Skip to main content

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today called on Israel to halt what he called "provocative" actions after another Palestinian family in East Jerusalem was evicted from their home, the latest in a series of similar incidents.

Jewish settlers have forced their way into a house in east Jerusalem, using hired guards to evict an elderly Palestinian woman and throwing out other residents' belongings. The settlers displayed what they said was a court order granting them ownership of the single-story building. Human rights groups said the takeover was part of a push by Jewish settlers to expand their presence in the traditionally Arab sector.

Shortly after the Six Day War in 1967, Israeli settlers forcefully took over several homes in Hebron and other areas in the West Bank; on many occasions under the watchful eyes of Israeli soldiers. In 1994, Baruch Goldstein, a doctor who had emigrated from the U.S., machine-gunned 29 Palestinians to death as they prayed in Hebron's Ibrahimi Mosque during the holy month of Ramadan. In 2005, I worked on the documentary Occupied Minds and witnessed first hand the plight of a Palestinian family living in fear under the continuous harassment of the zealot settlers who were determined to drive them away from their ancestral home.

This week, Israeli police filed terrorism charges against Jack Teitel, a 37-year-old Florida-born West Bank settler, which include the murders of two Palestinians and attacks wounding three other people over the past 12 years.The first attack of which Teitel is accused was the murder of Samir Billbisi, a Palestinian taxi driver who was found shot dead in his cab in East Jerusalem in June 1997. Two months later, allege the police, Teitel shot dead Isaa Mousa'af Mahamada, 57, a Bedouin shepherd near the Carmel settlement in the south Hebron hills.

Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman, described Teitel as a "Jewish terrorist", adding: "He was deeply involved in terrorism in all different levels."

Below is a video report which aired on Al Arabiya TV detailing the eviction of Um Nabil, who lost her home to Israeli settlers. In the video one of the settlers sends a message to the entire world, "You know, we are God's chosen people," he says.

Follow Jamal on Twitter

Originally posted to mosaicnews on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:08 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  you should change the title its not acceptable (17+ / 0-)

      imagine if someone wrote an diary about say afghani terrorists and had


      Allahu Akbar

      in the title.

      That's a theological concept that has no place in such a diary.

      Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

      by simone daud on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:04:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No! (13+ / 0-)

        He echoes what the settler said.  It needs to be out in public.

        Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

        by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:09:21 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think so (13+ / 0-)

          when some criminals in afghanistan or iraq blow up people they say Allahu Abkar by way of appropriating religious language.

          these settler thugs similarly appropriate religious language (typical of the thieving scum that they are) its not their and it has no meaning in this diary aside from the act of stealing sacred language.

          Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

          by simone daud on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:27:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  If Israelis want these type quotes not to occur, (12+ / 0-)

            they need to control their population with their police force.

            I can guarantee you that if someone in MY neighborhood decided to evict a member of our neighborhood from their home, to put them out on the street and seize their home -- the police would be called, and they would defend...

            wait for it ...

            the homeowner.

            If you don't see that happening, if you don't see Israeli forces zipping to the defense of the homeowner, no matter what the person's religion -- then it seems there just might be a religious tie-in.

            This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

            by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:37:12 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  What if the person being evicted wasn't the (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              1918

              Homeowner?

              What if there was more to the story?

              We are in a time where it is risky NOT to change. Barack Obama 7-30-08

              by samddobermann on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:22:37 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's Israel, so of course it will be spread far (2+ / 0-)

                and wide around the net.  True or not.  

                Hundreds of murders in Darfur, not so much...I'm sure its all innocent though.

              •  They are the home owners (13+ / 0-)

                in Israel basically Palestinians in the occupied territories own nothing. Settlers can steal whatever they wish.

                Further, as with the house in hebron that was supposedly bought by settlers, New Jersey hasidic groups (the same ones that were arrested recently) have been involved in land swindles and forgeries throughout the occupied territories.  Taking advantage of the fact that Jews have access to different laws from palestinians living under occupation (one example is that a Palestinian cannot demand land back in his depopulated village inside israel while a Jew can make one hundred year old claims over houses in the occupied territories), Palestinians of course have little access to any form of justice in israel because there are different laws governing them.

                Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

                by simone daud on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:09:48 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Prove it, and we'll react accordingly. (0+ / 0-)

                In other words, if it is, it is.

                If it's not, it's not.

                If it's not, your comment is completely irrelevant to THIS story.

                See my point?

                I could say, "What if it was aliens from Mars evicting her from her home, and saying, 'All power to the Martian God!'"

                But that isn't the case, so it's irrelevant.

                This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

                by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:56:48 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  PS. Not only is it not Martians, (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                RandomActsOfReason, simone daud

                Not only is it not Martians, but this action takes place in a proud, locally celebrated tradition of denying people of one religion their homes and livelihoods. Celebrated in the papers of that country, because yes, I've read the papers. "So many dunams (sp?) of land acquired today, removed permanently from Palestinian hands."

                This is the country that bulldozes orchards owned by one family for generations. Generations of eking out a living by working hard and managing an orchard... poof, gone. Too bad, earn a living another way. We just passed a law that says we can lay claim to property that your family has owed for GENERATIONS, and not only TAKE it from you, but DESTROY all the work and love and hopes and dreams your family has poured into supporting its members for generations.

                This is the country that bulldozes houses that people own when it declares the house to be a risk to something or other. Yessssss, it's legal, because a law has been passed -- by whom? -- and why? -- just like apartheid was legal in South Africa, and the slave auction block was legal in the USA.

                And that something or other that people living in one house is a threat to, that the extended family owning an orchard is a risk to -- what is that something?

                It is sometimes, or often, an ideal of creating "racial and religious purity in this area". When that's your goal, your ideal, then anyone of any other race or religion is a risk or threat in that arena.

                Heaven help anyone who will take any action necessary to create racial or religious purity in any one area on earth.

                This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

                by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:02:02 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Um ... (8+ / 0-)

            I really, really don't have a problem with people saying "Glory to God" in any language.  I've used it myself as a greeting to Muslim mates despite the fact that I am an atheist.  Mind you that was before the days of terrorism.  

            The way the settler used the term "chosen of God" is not the way that jews normally interpret it.

            Those who use "Allahu Akbar" when creating mayhem is not the way most muslims normally use it.

            This needs pointing out.

            Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

            by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:55:51 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Sacred Language? (5+ / 0-)

            How is "We are God's chosen people" sacred language? You know there are Christians in America that believe they are now God's chosen people. The Jews rejected Christ you know. Now Christians get to claim the prize of God's choice. I think it is fairly safe to assume their were a few Mayans who believed they were God's choice and took it out on the ones who weren't.

            This may be religious language, or racist language, but it is no way sacred. Just the existence of so many different "One God"s chosing so many different "Chosen People"s automatically moves the statement from the realm of sacred into the realm of the laughably dangerous.

            As if we could make things better without making them worse.

            by A Voice on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:16:25 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think anyone is saying that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          word is bond

          the Diary should obscure what the settler said.

          However, using it as a Title is...less than classy.

          Crush the Horror.

          by JesseCW on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:02:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  It's not theological, it's a quote (8+ / 0-)

        If the settler didn't want it quoted, on media everywhere, including blogs, they should not have said it.

        What if someone had "Manifest Destiny Destroys Again" in a title? That's a slam against a Christian doctrine.  It would be fine, because we're here to discuss political actions -- whether performed by religious people, or secular people.

        Peace out.

        This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

        by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:33:51 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not all quotes have informative value (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JesseCW

          Quote mining can lead to false impressions, and in this case it would also have been useful to know what the settler said immediately before those words.

