Got this from Pastor Dan and thought you
might be interested. It just goes to show you, no matter how much that
people like to deny the truth of what I tell them about Judaism and the
Jews, everywhere on looks and reads Jewish writings they will find that
I am absolutely right; and that in fact that I leave out a lot of filth
and blasphemy which I consider obscene and will publish where children
might see it.
Well do the Jews deserve what Christ said about them
when He called them the children of the Devil. And to think that the Judeo-Christians
are just too stupid to study to make themselves approved as the scriptures
tell them to.
Many say why should we study the Talmud, we don't
need to know what it says. That is just almost too stupid a response that
it does not even deserve an answer. If we do not study their writings then
we will never know the depths they will sink to to destroy our people
"JEWISH HISTORY - JEWISH RELIGION: The Weight
of Three Thousand Years" By Israel Shahak, with a foreword by Gore Vidal.
Published by Pluto Press (London, 1994).
Reviewed by Ryszard Cimek, Cimdec Inc., Cognitive
Intermedia, Canada. email: rcimek@netcom.ca tel: 613.232.3057 fax:
613.232.2767
When the Roman historian Tacitus pointed out
19 centuries ago that the Jews are unique among the races of man in their
intense hatred and contempt for all races but their own, he was only repeating
what many other scholars had discovered before him. For the next 1,900
years other investigators came to similar conclusions, either from a study
of the Jews' religious writings or from a study of the Jews' behavior toward
non-Jews.
Notable among these was the Great Reformer,
Martin Luther, who in 1543 wrote in "Von den JM-Yden und Ihren LM-Ygen"
:
"Does not their Talmud say, and do not their
rabbis write, that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it
is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep
his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob, as they do with their
usury, from a heathen is a divine service. For they hold that they cannot
be too hard on us nor sin against us, because they are of the noble blood
and circumcised saints; we, however, are cursed goyim. And they are the
masters of the world, and we are their servants, yea, their cattle....
"Should someone think that I am saying too
much, I am not saying too much, but much too little. For I see in their
writings how they curse us goyim and wish us all evil in their schools
and their prayers."
The Jews responded to Luther like they responded
to all the others. They put him down as just another "hater," blinded by
religious bigotry. And today that's still the Jews' standard answer to
everyone who says or writes anything about them except the most fawning
praise.
When British newsman William Cash, Los Angeles
correspondent for London's Daily Telegraph , reported late last year in
a magazine article the simple fact that the executives in Hollywood's motion
picture industry are nearly all Jews, they shrieked at him, "Hater!" and
denied his fact . . .
Thus, Israel Shahak's book is all the more
important for being a document by a knowledgeable Jew--a Jewish "insider"--about
the beliefs and behavior of his fellow Jews. Born in Warsaw in 1933, Shahak
spent a portion of his childhood in the concentration camp in Belsen, from
which he immigrated to Palestine in 1945. He grew up in Israel, served
in the Israeli military, and became a chemistry professor. Like all Israelis,
he became fluent in Hebrew. He also became acclimated to the peculiar moral
atmosphere of Israeli society: a combination of overweening arrogance and
deceit, a mixture of pugnacious self-righteousness and duplicity.
Unlike his fellow Israelis, however, Professor
Shahak is deeply troubled by this peculiar atmosphere. Whereas the Jews
around him take it for granted that the goyim on whom they depend for economic,
military, and diplomatic support are too stupid ever to figure out what
the Jews think about them and say about them behind their backs and plan
to do to them when they can, and too sheeplike ever to take effective action
if they do figure it out, he worries. He remembers that the Romans figured
it out, and they consequently sacked Jerusalem and chased the Jews out
of Palestine. He remembers that the Germans figured it out, and that's
why he became an involuntary tenant in a concentration camp. He's worried
that if his fellow Jews continue behaving as they always have, they will
get themselves into some really serious trouble--again.
In particular, Professor Shahak is concerned
about the behavior of those of his race who adhere to Judaism. He is not
one of these himself, and so he is able to look with some degree of objectivity
at the mixture of superstition, Jewish chauvinism, and hatred of non-Jews
which makes up the Jewish religion and its sacred writings. He deplores
traditional Jewish teachings, not only because of the danger that some
new Martin Luther will come along and spill the beans to the Gentiles,
but because of the spiritually debilitating effect these teachings have
had on the Jews themselves. Of the world of medieval Jewry in Europe, the
world of the ghetto and the shtetl which modern Jewish writers refer to
in euphoric tones as a world of quaint tradition and piety, Shahak says:
"It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance
. .."
