Rabbinical Council says "no innocents in war"
Sponsored Links
Rabbinical Council says "no innocents in war"
Submitted by Khalid on Sat, 2006/08/05 - 00:13The Yesha Rabbinical Council, commenting on the Qana massacre, has said that during the time of war, there are "no innocents".
Yesha Rabbinical Council: During time of war, enemy has no innocents
The Yesha Rabbinical Council announced in response to an IDF attack in Kfar Qanna that "according to Jewish law, during a time of battle and war, there is no such term as 'innocents' of the enemy."
All of the discussions on Christian morality are weakening the spirit of the army and the nation and are costing us in the blood of our soldiers and civilians," the statement said. (Efrat Weiss)
(07.30.06, 17:37)
The disdain for the life of others, the jab at "Christian" morality, and the tone of superiority is appalling ...
I wonder what the response would be if this was an Imam and a Muslim Sharia Council that was saying the same thing ...
Meanwhile, the Antiochian Orthodox Christian church in North America has issued a statement on this atrocity, calling Qana by its New Testament name (Cana) and linking it to Jesus Christ. They also quote Joshua 6:21.
»
So true
"The Yesha Rabbinical Council announced in response to an IDF attack in Kfar Qanna that "according to Jewish law, during a time of battle and war, there is no such term as 'innocents' of the enemy."
Translates so easily to:
"The al-Qaida leader announced in response to an al-Qaida attack in Tel-Aviv that "according to Muslim law, during a time of battle and war, there is no such term as 'innocents' of the enemy."
That I can only shake my head in dismay and agree 100% with you. There are so many double standards in the coverage many Western media offer...
Alas :(
My observation
My observation is the statement was stating what in fact has been the policy of the US and Israel, that killing of innocents is sanctioned, unless of course the public finds out in which case a different spin is put on it.
Looking at the actions of nations would lead one to conclude that shedding of innocent life is only viewed as a problem if it causes domestic support for the war to suffer.
No real solution ever comes from war.
Yes and no
Yes, I agree that killing civilians is only seen as a problem if it creates a public relations issue that causes the media to highlight the plight of civilians and hence the support for war wanes, and politicians have to answer to the people.
No, in that in this case, it is an official religious authority, and not the state per se, that is sanctioning what the state is doing. Instead of religion being a source of compassion, it justifies aggression.
Moreover, it is a respected authority and not a runaway illegal entity.
If this rhetoric came from Al Qaeda or the Taliban, it would have been decried by everyone. But in this case, no coverage by the media, nor condemnation by the public ...
We often hear the loaded question of whether Muslims ever condemn terrorism. Can we by corollary say that Jews do support killing of non-Jewish civilians?
--
Khalid Baheyeldin
Yes but ...
Yes but some not all just like some Muslims and Christians would support killing of people not from their religion.
I read with interest an article in the paper which also received some TV coverage about Muslim & Jewish women having a peace rally in Ottawa.
Your right though about a double standard (bias) in media coverage and we are all encouraged to look for other viewpoints.
The following excepts come from a Mennonite Church USA release which speak to that, particularly the last point.
*All the civilians and all the combatants are children of God. We weep for the souls of the warriors who turn to violence for salvation as we weep for the lives of the innocent caught in events they can't control.
*Each visible act of violence is caused by numerable invisible structural causes which must be resolved before there can be just peace.
Anything that impedes the potential of humans to use all the gifts given them by God is violence.
*Media has a viewpoint. We must read several different accounts and not rely on news from one country or one political perspective.
Post new comment