A comparison of international law and traditional Jewish approaches
The following discussion presents a point of view of international law on the Arab-Israeli conflict, as documented by Mr Jonathan Wenig, with a response to its tenets from the standpoint of Jewish tradition by Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen. The point at issue is the secular notion that sovereign states make or voluntarily subscribe to laws and processes of adjudication versus the Torah (Talmudic) view of universal norms of conduct. The second is between legal concepts of the Palestinians’ claim to statehood and the Torah’s (Talmudic Eretz ITSREALHELL Global anti-God Racist) view of the intrinsic relationship of the Jewish people to the land. The third has to do with the mode of action in international conflict: mutual negotiation as the source of resolution and the halachic ruling as a guide to practical dealing.
The Arab-Israeli conflict: a traditional Jewish approach
Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen
Torah as source of the law of nations
Talmudic Noahide enforcement to the Dragon of Sanhedrin and the coming False Christ
The sources of modern international law, as documented by Mr Wenig, are customary international law, based on practices which nations chose to observe; an International Court of Justice, to which nations elect to subscribe; the United Nations, the members of which stand in political relationships to one another, where also certain nations possess veto powers; and finally the contractual activity of nations in treaty-making.
destruction of the Constitution
The common feature of all of these aspects of international law is that they are essentially voluntary; they represent elective commitments of sovereign nations, which are bound to no moral or legal authority above their individual sovereign existences, except to the extent that they chose to subscribe or be bound by one. That authority, at all events, is not absolute.
This is the character of modern international law, the law which was formulated and practised in modern times since the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. It corresponds to the political reality of the rise of sovereign national entities. This law was historically preceded by a different political reality and different notions of law. In ancient and medieval times, before the emergence of sovereignty as a universal principle of states, there prevailed a notion of natural law.
see Roy Moore's shem sham and his monument, which states : Natural Law, or Noahide Law
This was the concept of a concrete morality of universal application which governed states just as municipal or domestic law governs the individuals within a single state.
Noahide enforcement of Mystery Babylon
Typically, in its Roman law or medieval canon law expressions, this law was based on universal and immutable principles. The political reality corresponding to this natural law was that of the Roman Empire – the pax Romana (the Roman peace) – and later, the political supremacy of the Catholic Church in medieval Europe. A “natural”, universal morality was to arbitrate the laws of individual states. This was the law of all human beings and all states.
Judaism also sets forth a substantive law for all humanity. It does not prescribe the exact texture of non-Jewish national practices and regulations but it lays a basic “grid” over human conduct. This is the morality expressed in the seven “Noahide” laws, so called because they were incumbent upon Noah, and are upon all his descendants, general humanity. These laws are the prohibitions upon idolatry, blasphemy, forbidden sexual relationships, murder, theft, the consumption of the limb of a living animal and upon failing to set up courts and processes of justice.
Not only the domestic, but also the international, orderliness of nations follows upon their subscription to the Noahide laws.
Thus war, where there are no legitimate grounds of self–defence, will fall under the Noahide prohibitions of murder.
The Code of Maimonides similarly sets out the laws relating to the waging of war by a Jewish King including the conditions under he may make war.
Bushwhacker Dan the "War President"
It states that where he has made conquests and embodied them in a covenant, he may not betray the covenant, provided his erstwhile opponents have made peace, and have accepted upon themselves the seven Noahide laws. If on the other hand, they do not make peace and they do not accept upon themselves the seven Noahide laws, he can resume the serious measures of war.
see Iraq, Iran, Persians and the Medes
The enforcement of the peace based on these laws has admittedly a messianic (Moshiach) quality.
Dan:8:24: And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
Maimonides sets out these laws at the end of his Code in the section dealing with “Kings and their Wars” and at the end of this selfsame section, states that the Messiah, himself a king descended from the House of David, will “rectify the entire world to serve G-d together”.
Their False Christ who is not Jesus the Christ of God
The law of international order is thus associated with concrete morality of the Noahide laws. This is of interest not only from a legal point of view, but also from that of the theory of international politics. It is far from Realpolitik and notions of balance in mutual deterrence in an intrinsically lawless, anarchic world of sovereign nations. To the contrary, according to Torah, (Satan's Tradition) the order of the international community represents a moral imperium. Within this imperium, the Jewish people gathered into the land of Israel, where they will be at peace with the nations, have a central role: they are the centre of that moral imperium.
In their laws they say they are gods
This is in no way connected with a notion of the domination or dissolution of other peoples.
