Comments on: Each teen in Israel to adopt a tomb

By: RichardNYC

RichardNYC — Thu, 26 May 2011 03:02:45 +0000

@DR
I had to do exactly the same thing in a US state cemetery for veterans about ten years ago. Why is 972 constantly grasping at straws? What pathology drives you people to imagine dysfunction where none exists? This new job – the professional Jewish humiliator of Jews – marks a very sad chapter in our history.

By: Piotr Berman

Piotr Berman — Wed, 25 May 2011 20:59:50 +0000

I do not understand the problem. Suppose that young Xi Beta adopts a tomb, say of Psi Delta to care for. Young Xi visits the tomb, waters the grass, plants flowers, removes bird droppings, say, every few months on so. On Halloween, young Xi dresses as a scary ghosts of Mr. Delta (dec.) and goes around his neighborhood for Trick and Treat.

One day a news story informs the public that Psi Delta was a child molester (or, say, a leftist, or a non-Zionist, whatever). Who will console young Xi Beta? Are we assuming a-priori that tombs of child molester (or even the Leftists) are worth caring for? What if children will not accept the magnanimous message that even garbage human beings should be honored in death AND they start to identify with the beneficiaries of their effort (say, be becoming child molesters or Leftist)?

So the initiative is worthy, but one has to address many problems.

By: Kernod

Kernod — Wed, 25 May 2011 12:39:53 +0000

This is more militaristic, crypto-fascist indoctrination, however, no worse than what we have come to expect. Growing up in 1970′s Israel, I was exposed to infinite similar attempts to make me react emotionally to what was and is, quite frankly, a state dogma that defies logic.

This was instilled, as far as I know, very early on in the Zionist project to help people overcome its inherent contradictions. E.g., from a historic-Mapam perspective, the question they had to face was how can you reconcile a liberal, internationalist, socialist ideology with a colonialist project that ultimately had to result in the ethnic cleansing of an indigenous people? The simple answer is “you can’t”. The more complex answer is you can, if and only if, you make it an emotional discussion. That way logic stops playing into it.

The problem is that it is quite a slippery slope and the current Israeli political map, where the vast majority (if not to say almost everyone) is basically a racist, that has no problem with dehumanization, displacement, discrimination, oppression, etc. of the Palestinians, is the end result.

That said — it is the logical conclusion of Israeli education from its very inception by the so-called Zionist left, to this day. Nothing is new.

By: Leonid Levin

Leonid Levin — Tue, 24 May 2011 04:13:09 +0000

In the former Soviet Union, they called this military-patriotic education (военно-патриотическое воспитание). It could be that the idea came from someone from Yisrael Beteinu.

I agree with Dimi that there is something anti-life about this. Dealing with death at a young age is not healthy. Let them live, play, be joyful. There will come a time that they will have to deal with death of family and friends, hopefully not too soon.

Let relatives and friends mourn the fallen soldiers and take care of their graves. Of course, there should be room for the rest to pay tribute to the dead, but maybe the best tribute is to live their lives to the fullest, with respect and compassion towards still living fellow human beings.

By: Ben Israel

Ben Israel — Tue, 24 May 2011 03:29:03 +0000

Carl-you are an in bit of a fix. Of course the Leftist/Progressives are cheering on the Arab masses to take power. But, if you recall the recent PEW poll taken in Egypt, a large majority of Egyptians (something like 80%) want more Islamic law implemented, including the death penalty for Muslim apostates, cutting off hands of thieves and the like. This is bad news for homosexuals which Islam strongly condemns. So do you support “empowering the masses” or homosexual rights which are better off under secular Arab dictators?

By: Mohammad Saifullah

Mohammad Saifullah — Tue, 24 May 2011 00:40:25 +0000

Ben Israel : I am a Muslim.and personally, I would identified more with the Israeli left I would say. yes, from a religious view, I can say that the Orthodox, religious and the settlers share a common point with majority of religious Muslims.but nevertheless,from some point majority of Arab religious Muslims and Muslims cannot share a same stand point with the religious Jews, primarily with THE SETTLERS. yeah, why in the first hand, the settlers decided to live in the ILLEGAL SETTLEMENT?.. religious reason.the Torah. the Talmud.which on the way around, violated the right of the Arab,Arab Muslims to live there. majority Muslims see that as a ” theft “. everybody knows that Israeli left is a secular body. secular, modern, western. differ much with Islamic and Muslims value but somehow, we share a common point to respect the right to live in owns land. that’s matter here.the right to live in the land we were born. not to be exiled.shalom.

By: max

max — Mon, 23 May 2011 20:50:39 +0000

Carl, I’m afraid you’re mistaken. The Hamas charter explicitly states that the whole land is Waqf, therefore holy and therefore can’t be negotiated. Several high PA reps also used this explanation. I read that Arafat used this claim as well, but haven’t seen the actual transcript.

By: Carl

Carl — Mon, 23 May 2011 20:31:38 +0000

“I’m afraid I don’t understand… the Waqf is the religious custodian of the land, so what doesn’t hold?”

That would be ‘a little bit’ of land rather than ‘the’ land. If the Israeli claim to ‘the land’ was just for the Temple Mount, synagogues and a smattering of buildings, well things would be a bit different I’d think. And your housing situation would be even worse.

The Palestinian claim is fundamentally based on a more prosaic ‘I, and my family, and them before, was born here,’ rather than ‘God said I could have it,’ though given, Hamas has tried hard on that point.

By: max

max — Mon, 23 May 2011 20:12:23 +0000

@Carl “The Waqf point doesn’t really hold, as that’s about property & custodianship rather than a religious claim”
I’m afraid I don’t understand… the Waqf is the religious custodian of the land, so what doesn’t hold?

By: Carl

Carl — Mon, 23 May 2011 19:05:05 +0000

I’d say you’ve got a bit of a point there Ben in that the two religious blocks on either side are likely key to an agreement and do have things in common. That said, the things they have in common are really superficial, though I must say it warms my heart to see the three Abrahamic faiths uniting in hate over the Jerusalem Pride Parade.

The fact that you understand the Palestinian claim seems to me to make an accomodation less likely: if I understand you think it’s night while I think it’s day, we may well see each others’ points but we’ll never agree. The Waqf point doesn’t really hold, as that’s about property & custodianship rather than a religious claim. Obviously al Aqsa et al cross over into a religious claim, but that’s a one to a building, not a country.