Happiness and pain: Shalit returns home
Looking more like the 19-year-old he was when he was abducted rather than the 25-year-old he is now, Gilad Shalit has returned home.
I’ve already written about the conundrum such cases represent. But one thing that cannot be doubted is how happy his parents must be to see him, and how relieved he is to be home, although he’ll have a lot of healing and adjusting to do.
As for Netanyahu and Israel, it’s considerably more mixed:
Netanyahu told reporters that the case of the abducted soldier was among the toughest he inherited when he assumed office 2 1 / 2 years ago. He said Israel had paid a “heavy price” to secure Shalit’s release.
“On this day,” Netanyahu said, “all of us are united in happiness and pain.”
…Israeli officials offered a subdued homecoming ceremony for Shalit, reflecting their concern about the Palestinian militants who were being freed…
Meanwhile, for the Palestinians and the Arab world, it’s unalloyed happiness—and triumph. Everything has worked out exactly as planned, and hostage-taking has been richly rewarded, as it has many times before [emphasis mine]:
The first busloads of released Palestinians, including women, crossed the border into Egypt around the same time Shalit was handed over to the Israelis. The Palestinians were taken to Gaza and the West Bank, where jubilant crowds awaited them…
In Gaza, buses transporting the freed prisoners arrived about midday. Crowds of Hamas fighters, including some of the men who kidnapped Shalit in 2006, were among the well-wishers. Relatives swarmed over the buses looking for their loved ones.
The crowds in Gaza City exhorted militants to seize more soldiers for future swaps, the Associated Press reported. “The people want a new Gilad,” thousands chanted at a rally for the freed Palestinian prisoners.
Now, that’s a cycle of violence—and appeasement.
Friends, please consider http://tinyurl.com/6e4vncl . “nuff said . . .
I would have chosen a different method.
The only way to avoid such dilemma in future is to introduce death penalty for terrorism and apply it in every case when terrorists were captured. And kill them at sight every time they do not surrender first.
no conundrum
the answer is the same as which came first the chicken or the egg… the chicken does not come first as the chicken is a realized something, while the egg is still nothing but potential…
the potential comes first in that question
in the problem that seems to be a quandry here, your pitting an actuality against a potential, and saying its a shame to act on the actuality, because of the potential.
no it isnt… on TWO counts…
the moral account above that one acts morally on what is, not what isnt… or a potential that may never happen… and otherwise follows the lessons as given to the jewish people by god through abraham…
The idea that the jewish faith and people in their homeland would ignore the bible to play secular games of ethics
Which recently they discovered the norm we now apply, fits SOCIOPATHS!!! it was on physorg. ie, a sociopath would push a person on a track to save five more… thats pragmatic, the ethics of sociopaths… but a compassionate person could not murder one to save 10…
notice that the soviets, the chinese, and germans all thought it was ok to exterminate some to save others.. a sociopathic moral ethos we now think normal… (kind of makes it easier for them, you know how oppressed they are from acting)
So the Torah and Bible take the lesson on what to do here from sodom and gomorah… the lesson comes from the point of god forgiving
In Genesis 18, God sends three men, thought by most commentators to have been angels appearing as men, to Abraham in the plains of Mamre.
After the angels received the hospitality of Abraham and Sarah, his wife, God reveals to Abraham that he will destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, because their cry is great, “and because their sin is very grievous.”
In response, Abraham reverently inquires of God if he would spare the city if 50 righteous people were found in it, to which God agrees he would not destroy it for the sake of the righteous yet dwelling therein. Abraham then inquires of God for mercy at lower numbers (first 45, then 40, then 30, then 20, and finally at 10), with God agreeing each time.
Two of the angels of God proceed to Sodom and are met by Abraham’s nephew Lot, who convinces the angels to lodge with him, and they eat with his family.
Genesis 19:4-5 describes what followed, which confirms its end
(may mean have sex with them)
In response, Lot refuses to give his guests to the inhabitants of Sodom and, instead, offers them his two virgin daughters to “do to them whatever you like.” However, they refuse this offer and threaten to do worse to Lot than they would have done to his guests, and then lunged toward Lot to break down the door. Lot’s angelic guests rescue him and strike the men with blindness.