Yitzhak Ginsburg says he knows in the near future the
Maimonides explicitly repudiates this when he writes that
The prophets yearned for the days of the Messiah, not in order to rule over the world or to subjugate the nations, and not that the nations would exalt them, and not to eat and drink and to rejoice, but in order that they should be free to engage in the Torah and its wisdom; and that there should be none to press or prevent [them from this], that they might merit to the world to come…
and when the Chooser came, they cried crucify him and give us the "Robber" and they forfeited. Now they want another, the "Robber" and he will come in his own name, and he shall destroy wonderfully in the name of Tamud Bavli, Babylon the mystery
Indeed the next and final halachah of Maimonides’ Code sets forth the unified and harmonious purpose of all humanity, which will then be realized:
And in that time there will be neither famine nor war, neither jealousy nor struggle, for there will be an abundance of good… The occupation of the entire world will be only to know G-d…
Mt:10:34: Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
The spiritual geography of that world order takes as its centre the Jewish people, the “light to the nations”, regathered upon their land.
One World Talmudic jew odor
The connection of the Jewish people with the land of Israel
Mr Wenig spoke of the conditions of Statehood in modern international law, particularly in regard to the Palestinian claim for statehood within the land of Israel. He enunciated certain criteria in law which might objectively qualify a people for statehood as well as notions of recognition which might constitute a state, and notions of self-determination furnishing them with rights to statehood. However, while any of these, as well as the simple fact of conquest, might establish statehood according to Torah, anywhere else, they cannot apply to any other people’s claim to the land of Israel.
Thus the Palestinians must become obedient "Goyim slaves" or be slain and driven out.
E-mail from Dov Stein, Sanhedrin 1-26-2006
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 6:10 PM
This notion is the subject of Rashi’s commentary on the first verse of the Torah, where the Talmud sage Rabbi Yitzchok is quoted as explaining the significance of the Torah’s (Talmud Mishnah Torah tradition) commencement with the words “In the beginning, G-d created the heavens and the earth.” The explanation is that if one day the nations will come and claim that the Jewish people “stole” this land from the nations, which had previously inhabited it, it will be made known from the verse, that the entire world “was created by G-d and is His. He gave it to those [the Jewish people] who were proper in his eyes. By his Will He gave it to them [the seven nations inhabiting Cana’an]
Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt to the Nile, Babylon Proper, Eretz ISTSREALHELL
and by His will he took it from them and gave it to us [the Jewish people]”.
and for abominations in the House of God, he destroyed the House and took the Land and dispersed a hard hearted people throughout the World, the seed of Abraham are they who are in faith of his Messiah, Jesus the Christ Heirs to his Everlasting Covenant, this is the same REDEEMER from the foundation of the world. Before Abraham, Jesus is Iam
The Lubavitcher Rebbe (Schneerson of Buswhacker Dan's HJR 104, PL 102-14) explains that the essential claim, which this statement anticipates and answers, is why the conquest of the land by the Jewish people is different from any other conquest of land.
wanna be gods who "chose" the "Robber" the Dragon, their flesh profits them nothing, their land in no Holy Place, but desolation
Whilst it may confer de facto ownership of the land, it should be revocable, it can be reconquered by another power. To this comes the answer in various places that the designation (- choice -) of the land of Israel as a special – holy – land bespeaks a special connection between it and the Jewish people, a chosen, holy people.
a Place "Chosen" for the War unto Desolation for their Dragon they serve. Their two fold children of Hell the Noahide proselytes of Judeo-Churchinsanity now worship the god of the jews, who the Talmudic jews say has no Messiah, No only Begotten Son, no Lamb of God worthy to open the book, in fact in their abominable Talmud Bavli states that Jesus is in hell boiling in human excrement....the "Chosen"
This was so from the outset of the creation. Then with the giving of the Torah, (Fables of the Talmudic Jews, their Tradition, oral laws, which make the WORD of God of none effect) it acquired the practical possibility of achieving its sanctity and connection with the Jewish people through the giving of the mitzvos which would be practised upon it. Moreover, the conquest, occupation (chazaka) and utilization of the land by the Jewish people for the special mitzvos associated with the land brought the land’s intrinsic connection with the Jewish people from potentiality to actuality.
In other words, there is no legal principle which can accord ownership or statehood in the biblically defined land of Israel to a people other than the Jewish people. In this it differs from all other nations which by differing criteria could establish jurisdiction over territories. None of these formal or pragmatic rules apply to the Jewish people’s relationship to the land of Israel. For the land of Israel is different in its essence from every other land, and pertains by virtue of its essence to the Jewish people. It is a Jewish land.
you can have your wretched zion, but the Children of God inherits SION
The foregoing does not mean that a gentile cannot dwell within the land of Israel. The Torah (Talmud Bavli) sets out the category of ger toshav, a gentile, who has accepted before a Jewish court ( Make an oath "brit" to the Dragon and denounce Jesus the Christ) to live according to the Noahide (anti-Christ Mitzvah) laws on the basis of the Torah (Satan's Babylonian Talmud of perversion) given by Moses,(Not Moses who wrote of the "SON of MAN") and may live in the land. It is incumbent upon Jews to take active measures to “sustain” the ger toshav. Maimonides writes that the practice of the formal declaration and acceptance of the ger toshav is possible only at a time when the laws of the Jubilee year (the fiftieth year, in which land returns to its original owners) are observed. (1998 forward) This observance in turn depends upon the settlement of the land of Israel by the entire Jewish people according to their tribes. At such a time, conversely, the Jewish people are not to tolerate idolatry of any sort, or its adherents, in their land.
