Indo-Israel: News and Discussion

negi · Post by **negi** » 26 Jun 2010 23:01

Chetak saar you are being too harsh on Anupam kher, given the presence of lynchmobs in DDM anyone who has earned some name in Indian cinema would think twice before taking up such a role.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 12 Jul 2010 12:58

Israelis training for a possible war with hezbollah.

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Four_ye ... r_999.html

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 25 Jul 2010 11:42

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/24/world ... srael.html

“What we are facing is an explosive global crisis over Jewish identity — a huge, snowballing disaster that is ripping Israeli-Diaspora relations.”

....the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Russian-speaking immigrants not considered Jewish has created an acute need in the eyes of Israeli leaders to find a way to integrate them in keeping with rabbinic tradition. Otherwise, they will not be able to marry, divorce or be buried here within Jewish tradition, and their children will feel deeply alienated. Mr. Rotem calls them “a ticking bomb.”

The bill that so angered American Jewish leaders was actually aimed at making conversion easier for the 300,000 Israelis among the 1 million who moved to Israel from the former Soviet Union in the 1990s. Those Israelis are not, by Orthodox rabbinic law, considered Jewish because they come from mixed parentage. The law would have tried to make conversion easier by granting conversion powers to local rabbis across the country, a group considered closer to their communities.

But after objections from the ultra-Orthodox, the bill formally placed authority for conversion in the hands of the chief rabbinate and declared Orthodox Jewish law to be the basis of conversion, making Americans fear that their more lenient conversion processes would be invalidated.

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 25 Jul 2010 18:21

"We do have a defence relationship with India, which is no secret. On the other hand, what is a secret is what is the defence relationship. And with all due respect, the secret part of it will remain secret." - Mark Sofer, Israel's ambassador to India, in a recent interview given to OutlookIndia.com.

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010 ... 48156.html

Having suffered under the hands of religious extremism, India and Israel has to share common aims and goals in defending their countries. Both of our countries are not necessarily against Islam or Muslims as it is interpreted by the extremists to get support for their attacks. We wish to protect the public from the extremism with which Pakistan is suffering like Cancer in their country. Meanwhil both countries need to take their own citizens and protect their interests regardless of their religion. India is particularly very careful and so they tend to keep a neutral in relation to Israel as they wish to share the concerns of large number of Muslims in India. I think we need a frank relationship with Israel. We do need to support them as they had enough with extremism their reactions at times are very sharp and very radical as they do not want to suffer any more in the hands of terror. India can be strict like Israel. But on other India also can share her own experience of how they treat Muslims in a far better way than Pakistan or in any other Islamic countries which Israel can take some tips. Strategically too this helps as Muslims in Israel will talk with freedom and support the Israeli government against the terror attacks. This is where one needs to distinguish terror from the common people. Not all are threat to the country.

On the other there is a need for India and Israel to respect the aspirations of their own Muslims. Particularly in Israel there is a need to work out soon with the help of US. I think India can lead NAM in order to help out a road map to two nations in Israel while every Israelis lives would be protected. I understand that the extremism in Palestine make it hard for Israelis to do this. But I think it is better to grant them an autonomy soon so that Palestine will have to deal with herself as a nation not fall into traps of extremism like in Pakistan or any other failed Islamic country rather like Bahrain (though I know some issues are there in this country too) or other countries can flourish and grow in business with neighbours and others.

Unless the funds for extremism and support for terror stops in Islamic countries many of them are sure to fall and fail and end up killing each other until the last person. But If Isreal settle this issue such terror groups will not find an ideology to get support from public and if they do they fight themselves and kill. India can lead this both by engaging with her own issues and also with Israelis in settling their problems as well. In this way India can show a leadership with the help of US in this region which will be good for her own sake.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 25 Jul 2010 23:35

Israel, U.S. sign deal to upgrade Arrow missile shield

Lisa · Post by **Lisa** » 26 Jul 2010 02:41

A_Gupta wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/24/world ... srael.html

“What we are facing is an explosive global crisis over Jewish identity — a huge, snowballing disaster that is ripping Israeli-Diaspora relations.”

