Churchill says the Jews are to blame for Anti-Semitism!
At least partially, that is. So scream the headlines today. They're based on recently discovered memoirs written by Sir Winston in 1937 where he basically says that based on the fact that they're hated everywhere, even in countries like the US and England, where they have equal rights and opportunities, we can see that they're partially to blame. They stick out too much, they don't become part of society. They keep their own rules and traditions, even when benefiting from the bounty of that society, no wonder they're hated, the man who would be Prime Minister said. On the advice of an advisor the article was stashed and not printed. It was found by a researcher who publicized it now, probably to tarnish the image of the man voted the greatest Briton of alll time by the English in 2002.
When I see his words I cannot help but make the comparison to today's Chabad - the Bechir of the Bechir SheBeUmos - and the object of much derision by the "Torah World." Why can't they be more like us, respect our Gedolim, and heed our calls? Why do they need to blindly follow their leader even after he's long gone, while our live leaders are out there waiting to be heard by them? Why did their leader stick to his principles even when ridiculed by us to the point where we were soooo right that a five-year-old child could see that? (of course, later, when we we realized our mistakes we never bothered to apologize, but that's beside the point.)
Churchill was a good man, and obviously nothing more should be expected from a Gentile at a time when Jewish blood was cheap. He's no worse than the Jews, good well-meaning Heimishe Jews, who were quick to blame Ari Halberstam hy"d for being shot on the Brooklyn Bridge on that fateful Adar morning. "Why do they have to have those hats and beards and walk around all messy, don't they know that they "Reitz Ohn" the Goyim?! That's right, friends, the multi-million dollar homes, luxury cars, and fur coats don't provoke downtrodden non-Jews, no sireee Bob, it's the scruffy beards on that darned Lubabs!
LOL
ReplyDeleteZezmir
ReplyDeleteyou're a good guy, and quite insightful from what I've seen. From you a "LOL" doesn't cut it. You'll need to write more. I expect LOLs from morons.
Tzig, beautiful corelation ;-). Although I have to say that I really didn't take it seriously, as this man did more to save the Jewish nation than any other politician of the time, and actions speak much louder than words.
ReplyDeleteHirshel, you've got it backwards. The article was not "written by Sir Winston" and suppressed "on the advice of an advisor". On the contrary, it was written for Churchill by a staffer, and Churchill decided not to publish it because he disagreed with it. That staffer was never assigned to write on this topic again.
ReplyDeleteThe Tzig has outdone his own stupidity. This, bar none is the dumbest post you have ever written.
ReplyDeleteAs usual your twelve year old side kick, Hmmm reitz dech on.
How in heaven Ari Halberstam hy'd got into your nonsense is truly remarkable :Does the chasidic and yeshivish world not wear 'black hats' etc? In fact if anything the Lubab are the most goyish looking of any 'chareidi' Jews (though, to fair Lubab are not chareidi and only Jewish based on their birth not practices)Jeans, sneakers, colored shirts etc.
As I've stated before, you are a serious fool.No surprise how Lubab scooped you up.
You have been gang brainwashed, yingeleh.
Churchill was no friend of Israel - remember the mandate days?
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't an evil guy, but I wouldnt say that he was some kind of ohev Yisroel by any streach of the imagination.
He always gets it backwards.
ReplyDeleteYechi hamelech
LUBABOTOMY
ReplyDeleteyou probably were not old enough then to remember now, but at the time there was talk like that, directed at me. So please spare us your sanctimonious cries.
Eli
ReplyDeleteChurchill didn't create the white paper, now did he?
The country was at war when he took over as PM, the last thing he wanted to do then was to provoke the darn Arabs even more.
Hey, people always say things that they later regret, I once said that a local Lubavitcher was a clever guy.
ReplyDeleteWC had a good reason though:
ReplyDeleteOn 6 November 1944 LEHI assassinated Lord Moyne in Cairo. Moyne was the highest ranking British government representative in the region. (Yitzhak Shamir claimed later that Moyne was assassinated because of his support for a Middle Eastern Arab Federation and anti-Semitic lectures in which Arabs were held to be racially superior to Jews.) The assassination act rocked the British government, and outraged Winston Churchill (a close personal friend), the British Prime Minister.
Hirshel,
ReplyDeleteYou write posts that are on the level of five year olds, yet you have to chutzpah to speak against Harry Maryles' well written and thought provoking posts, whether you agree or not.No surprise that Harry can get 200 comments, and good ones on his posts.
Btw, what is this crud ''the Bechir of the Bechir SheBeUmos ''?
Are you implying that you, Lubabs are better than other Jews??
What a joke.What an idiot you are.
>>When I see his words I cannot help but make the comparison to today's Chabad - the Bechir of the Bechir SheBeUmos - and the object of much derision by the "Torah World."
ReplyDeleteWhat is this crap? Is this what the late RMMS taught you to think?
Quote!
ReplyDeleteThat's right, friends, the multi-million dollar homes, luxury cars, and fur coats don't provoke downtrodden non-Jews, no sireee Bob, it's the scruffy beards on that darned Lubabs!
In CH haven't noticed the gutted out buildings and flashy jewlery fur coats etc. only scruffy beards and towels around the necks!