          It seems evident that the individual in the video is an ignoramus and a jerk. By emphasizing that one quote in the video, the diarist conveys the impression that the settler was representative of a much larger group who in fact clearly do not share the settler's viewpoint.

          Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

          by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:19:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It would be fair to say they believe it (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RandomActsOfReason, h bridges

            Those settlers are fundamentalist that believe in an extreme ideology, quoting them on that ideology seems relevant to me. If you think god chose you and gave you something and that motivates your actions we ought to discuss it. A lot of the absurd injustices in Israel are motivated by people who think like this and feel it is a legitimate point of view. We do no service to humanity by not challenging them on it.

            •  Yes, it's an insight into the person who spoke (0+ / 0-)

              but I don't know that one can generalize further, as we seem to be invited to do. I was motivated to learn about the "chosen people" idea, and even the Orthodox position doesn't seem to match the settler's.

              From what I've read elsewhere, I think the settlers' religious motivation has more to do with "promised land" than "chosen people". The distinction is important because one can compromise about how much of the "promised land" you get to have, but it's hard to compromise if you believe (contrary to religious doctrine) that you can do anything you want because you're "chosen". Fortunately, being "chosen" doesn't seem to mean that. People who think they are above the law should be prosecuted, as in the case of Teitel.

              Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

              by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:33:42 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, it is representative of a much larger (0+ / 0-)

            group. It is representative of the entire settler movement, and, more broadly, it is a common sentiment among religious Jews in Israel, and many religious Jews elsewhere.

            I speak from first-hand experience - but even if you don't believe it about the broader religious population, to deny that it is a prime motivating belief behind the settler's movement specifically, is simply revisionist.

            It's not just "one crazy guy".

            One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

            by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:39:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Most Jews say that with regret. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        david78209

        n/t.

      •  BULLSHIT (7+ / 1-)

        The title is absolutely appropriate. We have danced around peoples feelings towards their make-believe Gods and religion long enough. It is high time. . .well past high time. . .that the world woke up to the sheer lunacy of religion and the bullshit concept of "God's chosen people". For well over a thousand years, people could not speak up or they risked being tied to a stake and burned alive, or any other number of gruesome methods of torture and death. Even Socrates was killed for speaking out against religion. Fuck all this stupid assed "respect others religion" crap. it's time to speak the TRUTH.

        The TRUTH is no one on earth knows one goddamned thing about "God": that's the way it has always been and will remain.

        End of fucking discussion.

        •  Be still my heart.... (3+ / 0-)

          I have found a brother in truth.  I have floated the thesis on this blog that religion will be the demise of the species.  I also mention that it is a delicious irony that that will be the case.  90% of the people on Earth are locked into this nonsense and actually think that what somebody else says about the non-entity known as some form of God is spouting fact.

          When some of my former biology students used to ask why humans were the smartest animals on Earth, I paused and told them to rethink that.  Clever maybe.  After all, we're the only species that kills its own kind en masse just for the hell of it.  I couldn't get into the religion thing in school, but they started to get the message.  It was the least I could do.

          "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

          by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:25:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  the US is run by people (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dolfin66

            killing/oppressing people in nation after nation... all this supported for secular reasons.

            and re-focusing on the diary, Israeli policies are carried out by a largely secular government, and supported by a largely secular United States...

            blaming religion is just a scapegoat.

            let's talk about racism and imperialism.

            Protest Olmert Oct 22, San Francisco

            by Tom J on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:14:27 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The reasons are secular (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RandomActsOfReason, dolfin66

              The rationalizations aren't always secular.  I think you should remove your hide rating, it seems inappropriate there.  

            •  Uh. No. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RandomActsOfReason

              Israel is a state FOUNDED on one of the oldest of the modern religions.  The Knesset is populated and operated by committed Jews.  They will lash out at anything or anybody who tries to denigrate or destroy their religious bases.  

              Virtually ALL of our conservative types call America a Christian country, never mind what the Constitution says.

              You're right in that our country is run by those who are an extension of certain cultural imperatives, but I don't think they're secular based.  I'd say racism and religion tend to drive that engine.  Otherwise, why aren't we up to our necks in Darfur?

              We're going to be trying to put Bush's toothpaste back into the tube for a long time.  If you want to call what he and Cheney did imperialism, I won't argue, but we tend not to go and conquer any countries for our own direct benefit or colonization.  Those days, thankfully, are long gone.

              "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

              by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:38:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  that's a very simplistic view of (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                dolfin66

                US and Israel.

                US imperialism is supported by "liberals" and conservatives. US support for Israel's brutality against Palestinians comes from "liberals" and conservatives.  Their motives are not religious.

                Protest Olmert Oct 22, San Francisco

                by Tom J on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:19:51 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

                  If what you say is true and I have no reason to believe otherwise in view of history, why are all the politicians worried about losing the Jewish vote if they don't back Israel?

                  Also, aren't we in the West still carrying the cross from the holocaust?  It IS about religion or religion-based activity.

                  "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

                  by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:07:26 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

        •  hiderated for supporting hatred (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Terra Mystica

          even if it is not so specific. calling all religious people "lunatics" is just as hide-worthy as saying any particular religion is "lunatic".  i say that as  a secular person.

          Protest Olmert Oct 22, San Francisco

          by Tom J on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:57:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Calling delusions delusions isn't (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Meteor Blades, Alec82

            "supporting hatred".

            The truth doesn't deserve HR's.

            If he starts calling for doing anything nastier to believers than refusing to indulge them, let me know.

            Crush the Horror.

            by JesseCW on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:13:00 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  The comment did not call all religious people (0+ / 0-)

            "lunatics".

            The comment was about

            the sheer lunacy of religion

            Criticizing ideas and beliefs is not hide-worthy under any circumstances, and it is not a personal attack nor an attack on a group of individuals.

            This entire site is about criticizing - nay, attacking - ideas and beliefs.

            Why should religious ideas be privileged over any other ideology?

            One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

            by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:43:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks to all who. . . (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RandomActsOfReason

              support my idea. And indeed, I did not call believers "lunatics". Some good does come out of religion. Unfortunately, the divorce from reality and reason that religion necessitates, is hardly worth the good that is done.

              Many of those so quick to hide rate should move over to the republican party: that's the type of thinking done over there.

      •  Is it the same thing? (0+ / 0-)

        "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

        by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:20:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  agree with simone, it really is not helpful (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        simone daud

        and distracts from this really important news (that another Palestinian family has been evicted).

        now if we want to quote some foolish fanatic here, why not quote Hillary Clinton? As in

        Another "unprecedented concession"! another family evicted.

        frankly the insanity (i'm sorry, it is nothing less than that) of US politicians, (mostly non-Jewish) is much more disturbing to me than the actions of a few religious fanatics in Jerusalem.

        This policy is supported by  Israel politicians (mostly secular) and US politicians (mostly mainstream Christian, not at all fantical).  religion is not the problem.

        ideology of racism is the problem. ideology of support US allies for the sake of projecting US power is the problem (long way of saying "imperialism"), the knee-jerk pandering to large political lobbies is the problem.

        the problem is not a religion.

        Protest Olmert Oct 22, San Francisco

        by Tom J on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:43:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Frankly, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          simone daud

          frankly the insanity (i'm sorry, it is nothing less than that) of US politicians, (mostly non-Jewish) is much more disturbing to me than the actions of a few religious fanatics in Jerusalem

          Is it possible because you don't live in Jerusalem - specifically, in East Jerusalem?

          I don't understand why it has to be a contest, or why you think we have to care only about one thing and not another, or why the insanity of US politicians in any way, shape or form diminishes the injustice of what happened to this Palestinian family in Jerusalem.