....the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Russian-speaking immigrants not considered Jewish has created an acute need in the eyes of Israeli leaders to find a way to integrate them in keeping with rabbinic tradition. Otherwise, they will not be able to marry, divorce or be buried here within Jewish tradition, and their children will feel deeply alienated. Mr. Rotem calls them “a ticking bomb.”

The bill that so angered American Jewish leaders was actually aimed at making conversion easier for the 300,000 Israelis among the 1 million who moved to Israel from the former Soviet Union in the 1990s. Those Israelis are not, by Orthodox rabbinic law, considered Jewish because they come from mixed parentage. The law would have tried to make conversion easier by granting conversion powers to local rabbis across the country, a group considered closer to their communities.

But after objections from the ultra-Orthodox, the bill formally placed authority for conversion in the hands of the chief rabbinate and declared Orthodox Jewish law to be the basis of conversion, making Americans fear that their more lenient conversion processes would be invalidated.

I am not convinced by this article, does not appear entirely true/correct. A
friend of mine who had to convert was asked to go through a rigorous
process over 1 year in London so instead elected to convert in New York
where the paper service exercise was concluded in 28 days. If she could
become an Orthodox Jew in 28 days with no effort why the issue now?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Jul 2010 03:38

The problem is really about the effect in Israel proper, where the ultra-orthodox have grown stronger over the decades. The latter have also increased their strength in USA recently. It is somewhat similar to the process of NRI-RNI debate in reverse. But also a part of a larger re-assertion of Israeli "identity" away from the shadows of dependence on USA.

In UK, just like "purebred Mullahs" imported from pure-land, there has been a gradual hardening of the Rabbinical strand by "imported" theologians who are in turn influenced by the ultra-orthodox. I am not sure they are being tactically wise, even though the driving emotions are understandable.

The Israelis are facing not just the Islamists, but their own brand of WKK's. This is an increasing section of Jewish origin academics, intellectuals, and leftists who almost openly side with Islamist claims and try to academically undermine the "world-view" that was used to lay the very foundations of Israeli state in 48. A natural reaction will be to counter with ultra-orthodoxy.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 26 Jul 2010 05:09

The Israelis are facing not just the Islamists, but their own brand of WKK's. This is an increasing section of Jewish origin academics, intellectuals, and leftists who almost openly side with Islamist claims and try to academically undermine the "world-view" that was used to lay the very foundations of Israeli state in 48. A natural reaction will be to counter with ultra-orthodoxy.

I would disagree. The liberal or self loathng jew or whatever has existed in small numbers.

But most secular jews are staunchly nationalistic and are no way WKK.

The ultra orthodox are nut jobs and for long was generally ignored as they were not in huge numbers, Its just that in recent years they have more clout because of the more or less split between Labour and likud allowing the orthodox to throw their weight around. Also last few decades they have added from abroad and bred virulently. Walk into their areas and you will see families with 5 plus children all subsidised by the state. A state they do not even recognize.

consecutive govts needing their support have let them become more powerful then they need to be

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 Jul 2010 06:39

Well even WKK's of India are also self-proclaimed nationalists - its just that they have their own concept of what the nations is and should be which is about appeasement and one sided peace overtures to enemy that have proven violently genocidic. There are large samples of Jewish academics who now quite openly deny the much touted "trauma and persecution at the hands of the Romans" - which is one of the crucial pivots of Jewish legitimacy for Israel -an example of which I have quoted in the ME/West Asia thread before. There are other forms of activism too. Some use very similar memes, sentiments and logic as WKK's to oppose what they feel are "illegitimate aggression and occupation" of what belongs to the "enemy". Just as there has been suggestions from Indian WKK's about concessions on "Kashmir" and "aman ki asha", Israeli WKK's express their wish about concessions on the Palestinian demands. They are of course nationalists but to their own concept of the Israeli nation which should concede more and more to the Islamists -directly or indirectly.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 26 Jul 2010 06:50

Dont know if this has been posted before !