He cites a number of specific instances of
the ways in which Jewish religious authorities have kept their flocks under
control. In general, the rabbis have taught their fellow Jews that their
Gentile neighbors are spiritually and morally unclean; that they are subhuman,
on a level with the beasts of the field; and that they hate Jews and must
be hated in return. Jews are taught that the Christian religion is a religion
fit only for animals, and that its founder, Jesus, was the son of a prostitute
and is presently immersed in a pit of boiling excrement in hell.
Among the "Hassidim" (Hebrew for "pious ones")
all of these teachings are kept current. Shahak points out that a central
thesis of the Hassidic doctrine is that only Jews are human beings, and
that the universe was created for them alone. Non-Jews were created only
to be used by Jews. Although this teaching about the subhumanity of Gentiles
is most open and explicit among the bearded, sidelocked, black-hatted Orthodox
Jews that one sees in Jewish strongholds such as New York City, it comes
from the core of Jewish tradition and is accepted to a greater or lesser
degree by all pious Jews. It is, for example, a specific tenet of the Jewish
Defense League and is cited in the membership handbook for that group.
Especially frustrating to Professor Shahak
is the clever deception which his fellow Jews use to conceal the true nature
of Judaism from their Gentile neighbors. Regarding the veil of false piety
which conceals from Gentile eyes the malevolent doctrine of the Hassidim,
he writes: "A chief deceiver in this case, and a good example of the
power of deception, was Martin Buber. His numerous works eulogizing the
whole Hassidic movement (including Habbad) never so much as hint at the
real doctrines of Hassidism concerning non-Jews." Buber (1878-1965) promoted
Hassidism in Germany during the rise of the National Socialists--in fact,
until 1938, when he left for Palestine--and Shahak considers Buber's efforts,
despite their deceptiveness, at least partly responsible for the National
Socialist reaction to the Jews . . .
Another example of Jewish deception given by
Professor Shahak concerns the etymology of the Yiddish word for a Gentile
girl, "shiksa" . He cites the popular English-language book "The Joys of
Yiddish" (New York, 1968), by Leo Rosten, which tells its readers that
"shiksa" comes from the Hebrew word "sheqetz" , meaning "blemish". Writes
Shahak, "This is a barefaced lie, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The
"Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary", published in Israel, correctly
defines "sheqetz" as follows: "unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination
. . . "
Professor Shahak writes with passion. He evidently
feels that liberating Jews everywhere from the shackles of their misanthropic
superstitions and freeing Israeli state policy in particular from the stifling
influence of Judaism is a matter of some urgency. He focuses our attention
especially on the inherent hatefulness of Judaism with citations from a
number of Jewish religious writings.
This has been a favorite activity of anti-Jewish
writers for centuries, who have belabored us with the "Talmud's" insulting
and hostile comments about Gentiles. The inaccessibility to Gentiles of
many of the Hebrew texts, however, together with the deception veiling
them, has made Talmudic exegesis a problematic task for all Gentiles with
less scholarship or determination than that of Martin Luther. For this
reason one must exercise considerable discretion in quoting from many anti-Jewish
writings: translations are often questionable, and references are often
garbled.
Professor Shahak does not have these limitations:
he knows where to look; he understands the secret meanings of all of the
deceptive euphemisms; and he gives us clear and reliable translations.
In a chapter titled "The Laws against Non-Jews," he
writes:
"The Halakhah", that is the legal system of
classical Judaism--as practiced by practically all Jews from the 9th century
to the end of the 18th and as maintained to this very day in the form "Talmud".
However, because of the unwieldy complexity of the legal disputations recorded
in the "Talmud", more manageable codifications
of talmudic law became necessary... The most authoritative code, widely
used to date as a handbook, is the "Shulhan 'Arukh". . .
He then cites the teaching of this code regarding
homicide:
According to the Jewish religion, the murder
of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the
other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular
authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary
administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew...When the
victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders
a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable
by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all.
Thus, one of the two most important commentators
on the "Shulhan 'Arukh" explains that when it comes to a Gentile, "one
must not lift one's hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly,
for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice ...there
is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly..."
A Gentile murderer who happens to be under
Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not.
However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism,
he is not punished.