Then, (not having found even 10 righteous people in the city) they command Lot to gather his family and leave, revealing that they were sent to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. As they make their escape, the angels command Lot and his family not to look back under any circumstance. However, as Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed by Yahweh with fire and brimstone, Lot’s wife looks back at the city in defiance of the angels’ specific command, and she becomes a pillar of salt.
so how can they let something happen to what they are responsible for and still have morals and ethics?
the assumptive future is not real, it may never happen, it may happen worse than you assume…
whether it does, under judaic ideals, doesnt matter, as that is the future and the future is gods… today, we must act for today
so, a whole bunch of the questions we put forth dont even exist under that reality!!!!!!!!!
do you kill hitler to save the others?
no. Not until he does what he does…
Do you put a man in jail if he is innocent? no
do you let the guilty go free, to save one innocent? yes (but changing to no – notice how many pre crime things coming up)
the west is based on this idea of the importance of the individual, which leads you to once again, act on the now..
now, in the real, there is this man
now in the real, they did what is right and let a thousand guilty go free so that one innocent is saved.
there is no dilemma unless your secular…
so Sergey, your wrong… your still trying to establish some code that makes it ok. it wont work, as without that thousand you would have killed, you would have no coin to bargain for an innocent… you also will kill innocents trying to meet the idea
is it any wonder the secular and atheist soviets you are so familiar with come up with such dysfunctional responses? and how do they do as a whole? (not just the elite?)
how have the jews done as a whole?
pretty good for a population thats been a target for a few thousands years… they have seen more enemies die out and fade away than most others (except for maybe the chinese)…
its funny to watch people with no moral compass try to reach the same end of a moral compass through some logic… but the truth is that they tend to accept the potential as an actuality in their arguments…
perhaps there will be an accident and all of Palestine will go boom… then what? hindsight would be that an innocent was condemned by his own for their fear of what never happened.
Sergey… if the west thought the same way they would have rolled through russia slautering the communists…
also by the way… do those terrorist laws apply to the FSB members and the politicos sending them out? shall i give you the names we now know from manby places of those who funded terrorism? care to see the photos of ammo boxes for them with the soviet lettering? how about the tons of semtec?
no… you just want the little nobodies bieng used to get it… no one really wants to go afte the leaders of the ststes who invented and funded it and take credit for it in their biographies…
by the way..
abortion uses the same amoral moral argument of the future potential dictating the current action…
this is why so many women regret… as the future never happened, it was better than they thought, and so on.. and so, the potential that seemed to justify the action, never could..
being afraid of dreams to the point of killing actualities… well thats not ethical or moral..
why dont we just make a dictatorship, lock everyone down…
again.. they lock em all down because of the potential of a few… and the unethical willingness to use a suppositional fantasy to pretend to know the future and then act.
During the holocaust there were too many Jews who waited for a miracle, or for the Nazis to act humanely. I see the same mentality at work in releasing these terrorists. There have been close to two hundred Israelis killed by terrorists previously released due to exchanges so it is not as though the Israelis don’t know what to expect. These exchanges are not rational, nor is the support for for them justified under Jewish Law. Said law prohibits the saving of one life at the cost of another innocent life which is exactly what this does. There is something sick in the Israeli character that permits something like this.
I’m reminded of something Garret Hardin wrote, “every society has the right to go to hell in its own way.” This is sad, it says the Israelis do not respect their own lives, that the Palestinian cause is legitimate and strengthens the radicals (not that they need it).
The writing is on the wall.
What a terrible price Israel will be paying for Shalit.
I’m so sorry.
Happy for his family, happy that he is back on Israeli soil, hope he gets all of the medical/psychological treatment that he will undoubtedly need.
The disgusting savages that he was exchanged for – not one showing any remorse whatsoever – all deserve the worst fate possible. I only hope they are taken out sooner rather than later.
To top it off? The UN is concerned that the rights of some of the freed prisoners may be sent to places without their consent.
God has declared “my thoughts are not your thoughts and my ways are not your ways.”