'Arab Men Should Sexually Harass Israeli Woman As Resistance

[youtube]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nDqWGtykYNE&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nDqWGtykYNE&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 26 Jul 2010 07:34

Well even WKK's of India are also self-proclaimed nationalists

diff to

What i am sayingwhich is that most secular Jews are nationalists.

But most secular jews are staunchly nationalistic and are no way WKK.

which is completely diff.

ie there are a few left leaning, WKK types

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 26 Jul 2010 08:36

I agree with brihaspati. The leftist Israelis all support the idea of a Jewish state, but many are open to the idea of conceding land to Arabs. Of course this isn't true for all leftists. Note Ehud Barak's invocation of Apartheid when referring to the PA areas.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 27 Jul 2010 02:10

there is a difference between talking about the occupied territories andyour own land.

There is also another logical motive for the Baraks (who is no WKK).

As long most of Jerusalem is within Israel the rest can have some logic because at the rate things are going the demographics will create a problem.

The Ehud Barak's of the world also understand the danger of the lunatics on the right who do not even recognize the State of Israel in many instances.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Jul 2010 02:59

Ah the "lunatics" on the "right" again! Somehow they never appear among the "left" or the "centre" in our posts! Anyway, was not the whole state founded essentially by "occupation"? Or a kind of confirmation by the UN of the occupation?

What is the problem in seeing the essential similarities between Indian WKK's and Israeli Jewish Palestinian sympathizers? I think in late 2001, Shimon Peres declared "I do not see really any other solution either for the Palestinians, nor for us, nor for peace in the future" than a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip." There was a nice poll that also apparently supported his words :

A WEEK after Shimon Peres, Israel's foreign minister, kicked up a political storm by telling the UN his people supported the creation of a Palestinian state, a poll published yesterday backed up his statement.
The Gallup poll in the Maariv newspaper showed that 59 per cent of Israelis support the creation of a Palestinian state, and 36 per cent are opposed. The other 5 per cent had no opinion, the poll said.

link

We can go on piling up the statements from both Indian side as well as similar sentiments in Israel.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 27 Jul 2010 05:44

LOL

creation of a palestinian state means WKK??

WKK already is lunatic so what more you want me to say about the extreme left. They are equally moronic.

you are completely misunderstanding the idea of letting go of west bank and other occupied territories (sans Jerusalem).

Other than the lunatic right no one cares about those as long as Jerusalem is not included

The lunatic left would love to give part of Jerusalem too (hope that balanced my credentials

).

my point is most secular Jews are not WKK.

WKK is a small percentage of left wing nuts.

Perese, Barak etc are no WKK - just realistic nationalists. (note they have not mentioned anything about Jerusalem

)

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 27 Jul 2010 22:33

This is actually a good start : it appears that "occupation" means different things to different people. For the majority of Palestinian Muslims, the mere presence of Israel is occupation of Palestine, and if Jews at all come into "Palestine" they have to come as subjugated to "Palestinian Muslims". Even better, somehow there is no conflict or contradiction in the identity of Palestinians as Arabs - they can be both Palestinian and Arab, but they cannot be Palestinian and Jewish - because only non-Jewish right of forming a state on "Palestine" is recognized.

In the three threads where the largest sympathies for Palestinian Arab Muslim (PAM) cause appear to occur regularly, I have rarely found discussions on the real motives, drives, declared programme, objectives of the "Palestinian Arab Muslim" compared with that of Jews in Israel and evaluated as to consequences of the eventual victory of the PAM strategy - not only for the region, but for the world at large as well as for India.

Before getting into the comparison of WKK (as an attitude of surrender to and agreement with enemy who demands land away from you, and propose peace and no-retribution in reaction to relentless violence from that enemy, and either suppress or trash the persistent genocidic record of the enemy on your past and historical populations - the last two are points which prevents these three being sarcastically used in the argument that a similar thing could be said of Israelis or "Hindu Indians"who however have no records of doing that to the Muslims historically in the regions claimed) of Israel and India, here is something from the "Arab side" first.

