53 thoughts on “Jewish Home MK Candidate Directs Settler Rabbi Group Which Adovcated Genocide – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Is this some Freudian slip on your behalf?
    This article was probably written around Purim time, hence the tongue in cheek reference to destroying amalek – but I fail to see any reference or hint in the article to Palestinians.
    Traditionally amalek is the epitome of evil which must be destroyed. – why do you automatically associate that thought with Palestinians?!

    1. Shmuel- Purim or not, mentioning Death Camps should be taken seriously by Jews, the very same way we demand from non-jews. This is inexcusable!
      At the same time, I don’t see Baron’s name anywhere on the article or what magazine it was published in. This looks fake to me unless David Sheen can clarify on the source and link to Baron.

          1. On my iPad the picture from 2011 didn’t come up with the bottom where ‘ma’ayney Hayeshua’ and baron’s name appears. Sorry

      1. @ Ariel: Yet another example of commenters not reading the linked sources & then asking for information that is in the linked sources. I really hate when people like you do this. If you want to ask questions or don’t believe a claim READ THE LINKED SOURCES before publishing anything. All the information you asked is in the linked source. I would actually convey it to you but I your comments pissed me off. So go now & do it yourself. STOP WASTING OUR TIME!

    2. @ Shmuel: Actually, it’s just as likely your comment was written around Purim time. Yours is a feeble attempt at either wit or snark. Either way it missed the mark by a mile.

      “Tongue in cheek?” Don’t make us laugh in derision. It’s not ME who associates Amalek with Palestinians, it’s the Haredim themselves. Amalek is a Haredi/Orthodox reference to Palestinians. If you don’t know this then you’re even more ignorant than I thought. Spend a bit more time reading Haredi websites & you’ll confirm this. I’ve posted numerous such sources over the years confirming this.

  2. יו”ר תנועת “מעייני הישועה”, אביחי בוארון, הודיע על כניסתו לחיים הפוליטיים והתמודדותו בפריימריז לרשימת מפלגת הבית היהודי. בשבועות האחרונים הקים בוארון את “פורום ישראל” שיעודד התפקדות למפלגה של הציבור התורני בקרב הציונות הדתית.

    בוארון, נשוי ואב לשישה, עורך דין בהכשרתו, ייסד את תנועת ”מעייני הישועה” המפעילה עשרות רבני קהילות ברחבי הארץ. בוארון היה ממקימי היישוב עמונה והוא המוציא לאור של המגזין ‘פנימה’ והשבועון ‘ישראלי’.

    אמש התכנסו מייסדי הפורום, ביניהם ראש מכון פוע”ה הרב מנחם בורשטיין, ד”ר חנה קטן, יו”ר הקרן לגאולת קרקעות ביהודה ושומרון עו”ד דורון ניר צבי, מנכ”ל מקור ראשון לשעבר דוד שריקי ואלידע בר שאול, מרצה בכיר בצה”ל, היסטוריון וחוקר ירושלים.

    Helped establish the settlement of Amona.
    Website – Avichai Baron.

  3. Reading the article written by Baron, disturbing and shameful as it may be, I fail to see any “explicit” reference to Palestinians, in a general or specific sense. Whether “Amalekim” is a codename for the palestinians may be the case, but then that wouldn’t be quite as explicit as you described.
    You may claim that “well, for anyone who is immersed in Jewish culture, tradition, history and religion, and who is familiar with the discourse of the extreme Jewish national-religious sector, this is as plain as ink”. Well, since I personally meet said criteria rather well, I’d say that this article doesn’t come anywhere near the conclusion you drew from it. At worst, it is a display of fanatical religious fundamentalism, and a “to-the-letter” understanding of scripture, which is definitely bad enough.
    As to the term “Amalekite” – this term has been used in countless instances in the course of Jewish history to describe all sorts of people, viewed as dangerous, harmful and\or immoral by those using the term. Jews have used it against one another, in tandem with the term “Erev rav” (rabble, crowd, enemy-from-within), during the worst periods of turmoil within the community. To be sure, I have heard the term used on several occasions in reference to palestinians, so this wouldn’t be anything new. However, if this was in fact Baron’s intention, then it was lost on me, and it is reasonable to assume that I am not the only one who missed the message. Therefore, again, we return to the point where the conclusion you drew is very much a matter of interpretation, and far less black-and-white as you so adamantly insist. I respect the work you do on this blog, to the extent that whatever you report here is accurate and unbiasly represented. I believe you missed the mark this time.
    Other than this, keep up the good work. We need more writers reporting these unpleasant truths about the state we live in.

