← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 3572 | Posts: 12 | Started: 2002-11-18
2002-11-18 03:17 | User Profile
11-17-02
The upcoming, animated [Jewish comedian] Adam Sandler movie is called "8 Crazy Nights," the title apparently a reference to the 8 nights of the Jewish holiday Hanukah/Hanukkah.
A song from that movie is called "Chanukah Song Part III." That's right -- "Ch......"
The word "Chanukah" did not exist until about 1980. The word is an attempt by Jews of various stripe to make themselves seem less "alien" to non-Jews by linking Christmas ["ch-"] and Hanukah ["-anukah"] together. Less "alieness" means, in theory, less "anti-Semitism." Very clever. And few gentiles even notice this slyness -- they're too busy watching "The Simpsons" and muttering "but, Jesus was a Jew..."
For the record, Christmas and Hanukah have almost nothing in common. Christmas is the celebration of Jesus' birth. Hanukah, like most Jewish holidays, celebrates how Jews wiped out an entire group of people in battle many years ago. With Hanukah, they celebrate their military victory in 165 BC over their enemy, King Antiochus IV of Syria. Jewish holidays are not spiritual like Christian holidays -- instead, they celebrate "getting even;" indeed, recall the telling Jewish motto: "never forget."
Don't worry, we won't forget.
2002-11-18 15:46 | User Profile
Antiochus Epiphanes, King of the Seleucid Empire, and of Syria, 175-163 B.C.
He was a cruel tyrant (yet par for the course today as well apparently among most who hold power), calling himself "god-manifest" which is what Epiphanes means in Greek. In his rule of the province of Judea he took things too far, outlawing Judaism, and installed a statue of the Greek god Jupiter in Jerusalem in the Temple's Holy of Holies. His progam was the Hellenization of the area, and was assisted internally by Hellenized Jews, seeking their own advantage, and/or who also believed Hellenization, and the wiping out of the religion of Judaism would be "progress".
It didn't succeed. But if it had, since Jews were the only monotheists at the time, there would probably not only be no Judaism today, but no Christianity or Islam as well.
Would it have meant so-called progress; who knows? What it did mean historically in Israel was the rise to power of the Jewish Maccabees, who in 167 B.C. led a violent revolt, and in an on-again, off-again war, by 142 B.C. they ultimately defeated the Hellenized Jews who fought side by side with the Syrians.
Along the way after one fierce battle and Maccabee victory in 164 B.C., the Temple, though not destroyed, was in ruins; and now that it had been retaken, over the following 8 days it was rededicated, during which time Jews swarmed back to the Temple to worship, as they had not been permitted for the previous three years. Hannukka commemorates these 8 days during which time the Temple was rededicated.
However, once the ultimate victory over the Hellenized Jews and the Syrians was secured in 142 B.C., the Maccabees and their King Alexander Yanni were almost as cruel as the King of Syria, King Anitochus had been in his rule. They permitted the voicing of no opposition, and although they didn't outlaw Judaism, they executed 800 of their Pharisee opponents, after first forcing them to witness the murders of their wives and children.
The Maccabees's terrible moral and religious decline after their victory over the Syrians, led to civil wars in Judea. Until finally in 63 B.C. the Romans were invited in to moderate and attempt to keep the peace, the Maccabees could no longer handle it themselves; as they had also taken to warring with themselves, brother against brother, for the reins of power. The whole spectacle of what occurred for the, approximately 80 years after the Maccabees's ultimate victory in 142 B.C., until the Romans were invited in in 63 B.C. was such a disappointment to religious Jews, the Maccabees are scarcely referred to later on in the Talmud.
Once the Roman garrison was installed, in behalf of the Maccabee brother Hyrcannus instead of his younger brother Aristobulus who had no right to the throne anyway, Hyrcannus's rule depended entirely on the Romans. Rome via Pompey's legions had already conquered and annexed Syria, so inviting them in, in behalf of himself, was probably the shrewdest move Hyrcannus could have made, given it was only a matter of time, before Pompey got around to Judea, anyhow.
So who are the good guys in all of this, and who are the bad guys? I think it should be obvious by now, as it is similarly in the rest of the world as well. The religious Jews are the good guys in this particular drama. However in this same vein as Stalin once put it for example, how many divisions does the Pope have?
Of course once the violent revolt against the Maccabees and Roman occupation finally ensued sadly, the worst was yet to come.
If there is any consolation in the struggle against the Romans, it may be that, at least Caligula never made it into the Holy of Holies. Although for years prior to his death it had been scheduled to be installed therein, after he'd initially ordered it, however no one would do it. Like everything else this enraged Caligula terribly, but he kicked the bucket, before anyone got around to it.
2002-11-18 19:35 | User Profile
George -
Jews are Jews. They are a race. They think alike: "Screw the gentiles -- what is best for Jews?"