(funny isnt it that those who are so angry at Israeli attitudes consistently miss how Palestinians have no objection to being called Arabs - who have a separate geopolitical identity distinct from Palestine)

http://www.freearabvoice.org/articles/S ... isited.htm
"
Solidarity from "Pro-Palestinian" Jews Revisited
by Ibrahim Alloush

No Palestinian Arab would ever argue whether international solidarity with our cause is welcome or not. In fact, it's our obligation to garner such support wherever we may.
[...]
The question remains, however, what actually constitutes support for the Palestinian cause: sympathy with the victimization of Palestinians, like one would sympathize with road kills for example, conscious political support for a platform for liberation, or something in between?
[...]
Nevertheless, not everyone who claims to support us is actually a supporter. Many such supporters actually oppose some of the most crucial things we stand for, except they dislike some of the human rights violations that the Zionists are visiting upon us. That is, they: 1) recognize the right of "Israel" to exist and the alleged right of Jews to settle in Palestine, 2) they oppose our strategy to liberate Palestine, and 3) they especially oppose the armed struggle of Palestinian organizations. Such 'supporters' are not actually supporting us, but simply trying to make themselves feel better...

In some cases, you find Jews claiming to support the Palestinian cause. But when you scrutinize carefully what they stand for, you'll find they simply want what amounts to a 'nice occupation', as opposed to a brutal one. In reality they just wish there could be an occupation without administrative detentions, targeted assassinations, land confiscations, house demolitions, and all the rest. Otherwise, those same 'supporters' try as hard as they could to convince Palestinians to present their case 'in a civilized manner' without resorting to human bombs and military operations, especially against what they call "Israeli civilians". One such Jewish 'supporter' is Noam Chomsky who says that it would be immoral for Palestinians to target even an off-duty "Israeli" soldier!

This makes one wonder whether these Jewish "supporters" are just trying to whitewash the occupation with their own professed guilt, as Jews, or whether they're simply out to present another 'positive' side of Zionism!
Some of us are so happy to see a Jew or a Westerner criticize Zionist oppression that they trip all over themselves to the point of becoming oblivious to the essence of the POLITICAL MESSAGE such 'criticism' of Zionism is concealing. There are Zionists criticizing each other all the time for goodness sakes. That doesn't make them anymore pro-Palestinian than Arabs criticizing each other are pro-Zionist.

Let's put the issue in a nutshell: Palestine is occupied. Palestine is not only occupied by an army of soldiers, but by an army of colonists. In any country, when there is occupation, the natural anecdote is liberation. No one in their right mind would have asked Europeans to tolerate or to coexist with the Nazi occupation of Eastern Europe or France. Yet that is exactly what is being asked of Palestinians today by 'our supporters'. These supporters are basically asking us to either cede most of Palestine to colonists under a two-state solution, or to embrace the right of colonists to live in Palestine under a one-state solution. The latter 'solution', in fact, amounts to embracing the fruits of Zionism in retrospect, since Zionism is nothing but the project of building a Jewish colony in Palestine.

So, we don't need 'supporters' who try to dictate to us what our political strategy should be. Our cause is crystal clear, and the only thing that can possibly make us lose our true supporters is allowing fake supporters of the Palestinian cause to mystify it.

When there is occupation, the anecdote is liberation. Period. If you are an anti-Zionist, that must mean by definition that you are against Jewish settlement in Palestine that came on the heels of a Zionist project. It also means you support our platform to liberate Palestine, our way, not some other platform to make Palestinians more tolerant of Jews by parading a handful of "pro-Palestinian" Jews!