    1. Your refusal to capitalize the “P” in Palestinians” tells us all we need to know about you.

      You & I both know despite all your sophistry that the reference was to putting Palestinians in extermination camps. You can try denialism all you wish, but it will only make you look more the fool.

      1. RS – for someone who cares for details such as Capital letters, it surprising you neglect the fact the article didn’t even remotely dealt with Palestinians. It dealt with inner-politics of modern orthodox community. Whoever wrote this tried to make a point that rabbis might neglect ‘MITZVAT ASE” in order to be politically correct. The Death Camp comment was a stupid, insensitive overkill but so is pretending the comment referred Palestinians in any way.

        1. @ Ariel: You are so full of horse manure I can’t begin to say. I’m getting tired of the hasbara brigade trying to piss on our backs & make us think it’s rain. So no more stupid empty-headed comments about this passage not referring to Palestinians. It does. You know it. I know it. Next comment in this vein on the subject may earn moderation.

          BTW, it’s not capital letters I care about: it’s Palestinian denialism I care about. If Israelis are a nation they should have their nationality respected with a capital letter. If israelis are not a nation, they shouldn’t. They are, so they should. Same with Palestinians.

    2. @ yona: You hasbaridiots are publishing the biggest load of horses(^t imaginable. I’m not going to let you all keep nattering on with your denialism about Amalek & Palestinians. The writer of the original article knew what he was referring to, I know what he was referring to, you know what he was referring to. There is a well known concept in Jewish tradition of making allegorical references to current events through veiled Biblical references. So Jacob becomes Israel and Ishmael becomes Islam or Muslims. So Amalek becomes the enemy du jour of the Jewish people. In earlier periods Amalek was Hitler, now for a certain segment of Jews and Israelis it’s Palestinians.

      This is so friggin’ self evident that it offends me to have to rebut your nonsense. So stop it. If you continue you may be moderated.

      And please stop with the supposedly kindly words. They’re not sincere & I’d much rather people not dissemble here as you are.

      1. Hi richard,
        I’m sorry for the ommision. You are right: “Palestinians” it is. I do not for a moment deny Palestinian national identity. I definitly do not have anything to do with hasbara, or have anything remotely common with Ariel, whom I’ve come to know over time through his rediculous comments on this blog. Additionally, my words were sincere, and being beligirent towards me, for a simple mistake, is not the way to go. furthermore – assuming things about me without any prior knowledge of who I am, tells me something about you. My knowledge of the ins and outs of the Jewish extreme religous right comes from my past, as a former orthodox Jew, and my upbringing in the settlements. It comes from my family and high-school friends. I know the people who write in the shabbat-newsletter you refer to in your post. I can’t say I currently maintain any relationship with any them, but I definitely know who they are and what they are about.
        I do not deny that Baron may have specificly referenced the Palestinians in his article. However, I know the differece between “explicit” and “implicit”, and it seems to me that only the latter term may apply in this instance. Furthermore, wrapping Baron and his affiliates with the charaydi sector, is a grave mistake that exhibits a lack of understanding of the social devide between the extreme settlerist national-religous right and the charaydi sector. If something is written in “Yated Ne’eman” or “Ha’modia” it has nothing to do with Baron who doubtlessly doesn’t read either of them, or surf charaydi news websites. The term “charady-leumi” does not meen Baron identifies himself with the charaydim but rather that he holds a far more extreme-orthodox view of religion than someone like Naftali Bennet. That is the reason why Baron and cronies are contemplating a new party. He believes Naftali Bennet is not religous enough and he plans to tug him further towards religous orthodoxy in the political arena. That was the whole point of his article – that political policy should bow to “da’at Torah” – the halachic rulings of those who have authority to interpert the word of the Torah. Again, that is bad enough, and his allusion to the death camps is nothing less than obscene.
        Don’t moderate me. I have not come to fight you. I insist on accuracy because I value this blog. My ability to quote it to the people around me, so as to convince them of the real nature of our state, lies in my trust in you and your unbiased approuch to facts. Inaccuracies discredit you and diminish the value of the important work you do here.
        These are not nicities or platitudes. This my honest opinion of you and this blog. Keep at it, becuase I and others around me are few and need an alternitive news outlet that doesn’t blindly voice nationalist and militiristic propaganda. Best of luck,

        1. @Richard

          I don’t think it’s fair to call Baron ‘genocidal’, based on one vague comment.
          Instead of calling your readers ‘hasbarists’, or threatening to moderate them, you should examine more closely what Baron has said or written in the past that suggests that he really is ‘genocidal’.