          Or, why you think the two are unrelated.

          One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

          by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:45:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  If it is in quotations, and is an actual quote (0+ / 0-)

        What is the problem?

        It's not a universal statement, it is a quote from the subject of this diary.

        Haven't you ever read a news item that has a quote in the headline?

        One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

        by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:36:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Ignorance can be - and should be - corrected (9+ / 0-)

      The concept of "chosen people" provides no justification for stealing someone's home. In fact, it stands for the opposite: justice and compassion.

      Jewish authorities agree that "chosenness" refers to the Jews' duty, as pioneers of monotheism and morality, to set an example by obeying God's commandments. It is not a claim to superiority or special rights. Sources: 1 2 3 4 5 6

      If the settler in the video is claiming some "chosen people" exception to the commandment "Thou shalt not steal", the settler is expressing his ignorance.

      Unfortunately, the diarist - whom I respect for generally posting informative and balanced diaries - has chosen to highlight this one line from the video and make it the title, thereby buying into and magnifying the ignorant statement of the settler.

      The title and conclusion of the diary imply that the settler's words have validity in mainstream Jewish thought. This is incorrect and misleading. The diary and video carry a strong message without the need to promote a theme that is easily misinterpreted. The diary should be revised, either to change the title and conclusion, or to include an acknowlegment that the settler's statement was ignorant and not representative of Jewish doctrine.  

      Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

      by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:46:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  read em (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mikey, david78209, JesseCW, dolfin66, Alec82

        chock full of stuff that basically comes across as "we're a little holier than though, but we shouldn't act like it".  And clearly their are Jews who feel the same way  I do.

        "Reconstructionist Judaism rejects the concept of chosenness. Its founder, Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan, said that the idea that God chose the Jewish people leads to racist beliefs among Jews, and thus must be excised from Jewish theology. This rejection of chosenness is made explicit in the movement's siddurim (prayer books).

        In the mid-1980s the Reconstructionist movement issued its Platform on Reconstructionism. It states that the idea of chosenness is "morally untenable", because anyone who has such beliefs "implies the superiority of the elect community and the rejection of others."[14]

        •  This is bullshit like the christians born agains (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Terra Mystica

          that say all those different aren't moral.

          Or like the pope saying no other form of christianity is not any good.

          So there are pious dumb fucks. And apologists for them, so what.

          Then there are the holy-er than holyest that put down the braggers.

          We are in a time where it is risky NOT to change. Barack Obama 7-30-08

          by samddobermann on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:39:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Kaplin was a moron. (0+ / 0-)

          The Reconstructionist movement is hypocritical and dumb. We did a seder once with a reconstructionist haggadah, and the "we're doing it because it's fun" bullshit is really offensive. You do religion because there might be some truth in it.

        •  Thanks for actually reading ... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MoshebenAvraham

          ... but did you understand the context?  The holier-than-thou tone is indeed very offputting, but keep in mind that this ancient concept relates to the basic Jewish idea of monotheism coupled with a moral code, as distinguished from (often amoral) polytheism in the other ancient societies. The concept has nothing to do with political rights of Jews and non-Jews.

          You quoted part of the Wikipedia article on the Reconstructionist viewpoint, omitting the full scope of the controversy within that stream of Judaism. The material I linked, when read in its entirety, should have led to a couple of conclusions.  First, Reconstructionists and other Jews who are uncomfortable with the "chosen people" concept are responding to fear of misinterpretation by non-Jews at least as much as the risk of misinterpretation by Jews.  Second, in stating that "chosenness ... implies the superiority of the elect community and the rejection of others", the Reconstructionist Platform disregarded the consistent view of the more mainstream branches of Judaism that the "chosen people" idea does not imply superiority or the rejection of others. Those implications are repeatedly refuted in the material I linked.

          To our contemporary minds, the idea of a chosen people, on its face, seems weird and offensive. However, as Jews actually understand it - an obligation to uphold morality, justice and compassion - it may be one of the reasons that Jews are prominent in progressive movements and overwhelmingly inclined to support Democratic candidates.

          Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

          by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:01:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Upholding morality? Title about hypocrisy? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            h bridges

            Well assuming the settler interprets it that way the title would clearly point to hypocrisy making even more relevant. Either way under that banner the person chooses to act thus it is relevant, in the discussion of what we view as a flawed ideology that is being used to promote and sustain injustice toward other human beings. We can approach this as we do with all other ideologies and religions, if we sweep things under the rug then that is where the evil will go to hide. We need to discuss openly the things going through the minds of the extremist to understand them and if need be shame them into recognizing injustice.

            •  Irony (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MoshebenAvraham

              If, as I understand it, the "chosen people" concept is a calling to moral behavior, than it is misguided and ironic for someone to use that concept as justification for misconduct. That's why I called the settler ignorant.

              If an entire group of people are distorting the "chosen people" concept, rather than just this one individual, it is a serious issue. The diarist hasn't given us a factual basis to attribute this ideology to an entire group. Should we assume it? Should we assume it applies to all settlers, all Jewish Israelis, all Jews? That is one of the problems with the diary: innuendo instead of facts.

              And while noting the absence of facts, I'm still wondering what the settler meant about a court order and obeying the law. There's no background information about that. We also don't know what the settler said immediately before the "chosen people" comment.

              On reflection, the settler may have been saying something that's not so outlandish, something like this: "I am acting in accordance with the law. You can believe that I am obeying the law because, as one of the chosen people, I am bound to obey the law." That interpretation is consistent with the normative meaning of "chosen people" and, as a religious person, the settler may have taken the normative meaning so much for granted that he wouldn't have imagined how it sounds to us.

              Regardless of their ideological motivation, the settlers need to be restrained. You are right that it would be helpful to understand what is going through their minds, but in that case we have to make sure we interpret their words in the same way they intend them.

              Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

              by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:00:37 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Your interpretation is consistent (0+ / 0-)

                with complete and utter ignorance of the settler's movement, the history of Israel and Palestine, and the reality on the ground.

                One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

                by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:54:31 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Polytheists were not "amoral" (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            capelza, Flyswatterbanjo

            The practices attributed to the ancient polytheists by their monotheistic (I'm being generous; I don't think the ancients were strict monotheists) tribal enemies hardly offer a balanced point of view.  

          •  Jews in Israel are not Jews in the US (0+ / 0-)

            It would be useful for you to learn the differences.

            One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

            by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:55:44 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  In other words.... (0+ / 0-)

          it's just like any other religion:  they're making it all up as they go.  What a waste of brain cells.

          "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

          by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:27:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  How many Reonstructionists are there in Israel (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Flyswatterbanjo

          and, specifically, how many in government and parliament?

          This is like people who defend Christianity by pointing to the 0.2% of Americans who are Unitarian Universalists, or who claim Christianity is democratic by pointing to the 1.1% who are Episcopalians.

          Give me a fucking break. I lived in Israel for 15 years, fought in the IDF for 4, still have family there, and visit often.

          If there is any nation that suffers more from a Manifest Destiny and Exeptionalism syndrome worse than the US, it is Israel.

          One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

          by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:52:46 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  You can't steal what is already yours. (0+ / 0-)

        n/t

        •  indeed (9+ / 0-)

          and that's exactly why the word "stealing" is appropriate here.

        •  Does any of us actually have any facts? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dolfin66

          Except for a reference to a court order, neither the diary nor the video tells us anything about the actual facts in this case. On what basis did the settlers claim the house? What actions had they taken prior to evicting its residents?

          There is no information here on which to make a judgment about who was entitled to possession of the house.

          Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

          by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:24:47 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Stealing. (0+ / 0-)

            Homes and property have been stolen, back and forth, between different groups in that and other regions for 7,000 years.  It's "normal" in some cultures to do that.  It preserves the tribal imperative.  It certainly isn't about God or religion.

            "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

            by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:28:54 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Is that a normal we want in our world? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dolfin66

              Is it a "normal" you want on your block?

              For your life?

              This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

              by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:10:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Of course not. (0+ / 0-)

                But we clearly haven't evolved socially as rapidly as we have technologically or behaviorally.  Them's the bald facts.  I wish we could use our intellect, as a species, to overcome these foibles.  But then we always seem to have some religion pushing us back into stone age thinking.

                "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

                by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:01:47 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Jewish doctrine in its pure form, vs (0+ / 0-)

        Israeli actions -- in reality.

        One can only say that when the world sees this type of action, over and over and over, they come to the conclusion that someone, somewhere, is sanctioning it.

        I gave the example elsewhere, IF this action has been performed in a society which disagrees with it on principle... then where is the immediate arrival of a state-sanctioned police force to prevent the armed guards and settlers from succeeding?

        She was out there long enough for someone to take pictures. On my block, in my city, that's enough time for the police to be called and arrive. The police would say, "You must cease and desist, until we can determine if your claim has any validity."

        What does it tell me, and the rest of the world. if the official representatives/enforcers (police) of the laws of this country did nothing?

        This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

        by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:10:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It would be nice to have some hard facts (0+ / 0-)

          The diarist says the settlers displayed what they said was a court order.  The video says that the settlers will no longer have to wait for a final decision by the Isreali courts and that another 23 homes are affected. Obviously, there is some history here. One can only guess that there are competing claims to the property and that some sort of adjudication process took place.

          We don't have these facts, but I think we know enough to conclude that the situation is different from the hypothetical one you describe would happen in your neighborhood. This is not just a case of people showing up out of the blue and evicting people from their homes by force.

          In your neighborhood, there are some situations where people can be lawfully evicted by the lawful owners (e.g., nonpayment of rent, mortgage foreclosure, or squatting). I'm not saying that's what happened to Um Nabil, I'm just saying that the diary is incomplete in not providing relevant information.

          Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

          by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:46:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  The settler represents a widespread sentiment (0+ / 0-)

        that is central to the settler's movement in Israel.

        And, incidentally, widespread all over.

        Like those who claim that conservative Christians are not "real" Christians, you make the same theoretical argument, ignoring the reality on the ground.

        Jewish exceptionalism is an integral part of Jewish culture, particularly in Israel, particularly among religious Jews, where it has become entwined with ethno-centrism in an particularly ugly way.

        And, most of all, among the "Greater Israel" crowd, which includes not only the settlers, but leading members of the Knesset and the Israeli government.

        One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

        by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:49:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  While I do not approve of settlements at all, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    samddobermann, yaque

    I find this in poor taste and I'm mildly offended.  Jews aren't all terrorists simply because of our beliefs, nor is this guy a terrorist because he's a Jew.  He's just a morally-challenged asshole.

    "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

    by James Allen on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:26:04 PM PST

    •  Um, Please Re Read. The DIARIST Did Not Call (16+ / 0-)

      him a terrorist, the Israeli police spokesman did. Nothing mutually exclusive about him being both a terrorist and an asshole.

      You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can always be honest.

      by mattman on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:34:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The title and content of this diary (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        samddobermann, MoshebenAvraham, yaque

        seem to have the intention of being inflammatory, or the diarist is just ignorant, which I doubt.

        Connecting racial violence to "chosen people" is not cool.  If we were talking about a group which called itself a "master race", that might be a bit different, but Jews are not generally supremacists.  A lot of people in Israel are racist against Arabs, but this diary is painting with a pretty broad brush.

        "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

        by James Allen on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:59:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  huh? (11+ / 0-)

          You are aiming your criticism in the wrong direction.  All that the diarist reports are facts.

          Of course facts have a "liberal bias".

          Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

          by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:13:44 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  When someone uses the phrase "chosen people" (5+ / 0-)

            like this, whether it is the settlers using it in a prejudicial manner, or a diarist like this using it to make Judaism look bad, as a Jew, I am being attacked.  As a Jew, I am being made to appear prejudiced.

            "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

            by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:07:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't think so. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mattman, capelza, RandomActsOfReason

              As a Jew I don't feel it makes me out to be prejudiced.  As a jew it makes me not want to be associated with that arsehole settler.

              Oh, I'll as a question to which I do not know the answer.  What made you assume I wasn't?

              Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

              by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:12:38 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Whats to make someone think you are? (1+ / 1-)
                Recommended by:
                MoshebenAvraham
                Hidden by:
                RandomActsOfReason
                •  Oh, nothing. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mattman, RandomActsOfReason

                  It is just that he seemed to make the assumption that I wasn't because I was not offended by it.

                  Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

                  by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:26:51 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Hide-rated (0+ / 0-)

                  Questioning another's commenter's self-identification in this way is unacceptable.

                  Perhaps the right lesson to learn is not to make assumptions, and not to engage in attacking the messenger, rather than focusing on the substance of the message.

                  IMO.

                  One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

                  by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:58:35 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  you said (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MoshebenAvraham, Gatordiet

                despite the fact that I am an atheist.

                in an above comment.

                Maybe that's why you aren't offended.

                Maybe if I said something about atheism, like that Hitler and Stalin were atheists, and that says something about atheism, you'd be a little offended.

                "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

                by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:22:09 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Somewhat off the wall. (5+ / 0-)

                  It seems to me that Jewish atheists are not uncommon.

                  Maybe that's why you aren't offended.

                  Maybe if I said something about atheism, like that Hitler and Stalin were atheists, and that says something about atheism, you'd be a little offended.

                  No, it would not offend me.  I would just have two reasons for thinking you stupid.  Please not that I did not call you stupid just there, but that if your hypothetical was an actual it would be stupid.

                  No, make that three because you also have a straw man there.  Where did I say that it says something about Jews?   It certainly says something about that settler and maybe about those who would befriend him but is says nothing about jews in general.  That is why I was not offended.  

                  It doesn't say anything about you, it doesn't say anything about me and it doesn't say anything about jews.

                  Every other jew I who has ever mentioned the chosen people to me has used it in the context of being chosen to carry a burden.  A duty and responsibility not a privilege.  The settler's use of it as a privilege or a due because he is jewish is deeply offensive to me.  I am somewhat surprised it doesn't offend you.

                  As regard to your particular example, well I am not sure anyone knows for sure what Hitler was but he certainly wasn't an atheist.  He believed in a creator, that much seems certain.   Stalin?  Well his religion was communism if any.  I rather think that nihilist is probably the best description.   You might say that nihilism is atheism but if it is then it is at the opposite extreme of atheism than the stance that I take.

                  Fair enough?  Or is there anything else I can answer?

                  Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

                  by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 01:54:21 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You seem to misunderstand everything I say. (0+ / 0-)

                    I didn't start objecting to this diary because of you, and I'm not continuing to object to it because of you.

                    Where did I say that it says something about Jews?

                    The diary is the problem, not you.  The diarist is implying this by using it in this way.

                    Demena, I don't care about Hitler and Stalin.  I once considered myself an atheist and have nothing against them.  My point was only to try to relate the feeling of having my beliefs assaulted.

                    "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

                    by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:23:54 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Agghhhh! (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      capelza

                      I disagree that the diarist uses it to say something about "jews".  You are playing the victim card.  The diary is not a problem.

                      You mention Hitler and Stalin suggesting I would be insulted. But I wasn't.  I'm not playing the victim card.