Mind you, throughout the centuries, we never ever opposed Jews coming into Palestine as individuals, BEFORE THE ONSET OF THE ZIONIST PROJECT. If you check the annals of history, you'd find that Palestinians opposed Jewish immigration into Palestine only AFTER the onset of the Zionist project. [Actually a lie, which I have shown in the ME/West Asia thread - because restrictions and abuse were in place from long before] But let's not wallow on that too much. Palestine is ours, and as such, it's our prerogative to decide whom we want to let into our country just like any other normal people on earth. [or we want the Jews to be subjugated to us under our regime and state]

Hence, each and every Jew in Palestine today is objectively part and parcel of the Zionist project. S/he is forcibly occupying space whence a Palestinian was dislodged. For such a Jew to even claim, on top of my land and from within my home, that s/he is an anti-Zionist, means that he either thinks we must be complete idiots or... that we are complete idiots. In fact, we would be if we accepted such preposterous claims. It would be exactly like believing George Bush lecturing about 'world peace' for example. FOR STARTERS, anti-Zionism necessarily implies that a Jew is practicing it OUTSIDE Palestine. Any Jew in Palestine today cannot possibly be anti-Zionist by definition.

Furthermore, if you take revisionist historians in the Zionist entity for example, you'll find that even those among them who have meticulously documented Zionist atrocities against Palestinians do not think it amounts to much compared to the alleged "Holocaust". Take Ilan Pappe for example. He has said repeatedly in articles and interviews that the Nakba is ethnic cleansing, but that the "Holocaust" is mass genocide, and therefore as abhorrent as the Nakba may be, it cannot possibly be compared to the "Holocaust"; and that only the Jews could have gotten away with something like the Nakba because of the sympathy they harnessed in the West due to the "Holocaust". In essence, Jewish colonists like Ilan Pappe justify the Zionist colonization of Palestine in retrospect as a natural response to Nazi persecution. Indeed, if you check out his website, you'll find he explains his parents coming into Palestine in that manner. In the end, he's calling for Palestinians to accept Zionism in retrospect under the thin veneer of a 'one-state solution'.

There is a real danger when our political vision becomes so hazy we cannot distinguish colonists usurping our land and identity from true supporters of our cause. [Again its a question of Jewish presence contaminating the non-Jewish identity]

Such political myopia, however, remains rampant amongst some Arab intellectuals, officials of Arab regimes and the Palestinian Authority, and Arabs bending over backwards to get themselves accepted by Westerners or by Jews. But rarely would one see such pathetic overtures towards the enemy amongst average Arabs on the Arab street, that is, among the overwhelming majority of Arabs. Arabs on the street, by and large, still regard ANY DEALINGS with the invader, under any pretext, as an act of normalization. Normalization of course is the act of dealing with the enemy as if they were not the oppressor, the invader, the murderers of our people, and the usurpers of our Haifa, Akka, and Jalil.

Frequently Palestinians are set up in a guilt trip. They have to prove that they do not hate Jews. The proving really never ends until you eventually embrace the doctrine of "Israel's" security. But, really, Palestinians have NOTHING to prove to the invader. It is exactly the other way around. A Jew who claims to be anti-Zionist is the one who has something to prove (to himself first of all), not a Palestinian who is fighting a Jewish occupation.

If someone supports you, that means they support your cause to liberate your land from an occupation. It doesn't mean that you have to change your strategic objective away from liberation so they can start supporting you. Otherwise, you have already lost your cause before even beginning. 'Support' which comes with attached strings is no support at all, but an impediment."

This is the attitude of the Palestianian Arab muslims towards any Israeli WKK's of any intensity of colour - and it clearly sets out the agenda of Palestianian Arab muslims. No sovereign state of Israel, no end to violence until the Jewish state is completely overthrown or crushed, and Jews have no right to claim political independence on that land - they have no claim to any part of the land. No two-state or one-state under Israel solution is acceptable. Muslims and Arabs will not live under a state where power is also in the hands of non-Musilms and non-Arabs - does not matter whether Arabs themselves could be considered invaders in that land or not.

It is not just one state or one enclave theya re after - they would at most accept it as an interim stage in the eventual ultimate liquidation of any and all non-Muslim authority. This is backdrop against which we have to evaluate WKK'ism of any shade and any variety.

I think we will have lots of fun next when I compare samples from both Indian as well as Israeli varieties of WKK'ism.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 27 Jul 2010 23:41

hmm not sure against who this large post was but my point is purely restricted to saying that most secular jews (which is not the same as secular(pseudo? in the Indian context) are not WKK.

and yes occupation in my case is restricted to only the territories not Israel.