          Buttress your argument instead of raising your voice.

          1. @ Figg: Baron has no track record in English & very little in Hebrew. But he runs the Haredi group Maayney HaYeshuah & this was published in its newsletter, hence he is responsible. Either he rejects it or he owns it. He hasn’t rejected it.

          2. @ Ariel: Your claim of an “apology” is entirely misleading and false. The apology was not made to the Palestinians, nor was any apology offered for use of the term ‘death camps.’ The only apology was offered to rabbis who were attacked in the editorial. This is documented by the article you yourself linked to.

            Here’s the English version: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/editorial-calling-for-death-camps-for-amalekites-raises-storm-among-religious-1.338588

          3. @Ariel

            כידוע, בימינו איש לא יודע מיהו העם העמלקי, כך שיש שלל תשובות לשאלה מיהו עמלק: אויבים באשר הם, עמים מסוימים במזרח התיכון, יהודים לא נאמנים ועוד. למי התכוון כותב המאמר ב”מעייני הישועה”? קשה לקבל תשובה, בין השאר משום שמנכ”ל מעייני הישועה, אביחי בוארון, התחמק באופן שיטתי מלהגיב לכתבה.

            הרב שמואל אליהו דווקא הסכים להגיב, אף שהדגיש כי לא הוא כתב את המאמר. לדבריו, “אני הבנתי שזו אמירה כלפי אותם רבנים, מה הם יעשו כשיקראו להשמיד את עמלק. ?האם גם אז תשבו בחיבוק ידיים?’ אבל מכיוון שזה הובן לא נכון, שבוע לאחר מכן פורסמה התנצלות. אבל קצת פרופורציה. מחנות השמדה זה לא חלום רטוב של אף אחד מאתנו”. יצוין, כי ההתנצלות שפורסמה שבוע לאחר מכן לא התייחסה למחנות ההשמדה ולעמלקים, אלא לעניין הרבנים בלבד.

            See my post about R. Shmuel Eliyahu and genocide of Palestinians.

          4. @Oui “See my post about R. Shmuel Eliyahu”
            You freestyle bringing quotes from him and his father w/o differentiating between the two. That is even before mentioning quoting a few different rabbis is 100% off-topic. And how exactly ISIL is related?

            RS asked whether ‘Maayney Hayeshua’ own it or reject it. The answer is clear! How did you add to that on-topic conversation?

  4. Amalek, using scripture to call for the destruction of another people. Targeting pregnant women, babies and children as acceptable policy. Deviousness? It can’t get much worse. Reading this I am much troubled by a self fulfilling prophecy. It does give a clearer understanding of politicians in general and Netanyahu in particular. Authoritarianism, absolutism leading to fascism. Goals not possible in a democracy. Naming mortal enemies Amalek leads to violence and genocide.

    Amalek found a clever way to destroy the Jewish nation. ‘He takes the tails,’ people of little or no stature and ‘throws them high’ makes them into Jewish leaders (Likutey Halakhot, Shabbat, 5:9).” Thus, the Jewish people have been fooled into thinking that their leaders are men of stature when in reality many of them are ordinary people who lack the ability to guide. A nation without proper leaders is easily misled, and so many unsuspecting and misguided Jews end up living a life devoid of real Jewish meaning.

    What Happens When We Call People ‘Amalek’

    “In his weekly parsha commentary, Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu refers to ‘Palestinians’ as Amalek.” – March 8, 2004.

    1. Hi Richard,
      This msy seem like splitting hairs, but Ma’ayanai H’yeshu’a are *not* a charedi organization but rather an ostesibly religous-zionist organization. They are fanatically religous and invest a great deal of resources in missionarry-like activities, in an atempt to win over the hearts and minds of Israelis, both religous and secular. Their zionist ideology sets them apart from any charedi group to a degree that conflating the two is almost as erroneous as mistaking Lutherans for Calvinists. I hold no symapthy for either (settlers and charedim, that is), but accuracy is important. A fundamentel misunderstanding such this does not serve you or your blog well. All the best,

      1. @ Yona: If Ma’ayney Ha’Yeshua was strictly a “religious-nationalist” (as opposed to Haredi) organization its newsletter would not have to justify or explain its intent to engage in political activity. Religious Zionist groups already embrace Israeli politics. The fact that defending political activism is a strong message of the movement indicates either that it has a Haredi component or that it’s seeking to persuade Haredim to support and vote for it in the elections.