The trade was much more than one life for 1000 lives. Artfldgr provided the example of how highly God values a righteous person. No one will ever be able to prove whether this was the right move or not because how does one place in value all that will happen. And yet, I believe that there are times when actions, which may be generally and usually illogical, define a variable which becomes the crux of the matter, the straw that breaks the camels back, the gram that tipped the scales . . . and without it, the whole history would have been different. Abraham believed in the goodness of God; David believed in His forgiveness.
Does anyone actually believe the Israeli’s who made this deal are stupid? That they do not know the consequences? That they are generally illogical? The decision is baffling and maddening until one allows for a different type of logic and math, one that is informed by faith and sees more than “sacrifice the few for the many.” Again, normally, such logic prevails but consider how and when. We sacrifice young men as soldiers, but with a whole nation equipping and training and supporting them.
It is a terrible, terrible price Israel has paid, but who really knows whether or not it will be worth it. My guess is that it will.
Welcome home Gilad Shalit !
“healing” and “adjusting” are understatements. Reintegerating into normal life after being held hostage is a major uphill battle. For Shalit the battle will be even greater because of his now fame, the framework of him being “everyone’s son,” and the deal that was made for his release. Pray this young man can make it through, because it is going to be one gigantic challenge. He will need enormous ongoing mental health support. Prayers for Galit.
I had a thought, probably a weak one. Has it occurred to anyone that by allowing the worse elements in Palestinian society to be portrayed and accepted as heroes Israel is releasing a poison into Palestinian society. At the end of the day the Palestinians are left with no state, a lot a public sympathy but even greater private dread. If I could not have friends I would want my enemies decadent, amoral self-confident and incapable of change like the Palestinians. A society like that is not cohesive, the members can never fully trust their neighbors not to find a reason why they should not be murdered, they cannot mobilize as a healthy society does a specific constructive objective. They could be used but never trusted. Any creative impulse would be channeled into terrorism, support for terrorism or condemned. It could produce no literature or philosophy beyond hate propaganda, no engineering not related to bomb making, no economics not related to support for terrorism. It would more in common with an institute for the criminally insane than any normal state.
Of course the simplest explanation is the most likely, the Israelis are neurotic morons.
If I could not have friends I would want my enemies decadent, amoral self-confident and incapable of change like the Palestinians.
If I refused real friendship as a country I would want my enemies decadent, amoral self-confident and incapable of change like the Americans.
Perhaps the Israelis will have to start taking a “take NO prisoners” approach to all future conflicts with the palestinian scum.
At least, the market has confirmed that ONE Israeli is worth ONE THOUSAND palis.
The “conundrum” is simple. The Israelis value life. The politcal system/ death cult of islam holds life to be worthless. HOW MANY TIMES CAN LIBERALS HEAR THIS SIMPLE TRUTH WITHOUT LEARNING IT?
Oh wait! I forgot! Liberals are “compassionate” and “care” about people!……hahahahahahahaha!
and now i reveal what hope and change means..
🙂
the principle of conflict and tension (hegel)
ergo they hate peaceful tea party, and favor the OWS… why they say they need a kent state moment…
“We deny that there is a moral law which comes to men from out-side of history, outside of society. It is a fraud. We devise our own moral rules according to the needs of the class struggle.” Lenin…
the principle of negation.
If you want to grow a crop of barley, you have to sow seed in the ground, and that seed must die before there can be new life.
in order to have a new society, the old society and culture has to die, and for that to die, the old people have to die… This idea has been taken over by Communism, which insists that there has to be wholesale death before there can be a general reconstruction of society.
in the past the chinese talked (and now again) about bringing the changes and such by nuclear war… and russia said it would cost them 300 million people.
“That is good; there can be new life only where there is this kind of wholesale death.”
was their response…
“the principle of transformation” CHANGE…
The Communist leader, therefore, insists that he is busy regulating the human environment in such a way as to produce the equivalent of the state change of a 32º Fahrenheit transformation of water, so that by a “leap” –that is his expression! –a new order of things may come into being.
that by creating the right conditions, one can make a fundemental transformation happen fast, the way water changes to ice. all you have to do, is convince the people that the perfect glass of ice is a 30 degree one, but not teach what happens..
all you have ot do is call for the destruction of the current system… and not explain what happens.
and Dr. Martin H. Scharlemann points out (and i borrow a lot from him in this post)..