So look at this way - find out how many Israelis are willing to give up Jerusalem. Those will be your WKKs.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 27 Jul 2010 23:55

I don't know what the point was with the long post but anyways on the topic of WKKs. WKKs aren't an extremist lunatic fringe as you seem to say, but a pretty large and mainstream group of people whom are themselves patriotic, but simply attribute the evils of the other side to a small group of "extremists" rather than seeing the evils as pervasive and fundamental to the enemy.

Israeli WKKs support the state of Israel but have accepted dominion of Palestinian areas as "occupation", (notwithstanding that the rest of Israel is also "occupation" then). In the future after Pal. Independence, the issue of splitting Jerusalem will surely be on the table as well.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 28 Jul 2010 01:22

The long post was quoted from the "Free Arab Voice" website, on the specific issue of "pro-Palestinian Jews" who express a variety of sympathies and support for the so-called "Palestinian Cause". Since we are on the subject of WKK'ism from Israelis as well as Indians and a comparison between the two, I thought it was necessary to first place the "Arab Palestinian" view on such WKK'ism.

It is a sobering background to any discussion on WKKism and what such WKK'ism will eventually lead to. As the author clearly and categorically states, the ultimate aim is to eradicate Israel as a state. Two state solutions which is practically the creation of an independent Palestinian State, is not "acceptable" - they want the whole under Palestinian Arab rule - Jews can be considered to be allowed to come in, but they have no inherent residence/nationality/land rights. So any "giving up" of any territory currently under Israeli control as site for a separate Palestinian state will only be acceptable as an interim step - not an "acceptable solution". Once such an independent entity is formed, a host of international alignments can be used and international laws invoked to protect an explicit Islamist state that continues to fuel insurgency and present itself as the victim until Israel can be crushed and made null and void.

This is what any opinion in favour of giving up any enclave to "Palestinian Arab" independent rule, is ultimately supporting.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 28 Jul 2010 09:25

The journalists, from Hindi, Urdu and English-language media outlets, arrived in Israel this week as part of Project Interchange, an educational institute of the American Jewish Committee.

http://www.jta.org/news/article/2010/07 ... sit-israel

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 28 Jul 2010 11:11

Why Bollywood's film about Hitler is profoundly misguided

Indian directors have as much right to make movies about Hitler as anyone else, but a forthcoming film about the Nazi dictator's 'love' for the country displays a shocking ignorance of history

----

Again, it's due to our typical immaturity combined with the lack of understanding of world history by the ordinary common man on the street. The crummy Indian educational system leaves 99% of the population ill-equipped to understand wider issues of our time, thus dooming Indians to always be victims of historical changes, just as we're blind to its effects on our wider world.

I've even pointed out the flaws of the BRF forum, where we can only discuss some international issues if they are immediately and directly related to India. Look at all the silly titles of threads in this forum - "India-Australia", "India-LatinAmerica", etc, etc - nobody sees any value in discussing the events in other places, except as they immediately pertain to India. Cultivating that type of myopic narcissistic navel-gazing mentality only leads to the overall nearsightedness that Indians are overly afflicted with.
The fact is that there may be political events going on in the US for example, which while not being overtly related to India, would still be vital to understanding the country and its workings, which would be of use to Indians.

But we don't like that - we are like this, Onlee.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 28 Jul 2010 22:10

joshvajohn · Post by **joshvajohn** » 28 Jul 2010 22:27

I agree with Sanjay on the point that he makes about Indians looking at only India related issues. I suppose we need to think that there is some thing universal mindset that we need to develop where Indians can contribute to other nations being part of them.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Aug 2010 23:34

http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/07/the-su ... ouin-town/

On July 26, Israeli police demolished 45 buildings in the unrecognized Bedouin village of al-Arakib, razing the entire village to the ground to make way for a Jewish National Fund forest. The destruction was part of a larger project to force the Bedouin community of the Negev away from their ancestral lands and into seven Indian reservation-style communities the Israeli government has constructed for them. The land will then be open for Jewish settlers, including young couples in the army and those who may someday be evacuated from the West Bank after a peace treaty is signed. For now, the Israeli government intends to uproot as many villages as possible and erase them from the map by establishing “facts on the ground” in the form of JNF forests.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Aug 2010 00:29