Then Shahak gives us a rabbi's answer to an
Israeli soldier who has asked whether or not it is proper to kill Arab
women and children. In his answer the rabbi quotes from the "Talmud": "The
best of the Gentiles--kill him; the best of snakes--dash out its brains."
Perhaps even more offensive are the Jewish
beliefs on sexual matters. Shahak writes:
"Sexual intercourse between a married
Jewish woman and any man other than her husband is a capital offense for
both parties, and one of the three most heinous sins. The status of Gentile
women is very different. The "Halakhah" presumes all Gentiles to be utterly
promiscuous and the verse "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose
issue [of semen] is like the issue of horses" is applied to them...Therefore,
the concept of adultery does not apply to intercourse between a Jewish
man and a Gentile woman; rather the "Talmud" equates such intercourse to
the sin of bestiality..."
According to the "Talmudic Encyclopedia" :
"He who has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to
the death penalty, for it is written: "thy fellow's wife' rather than the
alien's wife...and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the
Gentiles, in any case a Jew is exempted."
This does not imply that sexual intercourse
between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted--quite the contrary.
But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be
executed, even if she was raped by the Jew: "If a Jew has coitus with a
Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married
or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day--because
he had willful coitus with her she must be killed, as is the case with
a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble."
The "Talmud's" overriding concern with matters
of money and property mirror that of the Jews, and Professor Shahak offers
a number of hair-splitting examples of Jewish beliefs on the subject and
the way in which distinctions are made between the property of Jews and
Gentiles, and between Jewish dealings with another Jew and with a Gentile.
Two of these examples will suffice here:
"If a Jew finds property whose probable owner
is Jewish, the finder is strictly enjoined to make a positive effort to
return his find by advertising it publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and
all the early rabbinical authorities not only allow a Jewish finder to
appropriate an article lost by a Gentile, but actually forbid him or her
to return it..."
"It is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling
or buying at an unreasonable price. However, "Fraud does not apply to Gentiles,
for it is written: 'Do not defraud each man his brother'..."
Shahak points out that the Halakhah interprets
all such idioms [as "each man his brother" or "neighbor"] as referring
exclusively to one's fellow Jew.
How have the Jews managed to keep teachings
of this sort concealed from the Gentiles among whom they live? The truth
of the matter is that they have not always been able to do so. Luther was
not the only Christian scholar who learned Hebrew, peered into the "Talmud",
and was horrified by what he saw. Sometimes the Jews were able to bribe
the Christian authorities to overlook such things, but throughout the later
Middle Ages there were prohibitions and burnings of talmudic literature
by outraged popes and bishops.
The Jews developed a clever system of double
bookkeeping to circumvent such "persecution." They modified or deleted
the offending passages from new editions of the "Talmud", and they made
up a separate compendium, "Talmudic Omissions" ("Hebrew: "Hesronot Shas")
which circulated surreptitiously among the rabbis. In Israel today, feeling
cocky enough to dispense with most such deceptions, the Jews are putting
the passages which formerly had been omitted or modified back into the
latest editions of the "Talmud" or the "Shulhan 'Arukh" in their original
form. They are still careful with translations into Gentile tongues, however.
Professor Shahak gives an example:
"In 1962 a part of the "Maimonidean Code"...the
so-called "Book of Knowledge", which contains the most basic rules of Jewish
faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition,
with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been
restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish
infidels appears in it in full: "It is a duty to exterminate them with
one's own hands." In the English translation this is somewhat softened
to: "It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them." But then the
Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of "infidels" who must
be exterminated: "Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq
and Baitos [the founders of the Sadducean sect] and their pupils, may the
name of the wicked rot." Not one word of this appears in the English text
on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide
circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries,
not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.
Professor Shahak is too naive. If he ventured
out of Israel more and came to know Christian scholars better, he would
understand what a pathetic and Politically Correct rabble they have become.
There is not the slightest spark of Martin Luther left in the lot of them.
Traitors to their own people as well as to their religion, they smile and
genuflect at every insult from the Jews and are capable of feeling indignation
only when the Jews receive some slight. The Jews are able to enlist them
by the regiment to denounce in unison as "hate" any criticism of Jewish
policies or doctrines, but they turn a blind eye to the virulent hatred
which permeates Judaism and motivates the great majority of Jews, religious
as well as secular.
Israel Shahak is a rare Jew indeed, and his book
is essential reading for anyone interested in the problem of the Jews.