        Nevertheless, the issue of whether or not it’s Haredi is entirely secondary. Leave it to the hasbara brigade to lose the forest for the shrubs.

        1. @RS “Leave it to the hasbara brigade to lose the forest for the shrubs” – I’ll pick the challenge.
          I am not even sure why you chose to mention they are Haredim (which they are NOT! They are either religious-zionist or Charedi-Leumi [Char”dal]) in an article about a guy running with Bennet and how it strengthen your argument. But I have a few theories on why you added unnecessary wrong info.
          1. You don’t know the difference – I doubt it.
          2. You don’t think the difference is important enough – I doubt it as well. The last Kneset and the battle between Bennet and the Haredim is the best proof of that.
          3. Your line of explanation benefit from moving between groups, pick up their wrong doings and serve an Israeli Salad of Evil.
          4. You plant some ‘shrubs’ in your ‘forest’ to distract ‘hasbaridiots’ from your main point. Off the bat, I have an excellent example in mind but I’ll keep it to myself. It isn’t important enough to get banned over it.

          1. @ Ariel: Listen to yourself: they’re not “Haredim” but they are “Charedi-Leumi.” The distinction may be clear to you but the diff. to outsiders is miniscule. In one group, they are Haredi who reject the State and another they are Haredim who accept it. Railing at me for claiming they are Haredi when you yourself acknowledge they are is ridiculous.

            So again saying my info is wrong–is wrong.

          2. Hi Richard,
            For the very last time – yoy are wrong. They are not charedi and neither are the rest of the charedi-leumi communities . You may think that the difference between “charedi” and “charedi-leumi” is minor, but it isn’t. They are a completely different group – socialy, politically, ideologically and historically. They are not a zionist offshoot of charedim, but rather an ultra-religous offshoot of the settlerist religous-zionists. Their rabbis did not come from charedi yeshivot such as ponivez’ or chevron but rather from the yeshivot like “mercaz harav”, “har hamor” “beit el” and the like, who trace their spiritual roots back to rabbi avraham Kook and his son. They have nothing to do with charedim. They don’t see themselves bound to the decisions of charedi rabbis and never did. They don’t live in charedi neigborhoods, attend charedi synagoges, or dress like any charedi sub-group. They don’t read charedi newspapers or take part in charedi inner discourse. Yes, the term “charedi-leumi” is misleading, and the difference may be lost on outsiders. However, since your abilty to report events in Israel hinges on your understanding of the devisions between different social and political groups within it, you may want to take an insiders word for it, for future reference.

          3. I guess RS mistaken the Shabbat-leaflet with the medical-center which is indeed Haredi.
            Regardless – in the full leaflet (, you can see the names R. Ariel, R. Eliyahu and R. Aviner. If that doesn’t scream ‘Not Haredim, HarDal!!!’, one should refrain from sub-categorizing into groups and just use ‘religious’ (think of confusing Evangelicalists and Catholics, not that I’m an export!).

          4. @Richard “Ariel: Thanks for offering this jpg of the article.” I think I got it through a link in one of sources. I don’t think a PDF exist. Those Shabbat leaflets are usually distributed Friday night in synagogues. Here is their website – http://maayney.co.il

    2. Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu enters race for Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem

      The controversial chief municipal rabbi of Safed Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, a senior figure in the conservative wing of the national-religious movement, submitted his candidacy shortly before the deadline at midnight for the Sephardi position. Eliyahu has been given the tacit backing of the haredi United Torah Judaism and Shas parties, with Shas not running an official candidate. And Rabbi Moshe Haim Lau, brother of Chief Rabbi David Lau, entered the race for the Ashkenazi role.

      Eliyahu advocates carpet bombing Gaza

      In an article for the newsletter Eretz Yisrael Shelanu (“Our Land of Israel”), Eliyahu proposed “hanging the children of the terrorist who carried out the attack in the Mercaz Harav yeshiva from a tree.