Sanjay M wrote:Why Bollywood's film about Hitler is profoundly misguided

Indian directors have as much right to make movies about Hitler as anyone else, but a forthcoming film about the Nazi dictator's 'love' for the country displays a shocking ignorance of history

----

Hitler asked the British PM to get Gandhi killed during one of the meetings.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 02 Aug 2010 00:57

Sanjay M wrote: Indian directors have as much right to make movies about Hitler as anyone else, but a forthcoming film about the Nazi dictator's 'love' for the country displays a shocking ignorance of history

----

Again, it's due to our typical immaturity combined with the lack of understanding of world history by the ordinary common man on the street. The crummy Indian educational system leaves 99% of the population ill-equipped to understand wider issues of our time, thus dooming Indians to always be victims of historical changes, just as we're blind to its effects on our wider world.

Boss,

While I personally find the idea of this movie distasteful and ignorant....

What is with this self-flagellation of generalizing stupidity of one Indian director to all Indians?
Can we quit with these 99% generalization? Unlike the Paki 400% compliance!
Hopefully, like other ignoramus ideas, this movie will not see the box office.
Lets say it does do well - perhaps time to educate the ignoramus on how many
Roma, Poles, Jews, etc. were killed by this madman.

<sarc on>
I guess The Guardian can blame themselves and the British colonialist for the abysmal education system of India.

</sarc off>

joshvajohn wrote:I agree with Sanjay on the point that he makes about Indians looking at only India related issues. I suppose we need to think that there is some thing universal mindset that we need to develop where Indians can contribute to other nations being part of them.

Does Djiboti think about universal issues? Same holds for every other country.
If one is a citizen of country x, takes it seriously, then one tends to think from that point of view.
The media, caters to its market and thinks from that countries point of view as well.
Free media like markets exist only in deeply academic intellectual voids that inhabit modern Universities.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 02 Aug 2010 09:02

Fury as Israel president claims English are 'anti-semitic'

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 02 Aug 2010 09:06

Rony wrote:Fury as Israel president claims English are 'anti-semitic'

Man! If Israel doesn't have enough problems already,Perski ,Bibi and Lieberman are making sure the jewish hate brigade has something new everyday to jerk off on!

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 02 Aug 2010 11:22

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-10807166

Several rockets have Eilat! This comes two days after a senior Hamas commander was killed in a IAF air-strike and probably worth adding there was a mysterious blast in a house in Gaza yesterday that apparently injured another senior Hamas commander and 24 of its members..

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 04 Aug 2010 07:54

More violence in the middle-east. Israel and Lebanon clash on the northern border resulting in 4 lebanese (3 soldiers and 1 journo) and 1 Israeli death.

Lt.-Col. (res.) Dov Harari, 45, from Netanya, was shot dead by a sniper from the Lebanese Armed Forces, and a company commander from his battalion, Capt. Ezra Lakia, sustained a gunshot wound to the chest. By Tuesday evening, Lakia was in stable condition at Rambam Medical Center in Haifa.
The violence began around noon, when a force from Harari’s reserve battalion entered an enclave along the border and near Kibbutz Misgav Am to conduct routine maintenance work. Enclaves refer to land that is sovereign Israeli territory but is on the other side of the border fence, which does not always run directly parallel to the internationally recognized border, known as the Blue Line.

