Archive for month: December, 2006
Jimmy Carter’s Shame
I am nauseous and sick. I feel a kind of a revulsion that I have not had in years. The kind of sick feeling that I had when I was in the Cathedral in Sandomierz. Upon the wall hung a portrait from hundreds of years ago showing Jews piercing a Christian child for blood to make matzoth. I asked the priest, “ Why do you keep this portrait up? Everyone knows that this is a lie.” He answered in a cool, steely and almost mocking tone, “well, you know it might not be what you Jews do today, but it used to happen.”
Why am I feeling so ill, because I had the unfortunate luck to read some passages from Jimmy Peanut’s revolting, anti-Jewish, racist polemical work.
As Jefferey Goldberg points out so cogently in the Washington Post, the book’s goal is to loosen evangelical support for Israel.
Because a specific agenda appears to be at work here. Carter seems to mean for this book to convince American evangelicals to reconsider their support for Israel. Evangelical Christians have become bedrock supporters of Israel lately, and Carter marshals many arguments, most of them specious, to scare them out of their position. Hence the Golda Meir story, seemingly meant to show that Israel is not the God-fearing nation that religious Christians believe it to be. And then there are the accusations, unsupported by actual evidence, that Israel persecutes its Christian citizens.
Luckily for Israel, and the Jews, Carter is not high on the list of those loved by the evangelical movement.
Carter is not unlike the racist priest I met in Sandomierz. Carter’s book is replete with age-old canards in not-so-subtle language of Jewish control of the media and government. His passages connecting Israelis to the Jews of Jesus’s time are just a cover for saying that Jews are the devil incarnate for having rejected Christ, that we will forever suffer because of our sin of rejecting him, and that we are cold blooded killers out for innocent victims’ blood.
Jimmy Carter, you have shamed your country, your family, and your Center. Everything that you touch and talk about will be forever stained by the stink of your anti-Jewish racism.
Betrayed by a kiss?
Neturei Karta loves Ahmedneedajob. Match made in hell. I thought he was shomer negia? David Duke? David Duke, your SS uniform is ready! This way to the gas ladies and gentlemen…
More good bris news, just in time for Chanukah!
Chanukah is upon us, and one of the crazy facts that often gets overlooked in childhood versions of the story, is about epispasm. Those Jews that started wearing those red bracelets, I mean togas, and doing other Hellenistic stuff, wanted to go even further, and undo their bris. If your member was not wearing a hat, it precluded you from lots of naked activities, like the Olympics.
Today, as the anti-circ movement is beating down the doors, claiming circ is barbaric, the NY Times comes out with a convincing article showing why being foreskinless is a good idea.
Circumcision appears to reduce a man’s risk of contracting AIDS from heterosexual sex by half, United States government health officials said yesterday, and the directors of the two largest funds for fighting the disease said they would consider paying for circumcisions in high-risk countries.
So men in Africa, the place where there is the greatest risk of heterosexual transfer of the AIDS virus, the price of a bris has fallen to records lows. And not only does it help stem the spread of AIDS, but it helps stop some forms of cancer in women.
Earlier studies on Western men have shown that circumcision significantly reduces the rate at which men infect women with the virus that causes cervical cancer. A study published in 2002 in The New England Journal of Medicine found that uncircumcised men were about three times as likely as circumcised ones with a similar number of sexual partners to carry the human papillomavirus.