                      You think your beliefs were assaulted.  I pointed out that that is only in your imagination.

                      Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

                      by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:52:22 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  I bet some of your best friends are atheists. (0+ / 0-)

                      One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

                      by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:55:06 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Not only that, (0+ / 0-)

                        I thought I was one.  I certainly understand what it may be like to be one, since I lived as one, in a very religious rural area.

                        "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

                        by James Allen on Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 01:28:46 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                •  Is religion the only definition of being Jewish? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  RandomActsOfReason

                  There seems to be a bit of debate on that.

                  The bully pulpit only works if you are willing to be a bully every now and then.

                  by Terra Mystica on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:54:21 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Being a religious Jew is not the only way to be (0+ / 0-)

                    a Jew, in my view.  But Demena said she was an atheist so I assumed she was an atheist.

                    "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

                    by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:16:41 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Because, like Jews, all atheists think alike? (0+ / 0-)

                  What a stupid comment.

                  One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

                  by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:59:13 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  If one of the settlers said it, (4+ / 0-)

              then it's a quote and it's appropriate to use it anywhere.

              I'd say the settlers in this case are making Judaism look bad (assuming they are Jewish, and not simply secular Israelis making the claim).

              Perhaps as a Jew, you should be speaking out against that part of the equation if you find it upsetting.

              There is nothing "sensational" about this diary.

              •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                I'd say the settlers in this case are making Judaism look bad (assuming they are Jewish, and not simply secular Israelis making the claim).

                Perhaps as a Jew, you should be speaking out against that part of the equation if you find it upsetting.

                Did you not read the comment you were responding to?  I said that

                whether it is the settlers using it in a prejudicial manner, or a diarist like this using it to make Judaism look bad, as a Jew, I am being attacked.

                "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

                by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:27:23 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Maybe I misunderstood. (0+ / 0-)

                  I thought you were saying the quote appearing in the diary was an attack on you.

                  If you were saying something else, then I misunderstood.

                  If not, you have a different opinion and should diary it.

                  No matter however: a fact's a fact and a statement's a statement.

            •  I understand where you're coming from (8+ / 0-)

              but the diarist did not argue that the settler's interpretation of Judaism was representative, and the language about 'chosenness' in the diary came from the religious settler, not the diarist. That said, given the common stereotypes surrounding the concept of a 'chosen people', the diarist should probably have made it clear that the settler's understanding of the phrase is not shared by most Jews.

              That was an oversight, but it wasn't, as far as I can see, a malicious one.

            •  Please. (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mattman, capelza, elliott, edtastic

              Instead of giving cover to the crazies, how about you call them out?

              This is like the moderately religious trying to argue 'faith' is ok while the fundamentalists try to ram theocracy down our throats.

              Sponge Bob, Mandrake, Cartoons. That's how your hard-core islamahomocommienazis work.

              by Benito on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:32:19 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The guy is a terrorist. (0+ / 0-)

                A lot of the settlers are racist extremists.  I've said it.  I said it last night before you came into the diary.  Now what does that accomplish?

                "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

                by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:25:24 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  The police called Teitel a terrorist (0+ / 0-)

        but I don't think Teitel is the guy in the video. The diary seems to conflate several different incidents.

        Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

        by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 08:56:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Oh Teitel is terrorist scum (15+ / 0-)

      and part of the settler terrorist infrastructure.

      He has confessed to murdering a number of Palestinians, sending bombs to Israeli academics  , inciting against gays, and blowing up a settler family who he didn't like.

      He was certainly part of a group of mainly American immigrants involved in various terrorist activities, that was associated with  Eden Zada who murdered four Palestinian Israelis including Michel Bachus, my  uncle.

      Israel is so desperate for Jewish immigrants  that they even let a germ like Teitel into my country even though the shinbet at the time knew that he was connected to the murder of Palestinians.

      Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

      by simone daud on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:54:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong (7+ / 0-)

      This week, Israeli police filed terrorism charges against Jack Teitel, a 37-year-old Florida-born West Bank settler, which include the murders of two Palestinians and attacks wounding three other people over the past 12 years.The first attack of which Teitel is accused was the murder of Samir Billbisi, a Palestinian taxi driver who was found shot dead in his cab in East Jerusalem in June 1997. Two months later, allege the police, Teitel shot dead Isaa Mousa'af Mahamada, 57, a Bedouin shepherd near the Carmel settlement in the south Hebron hills.

      Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman, described Teitel as a "Jewish terrorist", adding: "He was deeply involved in terrorism in all different levels."

      He is a terrorist alright.

      Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

      by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:11:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, he's a terrorist. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        word is bond, Gatordiet

        But just because someone is a Jew who believes we are a chosen people doesn't make us all like the settlers.

        That was my point.

        "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

        by James Allen on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:13:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then express that point (4+ / 0-)

          Don't try to invalidate facts.

          Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

          by Demena on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:15:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  no, "chosen people" is exactly the problem (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          david78209, elliott, h bridges, edtastic

          That notion is behind the whole Israeli apartheid system.  It is the notion of "chosenness" that is behind Jews having rights that Palestinians are denied.  It is the notion of "chosenness" that makes stealing property ok.  If their is to be peace in the middle east Jews have to let go of that ridiculous notion, as surely as white Americans had to let go of the notion of their superiority.  How can you be "chosen by God" and not think you are somehow special or more important or more worthy than those not "chosen"?  It is a racist doctrine, pure and simple, no matter how much people try and explain it away, and it needs to go by the way side as surely as the practice of stoning adulterers and disobedient children.  God never said it.  Some priest did.  A loving God doesn't want us stoning people to death, and a loving God doesn't elevate one group of people over the rest.

          •  Way to totally misconstrue a religious doctrine.. (3+ / 0-)

            just feel glad the UN Anti-blasphemy law wasn't endoresed by the U.S.

          •  Christians are infected with this attitude, too (6+ / 0-)

            The attitude of being God's "chosen people" causes a lot of the evils that certain Christian groups carry out.

            Viewed properly, being the "chosen people" is supposed to mean being called to be especially holy and dedicated to God. Or anyway, that's how I've always understood it.

            People like that settler, and like plenty of Christians, think that being "God's chosen" means they have the right to do anything they conceive to be God's will, regardless of the consequences to others and regardless of how much it violates other tenants of their faith.

            But the problem isn't with the idea of being chosen -- the problem is in thinking that it means one is superior to others, rather than thinking it means that one has greater responsibilities.

            •  The problem is self-righteousness... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              word is bond, Terra Mystica, Aranfell

              everything else is ancillary.

            •  sure, its through all deistic religions (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Mikey, h bridges

              Never denied that.  The Mormons think they're chosen, many Christians, muslims, probably even scientologists.

              So maybe their are a whole lot of Judaic scholars who interpret "chosen people" differently, but its hard not to conflate the notion of "chosen by God" with the notion of those unlike you being "not chosen", and its hard not to think that your group being "chosen" doesn't somehow make your group "more special" than others, in an absolute way.  Not just "more special to you" but objectively "more special", in which case other groups are "less special".  

              It's a slippery slope, and few who accept the notion  of "chosenness" would have the wherewithal not to slide down it.  At best, you have people who think "that group isn't as special as we are, but we have to treat them as if they are because its the right thing to do".  But that would tend to result in an attitude of "why don't they appreciate me treating them as if they were an equal."

              I'm sorry, but the notion of "chosen by god" has clear socio-political ramifications, in every religion or culture that it crops up in, and they aren't good ones.  Its an archaic and tribalist idea that needs to be relegated to the dustbin of history.

