Re: What really concerns me
 

That is why, for example, sacrifices continue today.

The reason sacrifices do not continue today is not because people do not follow the Torah literally. It is because there is no Beit Mikdash (temple) in Jerusalem where The Dome of the Rock is because the Messiah hasn't arrived yet. When you refer to the teachings of the sages, I don't know exactly what you are talking about - if you mean the mishna (oral law) this is technically part of the Torah and was given by God at Mount Sinai and then written down by rabbis during Roman oppression because they feared that they might forget it, or be wiped out and have no record of it. If you are talking about the Gemara, this is the discussion and interpretation of the mishna, and is still following the Torah literally because it is deciding what is meant in the Torah.

Even the most Haredi Jews understand that God caused a natural phenomenon

So if they understand that God caused a natural phenomenon, then it means that they understand that God did part the red sea.

I said: Furthermore, and this is somewhat more serious, you are actually advocating the burning (possibly not literally) of books!

You replied: I merely made a suggestion.

So that's ok then(!) Why do you feel that this just being a suggestion validates it? It is widely (almost universally) accepted that burning books and monopolising information is a symptom of a fascist regime. Why do you suggest that burning books is in any way acceptable?

As it stands right now, what right do they [the Palestinians] have [to a state]?

Well, let's see. They were living in Israel/Palestine for a long time before 1948, when many of them were either expelled or fled because of the attitudes towards them. The state that they lived in was removed and Jewish settlers moved in, with slogans like "A land without a people for a people without a land". The only thing was, the land did have a people, and although some of them managed to stay, many of them were either forced to leave or chose to because of their reception. They currently live in terrible conditions, they are treated very badly by the IDF and often have to wait for 24 hours or more at checkpoints, under the instruction of some 18 year old soldier who is prejudiced towards them. They have curfews imposed upon them and are often confined to one room in their house for hours while soldiers use their roof top as a place to scout for terrorists. They have no real school or hospital system. How can you possibly deny these people a right to have a state?

No, the conditions they live in are not an excuse for suicide bombers, or a corrupt government. But given a real state, it would quell much of their unhappiness and although not all of it, there would be much less sympathy for real terrorists from other nations.

they'll never give up as long as there's any hope of Arab rule in what is now Israel.

This sort of attitudes facilitates the current situation. Palestinians might (and do) say "The only thing Israelis understand is violence, talking won't help anything". Rather than making enormous generalisations about why peace won't work because of the other side, use every effort to argue why peace will work, and perhaps, when given a real chance without all the negative attitudes, there is a possibility that it will. To make this slightly relevant to twoplustwo, it's like people who won't raise PF with jacks in hold'em, because "they never win" - rather than saying this, just keep making attempts to actually achieve something and there's more chance of it working than if you don't try at all.

Nice scarecrow!
 

Well it's nice to see someone who knows what they're talkin about.

There are indeed no tamidim (sacrifices) for the reason you mentioned.

The Sanhedrin (the sages I referred to) often had to rule what God would have wanted. (In fact, most argue that the destruction of the Beit Hamikdash is the moment the Jews became a nation as opposed to a religous entity). They applied their interpretations of God's wishes to day-to-day issues, paving way, for example, for the now-accepted version of sacrifice - the sacrifice of wealth, or rather, Tz'daka. Thus, the Sanhedrin were empowered to interpret the Torah to extrapolate God's wishes, and thus even the modern Haredim are subject to those interpretations, not literal meanings.

So if they understand that God caused a natural phenomenon, then it means that they understand that God did part the red sea.

There's a significant difference between Moses being empowered to part the Red Sea, and winds picking up to hurricane speeds (as is mentioned in the Perek in question) and exposing the land bridge.

Why do you suggest that burning books is in any way acceptable?

According to your straw man argument, I have advocated burning books, when in reality, I haven't made anything close that argument. I made a suggestion that people not read. It's 100% their decision, and far be it from me to tell then what they are able to read, but I have every right to suggest what I personally think they should read.

Although, now that you've got me thinking, if Zundel is not allowed to publish in Canada, why should Hitler be permitted to?

They were living in Israel/Palestine for a long time before 1948, when many of them were either expelled or fled because of the attitudes towards them

Palestinian Propagandist! While Palestine was populated, it was hardly bustling, consisting instead of sporadic Arab villages. Furthermore, their desire to limit Jewish immigration led to attacks on Jewish towns, and Jewish neighbourhoods in cities like Jerusalem. When the Jews began to defend themselves, by forming a militia called the Hagana (literally, the Defence), the only way to prevent this sort of violence was to attack its origin - the Arab towns that held the fedayeen. During the '48 war, many Arabs fled Israel for three reasons, each carrying approximately equal weighting:[list] [*]Arab forces closing in the new Jewish State recommended they leave to avoid the danger [*]They fled of their own free will to avoid the danger[*]They fled the new Israeli Defence Forces who were rooting out Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi collaborators i.e. those that allowed the Arab troops to set up camp in their towns.

The state that they lived in was removed and Jewish settlers moved in, with slogans like "A land without a people for a people without a land".

Do you know anything about Israeli history?

What state, pray tell, did they live in? The British rule in Palestine ended May 15, 1948. If you'd like to know what the area was like before 1948, read the Report of the Palestine Royal Commission to the League of Nations.

They currently live in terrible conditions, they are treated very badly by the IDF and often have to wait for 24 hours or more at checkpoints, under the instruction of some 18 year old soldier who is prejudiced towards them.

This is true. They are treated terribly, but unfortunately, when you use ambulances to smuggle bombs under the guise of rushing to the hospital, when you dress up like a Jew to get as close as you can to a bus, the people in charge of defending the country must take severe measures indeed. Think logically. The cost of maintaining these checkpoints and the sheer numbers of soldiers is astonishingly high. What could possibly justify this? Perhaps a severe danger to the Israeli populace.

They have curfews imposed upon them and are often confined to one room in their house for hours while soldiers use their roof top as a place to scout for terrorists. They have no real school or hospital system.

Yes. They do. You'd rather the terrorists roam free to blow themselves, and 20 others if they're lucky, to kingdom come?

The school system is alive and running, I can assure you. But if you want a hospital, build a fuckin hospital in the middle of Jenin. Who's stopping you? Oh, that's right, the PA spent $150 million in EU aid on a new yacht for Arafat.

But given a real state, it would quell much of their unhappiness and although not all of it, there would be much less sympathy for real terrorists from other nations.

So what you're saying, is reward the terrorists by giving them exactly what they want - a state with Arafat, king terrorist himself, in charge?

This sort of attitudes facilitates the current situation

This I agree with.

But as much as they have their rights, they still have brethren who stand behind them. Muslims all over the world and Arabs all over the world still back them, because it's only natural when they share the same beliefs and values, when they're one of your own. It goes without saying that this kind of setup is threatening to Jews, who number 13 million worldwide and have already seen the potential for calamity, as the original title of this thread may show. So for now, the Jews need a state of their own for the Jewish refugees of Ethiopia and Russia, who not more than 10 years ago were still sending millions of immigrants to Israel.

The interesting thing, is that the Jews of Germany were far more assimilated and complacent and prominent than the Jews of American today, and the results were fantastic there.