  5. P.S.
    The assumption that Netanyahu (again, no sympathy for him either) has any knowledge or affiliation with this group, or that this group is an indication as to the workings of Israeli politics on the wider scale is unfounded, and highly unlikely. They are representitive of a specific sect within the settlerist religous-zionist sector who match their rampant and unabashed racist, expantionist nationalistic fanaticism with equally fanatical religous orthodoxy. They have a considrable number of followers and sympathisers, but they are far from being an accurate representation of Isrseli politics or society as a whole. Accuracy is important. Ignorance of basic divisions and details within Israeli society discredits those who aspire to report the various events occuring in Israel.
    all the best,

    1. @ Yona: You’re missing a few important things here. THe issue isn’t Netanyahu. The issue is Bennett. He is the rising star as Bibi’s career eventually winds down. WHo will replace him? If it’s Bennett & he embraces a settler sect “with considerable number of followers and sympathizers” that’s very important. It means that Bennett must “own” the views of his allies. So Bennett too must answer for this embrace of genocide.

      There has been no “ignorance” of any aspect of Israeli society in this post. In fact, this group does represent an important facet of Israeli politics & society and its views have considerable support among a wide swath of the Israeli Orthodox community.

      Comments like yours raise my hackles. So if you want to end up moderated, keep it up.

  6. Hi Richard,
    Fair enough. Your point concerning Bennet is a valid one. I agree that these people have an unmistakable effect on the inner politics of the settlerist movement, which Bennet largely represents. Thus, they do wield a measure of influence on Israeli politics that extends as far as they are capable of mobilizing more followers within the religous-zionist sector.
    Their target in this shabbat-newsletter is not the charedi audience, since it is not handed out in charedi synagoges, which is the way it is circulated amongst the religous-zionist circles, along with similar “alonei shabbat”. Their purpose is not to explain or defend political activisim but to galvinize luke-warm religous-zionists into implementing a more radically religous political agenda.
    As far as Bennet is concerned, they are both an asset and a threat to his political carrear. Their loyalty will give him a valuable resource of fanatically motivated manpower along with some votes. Should he lose their support he stands to lose between one and two seats in the coming elections, along with the mantle of the sole political leader of the religous-zionist sector. Then again, if he gets too comefortable with them, he runs the risk of losing the secular vote, which is the key to his future success.
    I don’t think it is unimportant whether or not they are charedi, and whether or not their target audience are the charedi circles. Understanding their rhetoric and its effect on Israeli politics hinges on knowing to whom they are sending their message, and their specific relation to their target audience. This is the context of this newsletter, which is directed towards the “home front”. Granted, they do other things as well, and are very much interested in spreading their message further, especially to secular circles, but this newsletter is not the part of that effort.
    These may seem like petty quiblles to you, and maybe by now you think I should be moderated for overstressing trivialities. However, in my opinion, attention to such details is what sets apart informative reporting from the mere voicing of moral dismay. One of the reasons I regard this blog as trustworthy is because, in general, you exhibit a deap understanding of Israeli society. I assumed you would want to be further informed, just to stay ahead of the game.
    Your hostility towards me, right from the start, for pointing out what I believed to be errors in your post and your comments, reflects badly upon you. I rarely comment on blogs and websites. In this case I happened to have an intimate understanding of the people involved, and I thought you cared enough about truth and accuracy to accomodate my input, even if you ultimately choose to disregard it. I didn’t think attempting to correct you would be met with such unpleasant feedback. I confess I’m slightly dissapointed. I will definitely think twice before commenting here again.
    best of luck,

    1. … the notable fact that the Qalamoun area had been the scene in recent months of rare cooperation between Islamic State and Nusra, out of shared interest in extending the conflict into Lebanon.

      … Such an offensive would form part of the larger campaign against the regime and Hezbollah in this area.

      So, Israel is supporting al-Nusra terror group to fight Hezbollah in Syria. Where does that leave Israel and the IDF, supporting terror groups and allowing ISIS to advance towards the Golan Heights.

      Your article is from a dubious source: The Jerusalem Post!