              •  Your reasoning seems logical, but ... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MoshebenAvraham

                when it comes to religion, the logic often leads in strange directions, such as this analysis from an Orthodox Jewish source:

                In the Jewish understanding, chosenness leads not to arrogance, but rather to humility.... [T]he closer you are to G-d, the more you sense your insignificance.... G-d is an infinite being, and all delusions of petty self-importance fall away when you stand before infinity. Being close with G-d demands introspection and self-improvement, not smugness.

                Different groups can be special in different ways. From another Orthodox source:

                Maybe the Greeks were chosen for their unique contributions to art and philosophy, the Romans for their pioneering services in law and government, the British for bringing parliamentary rule into the world, and the Americans for piloting democracy in a pluralistic society. The Jews were chosen by God to be 'peculiar unto Me' as the pioneers of religion and morality; that was and is their national purpose.

                There is no such thing as more special and less special. Every group is different, and therefore special in its own way.  As Americans, we should value diversity.  This would be a much poorer culture and society if everyone were the same. The key to successful pluralism is to respect the specialness of every group rather than dismissing it as tribalism.

                Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

                by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:54:57 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  there are wise men (0+ / 0-)

                  in every faith who understand this sort of thing...that doesn't make it necessarily common wisdom.  The fact that one can interpret it in a positive light does not mean that the majority will choose to do so.  Otherwise Bibi would likely not be president of Israel (and Bushie would never have been elected here, by the same logic) and certainly when the militant racist Avigdor Lieberman was made a cabinet member thre would have been rioting on the streets of Tel Aviv. Tell me THAT guy doesn't think he's one of the "chosen", and not in any kind of humble sense.

                  •  I think it's more likely (0+ / 0-)

                    that most Israeli Jews are motivated by nationalism than by scriptural doctrines. It's the same kind of nationalism that motivates Finns or Basques or Kurds ... or Palestinians: wanting a country of their own. I think it's a feeling that Jewish Israelis share, whether they are religious or secular, and that any Israeli politician has to subscribe to. AFAIK, Lieberman is not religious, but you don't need a religious justification in order to be a nationalist, a bigot or a pig.

                    Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

                    by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:04:46 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Elect v Non-elect (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              capelza, elliott, JesseCW

              exactly.

              Religion is just another form of tribalism. All tribalism boils down to 'my tribe yay! your tribe boo!'

              Sponge Bob, Mandrake, Cartoons. That's how your hard-core islamahomocommienazis work.

              by Benito on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:33:23 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Educate yourself (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MoshebenAvraham

            You can start here.

            Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

            by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 02:58:21 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  No, the Israeli apartheid system (8+ / 0-)

            is not based on an interpretation of some religious text. It is a construction (and extension) of the Israeli state which, like all states, operates in the interests of the concentrations of economic and political power within Israeli societies (an oversimplification, of course). You're right that there is an attitude common within Israel that places the rights of Jews above those of Palestinians, but a) this is hardly uncommon or restricted to Israel (see attitudes in the US towards Iraqis, for example), and b) you would be better served looking for an explanation for this in terms of racism, occupation and Zionist ideology then in some obscure religious doctrine.

            This:

            "If their is to be peace in the middle east Jews have to let go of that ridiculous notion, as surely as white Americans had to let go of the notion of their superiority."

            is a completely unfair generalisation. Not all Jews view themselves as superior to the Palestinians, far less to all non-Jews, and those who are more likely to be motivated by other factors (racism, occupation, etc.) than religion.

            The interpretation of the 'chosen people' concept on which you're relying here is only, as far as I know, shared by a minority of religious Jews (who themselves only make up a fraction of Israeli society).

            •  unfair to assume Israelis feel superior? (0+ / 0-)

              I don't know if you have been listening to the Pro Israel talking points for the past few decades but that seems to be the idea they are trying to hammer home in a very overt manner. No we should not assume all the people of a nation have one attitude but at some point for the sake of argument we do have to devolve into generalizations, if not we would have to discuss the mindset of millions one at a time and that would be all together impractical.

              To generalize we can at the least they as a nation feel the lives of Israelis are of greater value than those in the occupied territories and also that they ought not need feel much guilt about how those people are being treated. If they did not I would assume they would be treating them a whole lot better.

      •  Teitel isn't the guy in the video, I think (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen

        The diary seems to have a lot of us confused. It tosses together several violent incidents by various settlers, noting that Teitel is being prosecuted by the Israeli justice system. However, I see no indication that the guy in the video is Teitel.

        Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

        by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:19:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  While the settlements continue, (0+ / 0-)

      how can we think anything else? I am sorry. I understand that Jews are not all on the same page here. I am not a racist, although I understand there are people of my race who are. I hope we are winning our battle against them. I absolutely support Israel's right to exist and flourish.

      When I make a judgement about a person, it is not based on the color of their skin, their language or accent, or their last name. I make judgements based on WHAT THEY DO.

      But as long as Israel's actions include different laws for Jews and Palestinians and the settling of land that is not theirs, what other conclusion can we reach that at least the majority of Jews in Israel believe themselves to be better and more deserving than Palestinians?

      "I'm a Jew and I don't feel that way" doesn't cut it. When a person of my race expresses racism, and someone calls them out, my first reaction is not "All whites don't feel that way. I certainly don't." It is "What a jerk! Please expose this man/woman's words to the world so we can make an example of them."

      I realize that history has put a defensive system into your heads that is recognizeable and most certainly understandable. But the Jews who say they don't agree with the quote "We are God's chosen people" need to get their shit together before it is too late. We are getting the wrong impression here.

      I am trying not to be offensive. I know there will be words I could probably have said better if I known exactly who was reading this. Just my humble opinion.

      As if we could make things better without making them worse.

      by A Voice on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:40:10 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  These people are hard up. (4+ / 0-)

    Jewish settlers have forced their way into a house in east Jerusalem, using hired guards to evict an elderly Palestinian woman and throwing out other residents' belongings. The settlers displayed what they said was a court order granting them ownership of the single-storey building.

    It gets worse. First they leave America to go live on a desert. Now they're living in second hand houses.
    What, they can't afford a new one?

    Seriously though, this West Bank settlement stuff is out of hand.

    Someone, much smarter than I, really needs to do something about this entire Israel, Palestine, please stop the violence situation.

    The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. (Herbert Spencer) rebel ga*

    by rebel ga on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:36:49 PM PST

  •  I thought this was going to be about Americans (4+ / 0-)

    When I read the title.

    They tortured people to get false confessions to justify invading Iraq.

    by yet another liberal on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:51:44 PM PST

  •  Ah, the old "god's chosen people" routine (3+ / 0-)

    It was the first hijacking of religion for non-religious purposes.  And republicans and conservatives carry on the tradition on a "grand old" manner yet today.  

    "In our century, we've learned not to fear words" - Lt. Uhura

    by ShempLugosi on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:55:25 PM PST

  •  Sick, Disgusting, (6+ / 0-)

    but a fact of life in the "Middle East"- thieves, robbers, and murderers are able to use their religions to justify their actions, at least in their own minds.

    I'm a very busy man, lieutenant, as you can see. What? Yes, yes, that's cheesecake. If you want some, help yourself.

    by heurlin on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:57:32 PM PST

  •  So these Palestinians are not allowed to buy any (13+ / 0-)

    homes in Jerusalem outside their sardine can neighborhoods. They cannot visit their relatives because of the wall that israel has erected around Palestinian townships in the west bank.

    they should be given full legal rights like other Israeli citizens. why should those settler bastards have rights and these poor Palestinians be treated like animals. Treated like Europe used to treat its minorities.