Get a clue.
Nice history lesson, though....
2002-11-18 21:05 | User Profile
The event Hanukah celebrates has no relevance to modern Jews nor is Hanukah related to anything in the Bible (OT). For a Jew to celebrate Hanukah on its own merits is just stupid -- too stupid for even Jews.
Jews celebrate Hanukah purely to compete with Christmas. In other words, Hanukah is nothing but an anti-Christ holiday.
Why don't Jews celebrate Jubilee where they forgive debts? Jubilee is a jewish celebration from the OT.
2002-11-18 22:26 | User Profile
Actually, the "Ch" more closely approximates the guttural, throat-clearing pronunciation favored in Hebrew and Yiddish.
Jews go out of their way to avoid using (and to keep their media and retail employees from using) the term "Christmas" at all.
Chappy Cholidays, all!! ;)
2002-11-19 06:05 | User Profile
Originally posted by Franco@Nov 18 2002, 19:35 **George -
Jews are Jews. They are a race. They think alike: "Screw the gentiles -- what is best for Jews?"
Get a clue.
Nice history lesson, though....**
France... I'm not exactly clueless. You don't get me, or haven't read enough of me...not that you should, or that I'm any great "shakes". I'm hard core. I agree with 'how the Jews are'. I agree with anyone who has the spine and the stiff neck to accept, it is as it is. And proceeds from there. While also--including the notion (or reality), much as Einstein did, of G-d, or the mystery, and subsequently, 'under that' as well...proceeding according to one's lights, to puzzle through in terms of how to best continue, theoretically and mechanically, (i.e. humanly.) When Gentiles are Jews in perspective, the world won't necessarily be a better place, but it will be more honest. Even Einstein wasn't, so to speak, Jewish in perspective enough. I'll give an example of what I mean. He held to his comfortable notion or fantasy, regarding the UNKNOWABLE (per se), or G-d, and wanted therefore ideologically to maintain and 'prove', as he put it: "God does Not play dice with the universe." How he coddled himself with this comfortable belief of his, led him astray. Gentiles do this all the time, fantasizing they "know" the mystery (an impossibility), and calling their fantasy or presumption, God. So did Einstein in this regard, with his "God does not play dice with the universe." If Einstein stood a tad more within the question on that issue, instead of staying comfortable, he would have asked: How does G-d play dice with the universe?
You see, it is only the appropriate degree of chance too, resident within the context of the world, which permits the appropriate degree of FREEDOM to exist in the world. The design itself is overwhelming, but in the design resides as well the element of chance too, to the appropriate degree, so as to permit the existence of freedom too, to the appropriate degree.
A friend of mine likes to believe as he puts it, there are no accidents. Conversely others believe it is all luck, or chance. But if either were actual, in either of these extremes were they actually the case, there would be no FREEDOM. I'm not Einstein, but I wasn't around at the time to avail him of the -Dogma of George. That being: "since everything in THIS world, is a matter of degrees, when to our human perception opposites appear or choices of significant degrees of difference present themselves so as to appear separate, e.g. (for example) God does not play dice with the so-called universe; or, on the other hand that's all God does, it's BOTH...thus, in the synthesis of the two, or BOTH, the real question indicated is HOW does G-d play dice with the universe?" So when G-d, in our terms--he or she or S-he wants us to know the answer, it won't be a question anymore, and France, you'll be back in paradise? I hope. Or closer?
Another way of putting it, is that Einstein, in behalf of his own comfort, made the classical error of wanting to be too large...and so, wanted to confuse contexts, this world, which is finite; with on the other hand the infinite... which we know exists (the infinite) in the universe outside of the context of this world, but has very little to do, next to nothing with this world, and the price of bubble gum. To be honest, it was a very Gentile thing to do, Einstein did therein.
On the other hand the world by design is a closed set, which also miraculously contains both the element of chance, and because of that, the element of freedom as well. But of course Einstein was FREE to choose what he wanted, accurate or Not accurate. That obviously is at least, HOW I see it. Call it clueless if you wish, you're FREE to do so. I don't know, YOU may be more accurate than I. :P
P.S. how stupid can Gentiles (and Jews too) be, that they don't even know, or have Actually been taught, the history of the 'Holy Land'?
2002-11-19 07:32 | User Profile
Originally posted by George@Nov 19 2002, 06:05 > Originally posted by Franco@Nov 18 2002, 19:35 George -
Jews are Jews. They are a race. They think alike: "Screw the gentiles -- what is best for Jews?"
Get a clue.