Jonathan and deeply snagged:
ReplyDeletenot only are you deeply snagged, but somehwere along the way you lost whatever sense of humor the good L-rd gave you.
Nothing wrong with having multi million dollar homes if you have the gelt, why not? Jews are often industrious and successful. Are we supposed to walk around with holes in our shoes pretending to be paupers? If my fellow Yidden has come upon their money in a respectable manner, than gei gezundeheidt-enjoy, and to hell with what the goyim think.
ReplyDeleteI can sit and criticize Charedim day and night and have thousands of comments. Those commenters are a dime a dozen and wait to pounce on anything criticizing Charedim. It takes very little thought, and Harry puts little thought into them. Take it from a fellow blogger.
ReplyDeleteTzig, they may have lost their sense of humor, but they provide great humor.
ReplyDeletechita brings up a decent point though. I don't think Tzig was questioning the accumulation of wealth per se, an age old discussion in Jewish thought, but the fact that if anything attracts non-Jewish hatred it is that, not scruffy appearance. The attitude of to hell with what the Goyim think is an appropriate one in general, until you need the aforementioned Goyim.
deeply snagged, johnathan
ReplyDeleteyou criticize Lubavitch for no ideological reason whatsoever, it's just that u have this unreasonable hatred that was sadly ingrained into u at a young age that keeps on resurfacing
Eli: Churchill was in the opposition when the White Paper was issued. He didn't become PM until after the war started, and he lost office almost immediately after the war ended. So he is hardly to blame for Mandatory policy.
ReplyDeleteAnon: The (well-deserved) assasination of Lord Moyne in 1944 can hardly have been responsible for Churchill's alleged attitudes in 1937!
>>you criticize Lubavitch for no ideological reason whatsoever, it's just that u have this unreasonable hatred that was sadly ingrained into u at a young age that keeps on resurfacing
ReplyDeleteCriticsm of Lubavitch? C"V!!! I was just pointing out that calling Lubavitch the chosen of the chosen is crap. Jewish people don't write that way.
Milhouse
ReplyDeleteI re-read the article, I don't see that I got it backwards. Where does it say that it was written by a staffer and that HE advised against it being published?
This article isn't the only thing published on the subject. The column is not some recent discovery. It's been known for a long time, and the circumstances of its writing have been known. It was written for Churchill, by a staffer who was an antisemite, and it was Churchill who killed it. See, for instance, here.
ReplyDelete'I criticize Lubavitch for no reason'
ReplyDeleteOh, so having a new Shabsai Tzvi movement, with an added Elokist twist is not a reason to criticize Lubavitch, among many others?
Yeah, right!
deeply snagged - you see, even in your humorous rants you approach nothing of validity, nothing of substance, nothing to debate. You are either unfamiliar with Shabtai Tzvi, unfamiliar with Lubavitch, or both. Just as there is nothing to debate in someone who declares the Arab situation to be a Holocaust, or Darfur to be a Holocaust. Please don't get lost, your being deeply snagged provides great entertainment.
ReplyDelete(((((((((((((((((YAWN))))))))))))) There are four Elokists out there:
ReplyDeleteZimroni Zick (pronounced Sick)
Ariel Sokolovsky (clinically insane and also responsible for the pilegesh movement - someone put 96'er in his kasha when he was a boy in Moldova and it caused permanent damage!!!!)
Alexander Milchtain (am haaretz and totally marginalized)
Meir Baraness (ShaBaK plant who put a pulsa denura on Pope JP2).
Add to that 50-100 deluded nuts from Tzfas, only 20-30 of whom are really active, 10 or so fringe BT's, and a jerk or 2 exploiting them for political reasons and there is your "Sabbatean" movement. More like a bowel movement to me. (Then you have a small n'shei Shabtai Tzvi movement consisting of four yachnes who made fools of themselves on Zev Brenner's show a few years back.)
I would be far more worried about the problems in your own communities than I would be about a mildly entertaining group of looney tunes in 770. We don't need you to tell us what they are. True, they made a mess of things to the point that I don't want to daven there anymore, but at the end of the day, the reason why we don't take care of them the old fashioned way is ahavas yisroel. If we were on the level of certain other communities, we'd throw them out and let them live on the streets like goyim rather than treating them as Jews who are deluded.
johnothan: please elaborate on your opinion, the reason why Lubavitchers are bechir of the bechir is because, unlike any other group, they listen and do whatever the Rebbe tells them to do, without question, unlike others who find some poisek or Gadol to follow their already formed opinion, and then do whatever it is they want to do in the name of that gadol or poisek.
ReplyDeleteas for deeply snagged:
ReplyDeleteu have it entirely wrong,firstly, as i stated before, u still don't have a reason, u don't have to be too talented to just name a group, u have to give a reason for why u believe that group is actually what u called them.
This article was not written by Churchill, it was written by someone else to appear under Churchill's name, Churchill hated it and killed it. It is being dragged out now by anti-Semites who want to associate Churchill with their filth. The truth is, Churchill was stam a Zionist and a friend of Am Yisroel. Had Churchill been re-elected in 1945, instead of the anti-Semitic socialists in the Labour Party, the early history of Israel would have been different.
ReplyDelete