    What a disgrace.  So here is a question that comes to my mind. What are American Jewish communities doing about this? because they singularly have the power to end the nascent apartheid system that is being imposed on landless, helpless, stateless, Palestinians.

    Perhaps in the future we will have Palestinian diaries replacing pooty diaries; because they are being turned into animals by an israeli legal system that doesn't recognize even the slightest human rights of non-Jews in east jerusalem.  

    Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

    by simone daud on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 12:41:06 AM PST

    •  Do you know what you are talking about? (0+ / 0-)

      Obviously not. This is as ignorant a bunch or rantings and assumptions as I have seen.

      So these Palestinians are not allowed to buy any ...
      homes in Jerusalem outside their sardine can neighborhoods

      Where was anything said about buying?

      So, Do you approve of a country taking over land during war and taking the property of those who had fled and then "settling" people on the property and leading them to believe they could stay? And that the original owners who want their property back should just melt away?

      Or would it be appropriate if the matter were taken to court and eventually ...... the court decision be carried out?

      We are in a time where it is risky NOT to change. Barack Obama 7-30-08

      by samddobermann on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:33:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes I know what I'm talking about (6+ / 0-)

        but I have no clue what you are reacting to.

        Can you explain your self better because you are not making any sense.

        Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

        by simone daud on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:38:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I will below, ok? I am a slow typist but unlike (0+ / 0-)

          some here, I know a bit about the history so I had a guess as to what was going on. And I did a few minutes research,

          I'll try to write it out, but I'm very tired so it may be dis jointed.

          We are in a time where it is risky NOT to change. Barack Obama 7-30-08

          by samddobermann on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:43:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I look forward to reading what you write (7+ / 0-)

            however, you should calm down and write sensible things. Should you need to write in Hebrew, then I'm happy to reply in Hebrew.

            To establish the perspective I have a number of questions:

            1. Can Jerusalem Palestinians who own land with land titles in West Jerusalem and villages west of Jerusalem get their land back? That is return to their homes and their land in israel proper?
            1. Can Jerusalem Palestinians, even buy west Jerusalem apartments?

            Previously I posted under the user name palestinian professor, which is now deprecated. I now post under my late grandfather's name simone daud.

            by simone daud on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 03:55:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Which court? (0+ / 0-)

        An international court? Or a court of the occupying country? Cause in the case of the second, I wouldn't exactly expect fairness. . .

        My spiritual advisor is the Reverend Horton Heat.

        by Jaxpagan on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:41:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It used to be that Palestinians had the right to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AmbroseBurnside

      go pretty much anywhere. Tens of thousands of Palestinians would commute into Israel proper to work at good jobs. Then came the first Intifada....

    •  asdf (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      capelza, sofia, unspeakable, simone daud

      "What are American Jewish communities doing about this? because they singularly have the power to end the nascent apartheid system that is being imposed on landless, helpless, stateless, Palestinians."

      What makes you say this? American Jews can be be influential, and their solidarity would be much appreciated, but I hardly think they are indispensable here. If a majority of Americans demand a change in US government policy towards Israel, what will it matter if a majority of American Jews aren't among them?

      •  well it would help even if not essential (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        capelza, JesseCW

        American Jews - sort of parallel to Americans in general - are slowly getting with the program when it comes to objectively analyzing Israeli-Palestinian issues.  They are developing "J Street" as a counterweight to AIPAC.  And it's necessary as a strong foil to the inevitable "you hate the Jews," "you're so anti-semetic," etc. crap that oozes freely from the likes of AIPAC when "debating" somebody about Israel.

  •  Why are we funding this? (9+ / 0-)

    We send Israel millions of dollars every year for defense. It's high time we stopped it. "God's chosen people" can get God to pay for their defense.

    •  Didn't Jimmy Carter promise this back during the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dexter

      camp David accords? (Around $3 billion to Israel, and $2 billion to Egypt)

      Feel free to correct me if I am wrong...

      •  You are wrong. You can look up the foreign (0+ / 0-)

        aid funding of all types and for all purposes. But I can''t recall where. and my bookmarks etc are on a dead machine.

        Funding to Israel actually stated in 1967. After they proved themselves in the 6 day war. It was the height of the cold war and the Arabs were the client states of USSR. There is more to it than that. But earlier the was a $50 million grant in 1948 and that was about it.

        We are in a time where it is risky NOT to change. Barack Obama 7-30-08

        by samddobermann on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:00:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think Gatordiet is right (0+ / 0-)

          There might have been some funding to Israel prior to Camp David, but part of what brought Egypt to the table was the promise that a peace agreement would result in US aid.  The US couldn't give aid to Egypt and not Israel, so Camp David resulted in $2B for Egypt and $3B for Israel.  

          Text "Justice" or "Justicia" to 69866 to get action alerts on federal immigration legislation and campaigns

          by Dexter on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:48:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  So why then. . . (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AllisonInSeattle, Terra Mystica

            . . .are we still giving "aid" to one of the richest and most influencial nations on the planet? Seems to me, at this point, they should be giving aid to US!

            •  Because.... (0+ / 0-)

              ...they are surrounded by states that are trying to destroy them.

              If missiles were falling where my two daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that. -- President Barack Obama

              by JPhurst on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:35:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Let Israel. . . (0+ / 1-)
                Recommended by:
                Hidden by:
                Gatordiet

                . . .pay for their defence themselves. Israel is a WEALTHY COUNTRY. Jews have a lot of money. That may not be PC to say but it is the TRUTH. And, no doubt, at least part of the reason the surrounding states seek to destroy them is precisely the unfair policies that Israel promotes: a two tiered justice system wherein jews are accorded greater rights in the courtroom than are Palestinians or other non-jewish races.

              •  this is a lie. (9+ / 0-)

                an old talking point meant to keep the status quo.

                Israel is at peace with Jordan and Egypt. Saudi Arabia has never fought Israel. Syria poses no significant threat (the only thing the Syrian regime does effectively is crack down in its own population), and Lebanon is fractured and incoherent.

                The only groups threatening Israel are paramilitary or guerrilla groups (Hizballah, Hamas). These are not states. So in fact, there are no states trying to destroy Israel.

                •  The few states that... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MoshebenAvraham, Gatordiet

                  ...have made peace with Israel have made a cold peace, and every other region is in a state of war.

                  At this time, they are content to let terrorist proxys conduct the war.

                  Israel is in fact, secure, precisely because of the aid package.  If not for it, you would most likely see open warfare between states in the Middle East.  For all the talk of political instability in the region, the American position has allowed the conflict to be relatively contained.

                  The American support for Israel ensured the peace treaties, which while flawed and cold, are better than outright warfare.  And it's warned off the other warmongering nations.

                  In fact, your statement is the best argument yet for the aid package.

                  If missiles were falling where my two daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that. -- President Barack Obama

                  by JPhurst on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:22:00 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  not at all (7+ / 0-)

                    Israel is the nuclear armed superpower of the region, operating with impunity against its Palestinians subjects, destroying their infrastructure, and seizing their lands. It does so with impunity precisely because it faces no real threats. The same goes for Lebanon: Israel has destroyed Lebanese infrastructure and killed thousands of Lebanese civilians. What comparable damage has Israel ever sustained?

                    There is no threat to Israel's tyranny from any state in the region. Israel does not need US aid, it needs to be cut off in order to face real pressure which might force it to make concessions and end its periodic massacres of children.

                    •  Before the U.S. cemented.... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Gatordiet

                      ...its relationship with Israel, it was three times as large, but constantly under siege.  The wars were full frontal military battles.  That was in no one's interest.

                      Except people who are anti-peace.