The soldiers had coordinated their movement beyond the fence with UNIFIL and were working to cut down a tree when shots were fired in their direction. Lakia was shot in the chest by a Lebanese Army sniper, and Harari was shot in the head.
The IDF responded with heavy tank fire at an Lebanese position just over the border, killing three soldiers and a Lebanese journalist. Lebanese soldiers then fired rocket-propelled grenades at an Israeli tank south of the border.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 04 Aug 2010 08:30

What's Behind the Latest Lebanon Clash?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 03 Sep 2010 08:16

Jewish fundamentalism - see how given its head, even a gentle religion (as practiced in historical memory) can turn.

http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/08/how-to ... -non-jews/

As soon as it was published late last year,Torat Ha’Melech sparked a national uproar. The controversy began when an Israeli tabloid panned the book’s contents as “230 pages on the laws concerning the killing of non-Jews, a kind of guidebook for anyone who ponders the question of if and when it is permissible to take the life of a non-Jew.” According to the book’s author, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, “Non-Jews are “uncompassionate by nature” and should be killed in order to “curb their evil inclinations.” “If we kill a gentile who has has violated one of the seven commandments… there is nothing wrong with the murder,” Shapira insisted. Citing Jewish law as his source (or at least a very selective interpretation of it) he declared: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 03 Sep 2010 08:39

A_Gupta wrote:Jewish fundamentalism - see how given its head, even a gentle religion (as practiced in historical memory) can turn.

Yes this is what happens when rabbid ideologies surrounding it want to exterminate that gentle religion.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 03 Sep 2010 08:51

Now certainly Judaism has been reformed and reconstructed in its long history and made it gentle. But the same ideologies and attitudes you find "rabbid" are derived straight from the books of the "gentle religion"!

But these guys are a fringe minority, and it's probably made out to be a bigger deal than it is.

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 03 Sep 2010 08:58

"Carl_T Wrote:
Now certainly Judaism has been reformed and reconstructed in its long history and made it gentle. But the same ideologies and attitudes you find "rabbid" are derived straight from the books of the "gentle religion"!

Of course with their own rabbid twist's and turns added to it.

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 05 Sep 2010 22:23

Historical Fiction

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/770 ... al-fiction

Vivek Raghuvanshi · Post by **Vivek Raghuvanshi** » 09 Sep 2010 12:42

Rosh Hashanah: The Tipping Point

http://www.aish.com/h/hh/rh/101452799.html

Happy New Year to all the Disciples of Prophet Moses

Vivek Raghuvanshi · Post by **Vivek Raghuvanshi** » 09 Sep 2010 12:45

ROSH HASHANAH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML1yKL1u1X4

ROSH HASHANAH – The Jewish New Year – (Sept. 8 – 10, 2010)

Rosh Hashanah 2010 (5771 in the Hebrew calendar)
will be celebrated by Jews around the world from sunset September 8 till nightfall September 10.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 Sep 2010 14:27

Does Rosh Hanah always conincide with Vijaya Dashmi?

vina · Post by **vina** » 09 Sep 2010 15:18

Does Rosh Hanah always conincide with Vijaya Dashmi?

Vijay Dashami this year is on Oct 17. Normally, Eid, Rosh Hashana and Ganesh Chaturthi are very close to each other, usually coinciding (like this year as well, Eid and Ganesh Chaturthi on Sept 11)

Not surprising really, given that Islam and Christianity just adopted wholesale much of the older Jewish religious and cultral practices (Kashrut- Halal etc) and many of the holidays from ealier times which were based on nature/seansons and some important period associated with them (for eg, Christmas - pagan Winter Solstice, celebrated by Hindus as Makar Shankaranthi), easter & passover / traditional new year in many hindu calendars (TN , Kerala, Punjab etc) (Vernal equinox) . The only difference is that the Indian Jyothish calendar is sidereal while the western calendar is tropical. So you need to account for the precession of the earth because the tropical year goes out of whack and that is what Pope Greogry did via a "Papal Bull" in 1582 , by lopping off 10 days off October. So in that year you went from Oct 4 to Oct 15, straight..But since then the errors have built up and the difference roughly is around 14 days.

Since Indian calendar is sidereal we keep "universal time" . The Indian and western calendars were in since when the Julian calendar was adopted exactly 2010 years ago (that is why it is 2010 today!) becuase when it was adopted, Julian was accurate. But now they have drifted apart. That is why you see in the news of scientists resetting their clocks by a couple of seconds every couple of years to keep that drift in control. Or else, in another 300/400 years, Dec 25 will be in Fall and March 25 will be in deep winter!