Nice history lesson, though....**
France... I'm not exactly clueless. You don't get me, or haven't read enough of me...not that you should, or that I'm any great "shakes". I'm hard core. I agree with 'how the Jews are'. I agree with anyone who has the spine and the stiff neck to accept, it is as it is. And proceeds from there. While also--including the notion (or reality), much as Einstein did, of G-d, or the mystery, and subsequently, 'under that' as well...proceeding according to one's lights, to puzzle through in terms of how to best continue, theoretically and mechanically, (i.e. humanly.) When Gentiles are Jews in perspective, the world won't necessarily be a better place, but it will be more honest.
... Another way of putting it, is that Einstein, in behalf of his own comfort, made the classical error of wanting to be too large...and so, wanted to confuse contexts, this world, which is finite; with on the other hand the infinite... which we know exists (the infinite) in the universe outside of the context of this world, but has very little to do, next to nothing with this world, and the price of bubble gum. To be honest, it was a very Gentile thing to do, Einstein did therein.
On the other hand the world by design is a closed set, which also miraculously contains both the element of chance, and because of that, the element of freedom as well. But of course Einstein was FREE to choose what he wanted, accurate or Not accurate. That obviously is at least, HOW I see it. Call it clueless if you wish, you're FREE to do so. I don't know, YOU may be more accurate than I. :P
P.S. how stupid can Gentiles (and Jews too) be, that they don't even know, or have Actually been taught, the history of the 'Holy Land'?**
George, yer slipping. Einstein coddled himself ... and " ... led himself astray." "Gentiles do this all the time ...". Hmmm. Confusing the world - finite, with the ... infinite. Nah, I don't think so. Einstein is vastly overrated for reasons we all know, but I don't think he was naive, or confused. And he certainly didn't act or commit to things that could be construed as acting as a "gentile". Or is it only mistakes in judgment or bad behavior that get labled as "gentile", while higher thought and analysis are ... jewish? Hmmm again. I would think that the world is part of the infinite, eh George? Even if it is a finite set, a subset of the infinite, maybe? Or did your marsden get farfied on the slithy toves? Because that is just about as non-sensical. When Gentiles become as focused on their group in terms of advantages and survival, I do think the world will be more honest - but not to the perspective of the jews. However, your tome gets off the beam, as the real focus of this thread is ...
"Chanukah". I'm surprised at Franco's take on "Chanukah". I thought that was the actually the correct spelling, a la "chutzpah". As Howard Campbell jr. pointed out, the chosenites pronounce these words in gutteral fashion, like they're hocking up a big one to fire at the front steps of a church they happen to be walking past.
2002-11-19 16:39 | User Profile
Interetsing observation, Franco.
2002-11-19 19:37 | User Profile
Originally posted by George@Nov 19 2002, 06:05 P.S. how stupid can Gentiles (and Jews too) be, that they don't even know, or have Actually been taught, the history of the 'Holy Land'?
Nice joke but no cigar, George.
Sez who is this twaddle you're peddling "history"? As usual, we have the say-so of long dead Hebrew tale-spinners that they won a battle and defeated an empire. They said that about Jericho, Egypt... who else, dude? And all of it's a crock of Levantine moonshine.
Anyone else back that tall tale up? How about the records of the Seleucid Empire? No? I guessed as much. As with the "Babylonian Captivity", we get one side of a story from Hebrew scribes and the other side says, "Huh?" History by and for the Chosen People is a crock 'o blarney.
Ragnar sez: No cigar for George. (Nice try though.)
2002-11-20 05:02 | User Profile
Antiochus Epiphanes, King of the Seleucid Empire, and of Syria, 175-163 B.C.
Raghead, alias Ragnar? I invite you, Rag... to go up again to the above post and re-read. It is an historical fact, you fool, that the Syrians & "Hellenized Jews" fighting along side the Syrians, were defeated by the indigenous Jews opposed to them under the leadership of the Maccabees, but defeated only in so far as being tossed out of Judea, you idiot. Nowhere in the above post, did I say the indigenous Jews in Judea went on to defeat the Seleucid Empire. When Pompey in behalf of Rome passed through, seven decades plus later they annexed Syria. CAn't you freaking read, or are you too busy stroking your cigar?I mean smoking it, or Clintonianizing it. I apologize you must have just been on the rag. Perhaps it blinds you when attempting to read? No seriously, on the other hand I think you guys are admirably attempting some cohesion--good--lame as it yet may be. Here comes the Keystone cops...well, at least they're united!
2002-11-20 06:09 | User Profile
It is not true. You got Syrians, "Hellenized Jews" and Vanilla Jews. Which you gonna believe? Me neither.
"History is Bunk."
--- Hesiod Ford, 3200 BC (in darkest South Phroggia) :P
2002-11-20 20:55 | User Profile
I hear'ya Ragnar... it may not be 'true' to you. But it is actual. I'm capable of love (and hate)...I love'ya, just the same. I'm with'ya. You're not on the hook. Sometimes I am, Ragnar, and sometimes I wiggle off.