                      If missiles were falling where my two daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that. -- President Barack Obama

                      by JPhurst on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 10:52:26 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

              •  The world is dangerous no excuses (0+ / 0-)

                Europe spent hundreds of years kicking the hell out of each other but they managed to get along eventually. We don't need to give Israel an excuse it has a massive nuclear arsenal and overwhelming military superiority.

      •  He purchased 'peace' (0+ / 0-)

        which is really about oil.

        Sponge Bob, Mandrake, Cartoons. That's how your hard-core islamahomocommienazis work.

        by Benito on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:36:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  amen (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AllisonInSeattle, Terra Mystica

      What kind of ally spies on us, mocks us, and struts around like they have us tied around their finger, all the while soaking us for all that cash?  The same kind of ally that destroys towns and then won't let the residents import building supplies to fix it with winter on the way.

  •  The problem with the diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OleHippieChick

    Isn't the "chosen people" title.  I think the fundamentalist nature of the settlers is a legitimate factor in this whole issue, and one that we secular Jews need to confront more.  We need to realize that these settlers are acting in our name, and perverting the legacy of our people.  It's no different from when we ask moderate Christians to stand up and call out their brethren on homophobia or Dominionism, or when we ask moderate Muslims to stand up to Islamic fundamentalist violence.  These are the terms of the debate.

    What's not great here is that this diary doesn't really make much sense.  Who is it about?  Ban Ki-Moon?  Jack Teitel?  Baruch Goldstein?  Um Nabil?  With that title, it's really gotta give us more about that incident than video link.

    •  Yes, the diary is very confusing. (0+ / 0-)

      Several people seem to think the guy in the video is Teitel, but that seems incorrect. Basically, we have references to multiple incidents, some of which are being addressed by the Israeli justice system (no information on the rest). There's no background on the "court order" regarding Um Nabil's home. Without clear facts, it's hard to draw meaningful conclusions, and most commenters are just drawing on their gut feelings.

      Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

      by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:25:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I interpret claims to being (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Flywheel

    God's chosen as confessions by the speaker that they're full of shit.

    When an old man dies, a library burns down. --African proverb

    by Wom Bat on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 04:11:55 AM PST

    •  Ah, the "they're all really atheists" canard! (2+ / 0-)

      It's all very tiresome.

      •  You seem not to understand. IMO, individuals or (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Terra Mystica

        groups proclaiming themselves God's chosen people to the exclusion of all others are acting contemptuously toward others and toward others' religious beliefs. I have no insight into, or concern with, anyone else's being either a theist or an atheist. And in any case, what anyone else might choose to believe is none of my business, and is of no greater or lesser merit than what I might believe.

        When an old man dies, a library burns down. --African proverb

        by Wom Bat on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:33:19 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You seem not to understand. IMO, that believers (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Rieux, RandomActsOfReason

          believe what they believe. Consider:

          groups proclaiming  2+2=4,  to the exclusion of all other answers,  are acting contemptuously toward others and toward others' mathematical beliefs.

          Does that make any sense? That's pretty much what you said. You are proclaiming the religious atheist because they don't really believe what they believe. Believe it, they do.

          •  Here's Sam Harris (0+ / 0-)

            making a very similar point:

            But there are several problems with [Andrew Sullivan's] defense of moderate religion. First, many moderates assume that religious "extremism" is rare and therefore not all that consequential. Happily, you [Sullivan] are not in this camp, but I would venture that you are in a minority among religious moderates. As you and I both know, religious extremism is not rare, and it is hugely consequential. Forty-four percent of Americans believe that Jesus will return to earth to judge the living and the dead sometime in the next fifty years. This idea is extreme in almost every sense—extremely silly, extremely dangerous, extremely worthy of denigration—but it is not extreme in the sense of being rare. The problem, as I see it, is that moderates don't tend to know what it is like to be truly convinced that death is an illusion and that an eternity of happiness awaits the faithful beyond the grave. They have, as you say, "integrated doubt" into their faith. Another way of putting it is that they have less faith—and for good reason. The result, however, is that your fellow moderates tend to doubt that anybody ever really is motivated to sacrifice his life, or the lives of others, on the basis his heartfelt religious beliefs. Moderate doubt—which I agree is an improvement over fundamentalist certitude in most respects—often blinds its host to the reality and consequences of full-tilt religious lunacy. Such blindness is now particularly unhelpful, given the hideous collision with Islamic certainty that is unfolding all around us.

        •  If you read up on this (0+ / 0-)

          you may have to revise some assumptions. The concept of "chosen people" comes from ancient times to distinguish Jewish monotheism linked with a moral code from other ancient religions that were polytheistic and sometimes amoral. The idea was that Jews were "chosen" to proclaim God's existence and to bear the burden of obeying God's commandments. In other words, Jews were not "chosen" for greater rights but for greater obligations.

          As explained in contemporary language, the concept is not contemptuous of others' religious beliefs. Rather, it respects other beliefs, or even an individual's compliance with basic moral laws, as valid but not burdened by the full set of commandments applicable to Jews. I posted a collection of links on the subject here.

          Democrats: Members of the Democratic Party working to advance democracy; Republicons: Members of the Republicanist Party working to advance Republicanism

          by word is bond on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:35:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for this post (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AllisonInSeattle, elliott, dolfin66

    This post is critically important because the most of the media dares not criticize Israel.

  •  When God speaks... (3+ / 0-)

    a ventriloquist is doing the talking.

  •  Religion + Nationalism = (4+ / 0-)

    Death, destruction, and oppression.

    Always. Everywhere.

    Sponge Bob, Mandrake, Cartoons. That's how your hard-core islamahomocommienazis work.

    by Benito on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:30:08 AM PST

    •  So so true. I hope each of us is dedicating (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      capelza, RandomActsOfReason

      ourselves to a life and worldview that somehow -- whatever works for us -- makes a different world:

      a peaceful world
      a world where religion is private (wonderful if you have it, but private)
      a world where everyone is valued, no matter what their religion

      a world where religious freedom is cherished
      a world where every PERSON is cherished
      a world where every woman is treated with respect

      a world where every man is has respect, just for being alive, and doesn't
         have to push people around in a (pathetic) attempt to GRAB respect
      a world where every child is viewed as precious, deserving of safety and the best treatment that humanity can offer a child.

      See, that's what we SHOULD be doing. And that points out that this event, these actions by these settlers in East Jerusalem, as documented above -- are so far from anything that could help create a peaceful, positive world...

      that they deserve to be condemned universally.

      By every person, of every (or no) religion.

       

      This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

      by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 07:49:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  As I read the comments... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Benito

    about religious topics I am struck by how stupid it all is.  Nobody knows anything about a God, no matter how IT is portrayed.  Religious "experts" just make it up as they go.  If there was no religion, people wouldn't feel set upon for their beliefs by others who believe something different.  It's all bullshit.

    "Have a beginner's mind at all times, for a beginner knows nothing and learns all while a sophisticate knows all and learns nothing." - Suzuki

    by dolfin66 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 06:31:17 AM PST

  •  In typical form for "Israel-right-or-wrong" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    capelza

    apologists, this diary has been largely hijacked into a discussion about the title, with implications of anti-semitism.

    This is a common tactic used to avoid discussion of the actual issue of the events occurring in Israel.

    We should not feed these apologists. We should focus attention back to the events described in this diary.

    One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

    by RandomActsOfReason on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 11:01:38 AM PST

  •  I don't understand why all of us can't be equal (0+ / 0-)

    in dignity and respect. We use aspects of identity to promote diversity, but that means respecting it. We don't do that anywhere near often enough.

    My hope in the United States to be the land of the free was destroyed again in Maine.

    by Liberalindependent28 on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 09:14:06 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site