Jesus the "Chooser" Banned, cut-off, but not for himself
This last injunction, Maimonides acknowledges, is dependent upon the “strength of hand” of the Jewish people.
40,000 nuclear weapons, Moscow, Washington, DC, Paris, Berlin, London, Itsrealhell
It has been argued that the notion of “strength of hand” in relation to this issue does not apply until the majority of the Jewish people live in the land of Israel.
When they do, they will turn to rend the earth for their Dragon the murderer from the beginning "Come to Pharaoh Moshiach"
Accordingly, when this circumstance does not exist, as at present, Maimonides writes that we sustain the poor of the idolatrous nations together with the poor of the Jewish people on account of “darchei shalom”, “for the sake of peace”.
after that destroy them all who refuse to denounce Jesus who is Christ the Lord the Iam from the foundation of the World to forever
They become recipients of the various agricultural gifts to the poor, pei’ah, leket and shich’chah, alongside the Jewish poor. “V’sho’lin bishlomom” : and we enquire of their well being and even on the day of an idolatrous festival “for the sake of peace”.
There is, in other words, even not in the optimal circumstance, when the Jubilee year is observed, a norm of “peace” in the land, with non-Jews.
Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg says he knows in the near future the land of Israel is about to expand. ‘It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not—they will be killed.
But this does not entail the conferral of statehood over any part of the territory of the land of Israel, just as it does not compromise halachic considerations of the safety of the Jewish people.
Targeted Killing and collective punishment Esther style
The halachic ruling as the guide for practical action
Jewish law states basic and absolute principles: that the land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people, and that the legal framework of the nations is the Noahide laws.
Treason and Blasphemy of the Dan Bushwhacker bloody ad-menstruation for Ertz ITSREALHELL for the murderer from the beginning, the "Robber"
Both of these principles can be followed rigorously in a time when “the hand of the Jewish people” is strong, which, as we have seen is not necessarily now the present case, even within the land of Israel. Halachah itself contains countervailing concerns of danger to life and hostility.
The characteristic of the halachic ruling, as has been discussed elsewhere, is that it installs Torah into the world in consideration of the specific exigencies of particular situations. It is not dominated or cowered by difficult realities, though it is cognizant of them. It has a Divine norm to install. In issuing a practical ruling, the posek - the preeminent halachic authority or adjudicator - merits to embody the Divine Will with his ruling as to how Torah wants the Divine norm applied to the here and now.
Rv:6:10: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
The application of countervailing considerations of danger to life and hostility, or in its positive formulation darchei sholom, paths of peace themselves require halachic supervision.
By Noahide Peace they shall destroy wonderfully, see Iraq and Iran and all war and all murder from Abel to the last saint of Jesus the Christ, then it is finished, through Jesus the Christ
How and when these apply are known to the halachic process and to the insight of the posek. Equally the posek will may tell us, in circumstances, that now is the time to trust in G-d, Who had commanded us in a Divine norm, as the possession and settlement of the land, and that it must be pursued boldly, notwithstanding all sorts of practical misgivings.
Torah (Talmud Bavli) comprehends not only the exigencies of situations but also human suffering. It is not indifferent, G-d forbid, to the suffering of non-Jews, in this case the Palestinians. Jew and non-Jew as human beings are made in the image of G-d. But how and where that is going to affect the practical Jewish ownership of the land of Israel and the security of the Jewish people, is something for halachah to decide.
collective punishment. The Talmud is clear, only Jews are men, all goyim are less than animals
In the halachic (Their Law) mediation of the norm of the Jewish occupancy of the land of Israel with the exigencies of “hostility”, “paths of peace” and “danger to life” we do find differences among the halachic leaders of the day. Relatively “hawkish” or “dovish” as these rulings may be, they still represent expressions of the “opinion” of Torah (da’as Torah), which also allows for a range of nuances in the application of same basic norms.
Mr Wenig, who has admirably followed his brief in presenting the perspective of international law, concluded with the words of an Israeli Prime Minister, whose life was tragically ended. Yitzchak Rabin placed his trust in the parties of conflict sitting down to construct a peace, a solution. From the point of view of Torah,(Talmud Bavli) the right course of action does not emerge from the consultation of parties, because they together are the source of that solution or proposed action.
Thus Rabin was assassinated by the hassidim
Acts of war and peace must themselves be informed, or supervised by halachah.
Dan Bushwhacker's Law
The opinion of Torah might or might not instruct to make a treaty, but not because treaty-making, the reciprocal agreements of human parties, are intrinsically the normative basis of peace.