Stop this lunacy

It's hard to resist the comment that the people who behaved like that are fundamentalist thugs.
Tthe wickedness they have perpetrated obviously deserves condemnation, and, needless to say, apart from that moot point is the salient fact that they're storing up such trouble for the future.
Someone pointed out to me the other day that if they think they have a right to Judea and Samaria they'll have to agree to forfeit Tel Aviv, for that was not within the biblical boundaries.

Why is it assumed that the attackers were Jews?
It could very well be Muslims trying to start an intefada. Remember pallywood?

I sit here remembering a couple of years ago when 2 Israelis accidentally drove into a Palestinian area. They were publicly murdered, by being physically torn apart by blood-thirsty Arabs.

Burning a carpet and some books doesn't deserve the attention it is getting.

Yet, the settlers are acting entirely in accordance with the teachings of the Torah (exterminate them, destroy their holy places) and Talmud (gentiles as a species less than human and more akin to animals). That is Judaism: strong shades of tribalism and nationalism, yet still referred to as a 'religion'. You cannot blame the settlers for following their faith to the letter, even if it does seem totally abhorrent in modern, civilised terms.

You are an antisemitic reptile

For once I agree with Hoffman. But why insult reptiles? Oi, JC moderators! WTF is going on here?

'vortiigern' posts on fascist websites

wake up moderators

I will not stoop to the lowly and infantile levels of abusive name-calling (Hoffman) and abreviated obscenity (Bennett). Nor will I have the temerity to do so and then call sanctimoniously for the moderator's assistance.

As Hoffman and Bennett ought to be aware, my assertions are founded entirely on the wording of Jewish religious texts starting with the Torah.

Rather than provide actual quotes, I would recommend reading Richard Dawkins's excellent book 'The God Delusion' in which he very succinctly sums up the God created by the Jews:

'The God of the [Torah] is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.'

Sadly, of course, a 'God' tends to reflect the nature of the people who have created him.

Regarding Hoffman's allegation of me being 'anti-semitic', I would recommend reading Shlomo Sand's "The Invention of the Jewish People" in which he confirms how only the indigenous peoples of the Middle East are truly 'semitic'.

I therefore fail to see what Hoffman means with this allegation.

As regards the accusation of posting on fascist websites: I have done no such thing. The closest I have ever got to posting on a fascist website was when I posted in disgust at some of Melanie Philips's racially supremacist rantings against the Arabs/Palestinians on her Spectator blog.

I would be grateful if Hoffman would provide some evidence, although ab initio he's got my name wrong: it's spelt with one i not two Jonathan.

Regards.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/b74fdfd2-cfe1-11de-a36d-00144feabdc0.html

Sand's book is full of falsehoods. It ignores archaeological and genetic evidence. It contains antisemitic elements.

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/11/10/shlomo-the-sandlout/

You are digging yourself in deeper with every comment.

Jonathan, I'm pleased to see that you've grown up a little in the last 24 hours and have not reverted back to the level of obscenity which two JC threads had to endure yesterday.

Trust you to write an article about respected professor of history at Tel Aviv University, Shlomo Sand, entitled 'Shlomo the Sandlout'! I found the title and tone of your article childish and Melanie Philips-esque to say the least and am quite disgusted.

Simon Schama's article was far more intelligent and challenging. As an informed historian - rather than a nationalist ideologue - even he acknowledges that claims of lineal descent from a certain ancient Middle Eastern civilisation 2000-3000 years ago are total nonsense:

'...... that all Jews are descended lineally from the single racial stock of ancient Hebrews – a position no one who has thought for a minute about the history of the Jews would dream of taking.'

He also rubbishes claims to Jewish racial purity: 'ethnicity – which, in the case of the Jews, is indeed impure, heterogeneous and much travelled'.

Despite Schama's opinions, Professor Sand's book has actually received much acclaim both in Israel and overseas and has rapidly become a bestseller. His willingness to search for the truth, in the face of the prevailing nationalist, racist climate in which he finds himself, is commendable.

As for ignoring genetic evidence, Professsor Sand's proposition that the indigenous peoples of the Middle East have their roots in the ancient civilisations previously there, including the Israelite one (rather than arriving, conveniently for Jewish nationalists, in the 6th or 7th centuries) is a theory supported by DNA evidence and has been propagated by other authors.

At any rate, even if there were a genetic link, there is nothing in general morality, previous human experience or international law which would thereby confer proprietary rights after what ..... 2000 years! Can the English trace their ancestry and now assert proprietary rights over parts of, say, northern Europe or Scandanavia?

The whole theory of a genetic link and, in particular, the implications of such a link is ludicrous. The Nazis used theories of such a link to try and justify German claims to swathes of Eastern Europe and Russia. Such theories were also predominant in the Balkans in the 1990s.

Jonathan, rather than me 'digging myself in deeper', I wish that you would climb out of the extremist, racial supremacist hole which you appear to have eagerly jumped into.

Regards.