that this is a “a secular version of Christian hope”…
that as Saint PAul says… when the conditions are right as they see it, change will happen suddenly and christian hope will be fulfilled and “in the twinkling of an eye,” history will come to an end (fukiyama?), and there will become the kingdom of glory…
so he was imitating an inversion of christianity… even with his comments as to collective salvation.. hope… transformational change…
and why he had the intenationale played…
‘Tis the final conflict, let each stand in his place: The International Soviet shall be the human race
WWI and WWII… wars to end all wars? final conflicts? get it yet?
or almadinajad thinking that if he starts a transformational war, he gets his 12th imam… the communists think if they have that war, they get the word… the fabians too…
so what does hope and change mean?
man is just about 100 dollars in chemicals, nothing special… getting rid of capitalism (judaism) isnt an issue… is it?
not if your on the left…
if your on the left, you WANT holocaust…
look at the kids in the parks..
complaining someone stole their $5,500 lap top and cameras, but in the same breath wanting to kill and steal from those who have even more…
they are the cannon fodder of the revolution…
the first line that dies to tire out the enemy before the crack troops come in… the expendible riff raff they will just have to clean up anyway..
Cannon fodder is an informal, derogatory term for military personnel who are regarded or treated as expendable in the face of enemy fire. The term is generally used in situations where soldiers are forced to deliberately fight against hopeless odds (with the foreknowledge that they will suffer extremely high casualties) in an effort to achieve a strategic goal. An example is the trench warfare in World War I. The term may also be used (somewhat pejoratively) to differentiate infantry from other forces (such as artillery, air force or the navy), or to distinguish expendable low-grade or inexperienced soldiers from supposedly more valuable veterans.
The term derives from fodder, food for livestock. Soldiers are the metaphorical food for enemy cannon fire.
OWS
ergo:
We need a Kent state moment…
too bad the man who fired the gun at kent state isnt around to fire another one and get it all going eh?
The supposedly first attested use of the expression “cannon fodder” belongs to a French writer, Frané§ois-René de Chateaubriand. In his anti-Napoleonic pamphlet “De Buonaparte et des Bourbons”, published in 1814, he criticized the cynical attitude towards recruits, that prevailed in the end of Napoleon’s reign: “On en était venu é ce point de mépris pour la vie des hommes et pour la France, d’appeler les conscrits la matié¨re premié¨re et la chair é canon” – “the contempt for the lives of men and for France herself has come to the point of calling the conscripts ‘the raw material’ and ‘the cannon fodder’.”
and they love that period as well!
for it was a bloody revolution they can study
unlike the longshormen hanging and murdering blacks in ny…
See also:
Forlorn hope, the initial wave of troops attacking a fortress or other strongpoint, who usually took terrible casualties.
Redshirt, a character whose sole purpose is to die violently soon after being introduced. This term was originally used to describe the red-shirted security personnel of the original Star Trek series.
[hey! dont communist protesters in the OWS and other things wear red shirts and are expendable?]
Mook, from mook jung (Cantonese for “dead wood” or “wooden dummy”) – the same but on the enemy’s side.
did you know thats where its from?
Sacrificial lamb, a metaphorical reference for a person who has little if any chance of surviving an upcoming challenge, but seeks to sacrifice him or herself for the common good.
Meat shield, informal and often derogatory expression for someone put forth to absorb an attack or shelter another, such as a hostage held to block bullets.
Volkssturm, a hastily trained and equally poorly equipped paramilitary force used by Germany in the end of the Second World War.
useful idiots
innocence clubs
Tianeman square protesters…
Red Shirts (Southern United States)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Shirts_%28Southern_United_States%29
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The Red Shirts or Redshirts of the Southern United States were white paramilitary groups in the 19th century, active primarily after the formal Reconstruction era of the United States. They first arose in Mississippi in 1875, when Democratic Party private militias adopted red shirts to make themselves more visible and threatening to Republicans, both whites and freedmen. Similar groups formed in other Southern states also adopted Red Shirts.
