbai. Those Jews were NOT harming anyone, and you and others know it well.

Those terror incidents are of monsters that are seen. They hunger for Jewish blood.

By: Michael W

Michael W — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

@Ed,
You said: "MW, your religion isn’t interested in the benefit of all humanity. It’s not interested in making the world a better place, despite its "tikkun olam" subterfuge. It’s interested in it’s own self-interest, its own tribe's well being ..." at http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2008/11/spooked-by-lefts-antiisraelism-liberal-jews-sat-on-their-hands-as-us-destroyed-iraqi-society/comments/page/2/#comments

All across the US, Jewish communities take part in an annual event called "Mitzvah Day" which is where synagogues and Jewish Day/Sunday Schools organize their congregants and students to participate in good deeds. The are many different things we do. My particular favorite is to volunteer at "Our Daily Bread", a catholic soup kitchen.

Do you still hold the belief that "[my] religion isn’t interested in the benefit of all humanity"?

Remember, this is nation wide, not just my synagogue. Does your religious community hold a similar nationwide annual event? Of course one shouldn't just do it once a year but "Mitzvah Day's" benefits last all year and compels us to do it more often.

"Mitzvah" means commandment but our interpretations teach us to go beyond that to make it mean "good-deeds". A miss translation but when we interpret Tanakh as a whole, we are compelled to help the stranger (read gentile).

In my Jewish High School, we also took part of a program called BLUES, a Black & Jewish student get together for the sake of learning and what ever. My greater community has many blacks and Jews. On our trip to Israel we also volunteered at a center for kids from troubled homes which included Jewish and Arab kids. We also also had a one day program at a Bedouin city similar to "BLUES".

So I ask you again, do you still think my religion only cares about its own self interest? Do you still think that Judaism isn't interested in the benefit of all of humanity? I'll let you ponder.

One more thing. When a local church burned down last winter, who's House of Worship took those congregants in and let them use their space for services? It was the synagogue I belong to. Not another church, but a synagogue. They still have their services at my synagogue when our kids go to Sunday School.

By: Eva Smagacz

Eva Smagacz — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

I think we are missing the point.

This is not meant to be call for more research or better chosen words as Richard is suggesting. Nor is it meant to be an auction of which religion is better in organizing occasional good deeds as Michael's W post is suggesting.

The question is whether we are complicit in horrors of the Palestinian Occupation by sitting on our hands and choosing useless and ineffectual activities that are designed to make us feel better, but do absolutely nothing concrete to help starving, sick, humiliated and assaulted.

Our humanity is measured by our actions, not our hand-wringing.

By: MRW.

MRW. — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

And, I think you are negligent in ignoring the chain of relationships that leads to inhumane terror targeting Jews, as in the Habad House in Mumbai.

Richard, stop with the wrist-to-forehead action over-dramatizing that Jews were targeted specifically. They weren't. It was "white people" who were targeted: Americans and Brits. The people living in the flat below the floor that the terrorists were on in the Chabad House got it because they tried to leave. And this was observed by Indians in flats across the street reporting to the Indian Press. If they were targeting Jews, why was it 5 our of 195 killed?

Read The Daily Mail remarkable article about the remaining terrorist who played dead and was 'discovered' alive in the ambulance.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1090546/I-told-kill-breath-Captured-terrorists-account-Mumbai-massacre-reveals-plan-kill-5-000.html
(The quote has changed between yesterday and today. Yesterday they quoted the terrorist directly. Today it's a statement.)

By: anon

anon — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

According to the surviving terrorist, they targeted the Jews, Israeli and those with American or dual citizenship, to bring attention to the plight of the Palestinians. Just as the 9/11 commission determined (before redacting for final form) that those terrorists were moved to retaliate against American troops on sacred land and the plight of the palestinians, the India 9/11 wanna be that just traspired was motivated by both the Indian-Pakistan bone of turf contention AND the plight of the palestinians.

This wedded issue (P v I) is not going to go away, and it is
a constant resource for growing new terrorists.

One day the American masses will get it.
Too bad that will probably take WW3 (Iran).

Witty's son will of course join the IDF at the crucial point.
And you average Americans here, and your sons and daughters?

By: samuel burke

samuel burke — Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000

“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.” Moshe Dayan: Haaretz, April 4, 1969. (noted from the web, Dayan was probably quoting Ben Gurion from the 'The Jewish Paradox')