      Israel Establishes Syrian Rebel Base in Israel, Treats Radical Islamist Wounded

  7. The attempt by some here to argue that in this particular political discourse the term “Amalekites” does not necessarily refer to Palestinians seems to me a form of bad faith, as absurd as arguing that in American political discourse during the Second World War the term “Huns” might have referrred to the one time enemies of Rome.
    Here is Max Blumenthal:

    “And genocide, incitement to genocide, is incredibly common right now in Israeli political discourse. It’s not just Feiglin. There’s Giora Eiland, who was one of the heads of the Institute for National Security Studies, which consults for the Israeli military. He’s a former national security adviser, someone who’s deeply embedded in the military intelligence apparatus. And today he published a piece in Yedioth Ahronoth, which is the main newspaper in Israel, pretty much calling for genocide in the Gaza Strip, or at least justifying it. He’s basically making the case that there are no civilians in the Gaza Strip because they elected Hamas as Germans elected Hitler. This is the same rationale that Osama bin Laden used to justify the 9/11 attacks and the indiscriminate slaughter of Americans, because they had elected governments which had attacked the Middle East, which had attacked Muslim nations. So you’re hearing this from mainstream figures, not just from crazy old Feiglin, who’s willing winning lots of fans and followers with this kind of rhetoric, who’s really keeping up a public profile.

    Ayelet Shaked is another figure who’s called for genocide. She is a rising star in the Jewish Home Party, which is the third most popular party in Israel, a senior partner in Netanyahu’s governing coalition. She called for exterminating Palestinian mothers to prevent them from giving birth to, quote-unquote, “little snakes”.

    And last night, along with Lia Tarachansky, who’s your correspondent for The Real News in Israel-Palestine, I followed a march of settlers, led by this group Women in Green, who established new religious nationalist settlements around the West Bank. We followed them up to the Jaffa Gate in the old city of Jerusalem, and there we heard more genocidal rhetoric. At the top of this hill, I interviewed Daniel Luria, who is the head of Ateret Cohanim. It’s a 501(c)(3) nonprofit in the United States that raises money, tax-exempt, in order to eject Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem and replace them with Jews. And Luria, in denouncing what he called the snakes to the South, the serpents to the south, referring to the people of the Gaza Strip, said that Israel had to take care of the sons of Amalek. Whenever you hear the word Amalek, the term Amalek, that is a call for genocide, because Amalek was the incarnation of evil in the Bible, and in Jewish history is considered anyone who wants to wipe out the Jewish people. And the only way to handle Amalek is as he was handled in the Bible: complete destruction. And that’s what Daniel Luria told me in English in his Australian accent, that the Amalekites had to be eradicated.”

    Read more:


    1. @Arie Brand – If I had changed the words in your leading statement from ‘Amalekites’ to ‘Jihad’ and ‘Palestinians’ into ‘Jews/Zionists’, I would be banned and shamed as Islamophob.

      In Jewish literature ‘Amalek’ subject is as legitimate as how to make a cup of tea of shabbat or ‘Oven of Akhnai’. Our ancestors debated on these subjects and many more for centuries and millennia. Bashing it, pretending it is all genocidal calls to kill Palestinians is borderline anti-semitic.

      1. @ Ariel: this is not only a stupid and offensive comment, but you’ve violated my request not to post again on this subject, which is settled. If you post in this thread again you will be banned. And you may not post more than three comments in any 24 hour period so as not to monopolize the comment threads. Do not violate this rule.

        I do NOT allow anyone to charge anyone else here with anti-Semitism unless it is absolutely supported by evidence that is clear & self-evident. Your comment is lame-assed and doesn’t nearly qualify. I put you on notice.

  8. Richard, I have your web page pinned to my desktop, as a mark of the respect I have for what you represent. However, after reading your replies to 7-8 comments, I feel like someone in an audience watching a friend proceed to drink to excess and get louder and louder. Of course I could be misunderstanding your style of communication. You seem to be a watch spring that is getting wound tighter and tigher….Patience? Kindliness? Are you ok?

  9. “Go now and fall upon the Amalekites and destroy them, and put their property under ban. Spare no one; put them all to death, men and women, children and babes in arms, herds and flocks, camels and donkeys”. (1 Samuel 15:3,4)

    Do Netanyahu, Ya’alon and the likes…seriously believe those are god’s instructions?

    If so are we in or entering the horrifying era of ultimate barbarity?

    If so, for sure, the powerful guys like them are the most powerful enemies of Israel…. for simple reason that immense incompatibilities abound between their mind set and the modern time ever maturing attitudes of rational, humanistic and constructive beliefs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link