Among the most prominent Red Shirts were supporters of Democratic Party candidate Wade Hampton during the campaigns for the South Carolina gubernatorial elections of 1876 and 1878. The Red Shirts were one of a number of paramilitary organizations, such as the White League in Louisiana, that arose in the continuing insurgency of white Democrats in the South in the 1870s. Such groups acted as “the military arm of the Democratic Party.”[1] While engaging in terrorism, in contrast to secret vigilante groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, the Red Shirts and other paramilitary groups worked openly, were more organized and directed their efforts at political goals: to restore the Democrats to power by turning out Republicans, and repressing civil rights and voting by blacks.[2] During the 1876 campaign, the Red Shirts of North Carolina also played prominent roles.
Red Shirts created a show of force to intimidate both white and black bystanders to vote for the Democrats or refrain from voting. The Red Shirts were one of a number of white paramilitary organizations, such as the White League in Louisiana and other Deep South states, that arose to push Republicans out and suppress African Americans’ civil rights and voting rights. They were especially active in states with African-American majorities. They broke up Republican meetings, disrupted their organizing, and intimidated or barred blacks at the polls. Many freedmen stopped voting, and a few voted for Democrats under the public pressure. The Red Shirts freely used violence and assassination for intimidation, as did other private militias. In the Piedmont counties of Aiken, Edgefield, Barnwell and others, freedmen were driven from their homes and whipped, and some leaders were murdered. When it came to the 1876 election, in Edgefield and Laurens counties Democrats voted “early and often” and barred freedmen from the polls.
After the election on November 7, a protracted dispute between Daniel Chamberlain and Hampton ensued as both claimed victory. Because of the massive election fraud, Edmund Mackey, a Republican member of the South Carolina House of Representatives, called upon the “Hunkidori Club” from Charleston to eject Democratic members from Edgefield and Laurens counties from the House. Word spread through the state. By December 3, approximately 5,000 Red Shirts assembled at the State House to defend the Democrats. Hampton appealed for calm and the Red Shirts dispersed.
As a result of a national political compromise, Pres. Rutherford B. Hayes ordered the removal of Federal troops from the state on April 3, 1877.
The white Democrats completed their political takeover of South Carolina. In the gubernatorial election of 1878, the Red Shirts made a nominal appearance as Hampton was re-elected without opposition.
Future South Carolina Democratic politicians such as Ben Tillman and Ellison Smith, proudly claimed their association with the Red Shirts as a bona fide for white supremacy.
its another facet of the hayes tilden thing i referred to in the past.
So anyone know any of that?
anyone know how the HAMPTONS got its name where the NAZI and PROGRESSIVES marched for SOCIAL JUSTICE?
here is a picture of obamas social justice crowd
merikadeutscher Bund Parade
on eastern 86. Street in New York City, 30. October 1939
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/German_American_Bund_NYWTS.jpg/727px-German_American_Bund_NYWTS.jpg
the link was from noam chomsky page that tried to make 9/11 the reichstag fire… oy… yet, knowing that, does he recognize the verbiage of social justice and so on?
i suggest a quick read of
The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics
By Edwin Black
it would really show you the progressives, the eugenics, and the desires of the people who are now in power…(again – last two times we had world wars… )…
artfldgr, seek additional professional help!
” ‘The people want a new Gilad,’ thousands chanted at a rally for the freed [Arab setter] prisoners.”
Thousands. It says thousands. Not a few. Not a tiny group. Not even hundreds. But thousands.
This “tiny minority of vocal troublemakers” is a Humanist myth–born of the Humanist view of human beings as basically good, with a few “obstructions” causing them to act, um, “irrationally.”
We’ve heard it time and again: “Only a few. Only a vocal minority. Don’t judge by the actions of a few. The majority wants the same good life as you do.” Beating like a drum, this steady beat of the Humanist lie.
But God’s truth, the Torah, says human beings, when left along to their devices, when not actively resisting the natural urge that is within them, drift automatically, not toward good, but toward evil.
Therefore, it is perfectly possible for the majority of a society to be evil. In fact, history bears out that this has more often been so (what is history if not mostly the history of human violence?).
And therefore it will be understood as the sanest and most rational course of action, that which Jewish Law says (in the case of the Jews and their land), that the only non-miraculous solution to such a predicament, to such a never-ending cycle of terrorism and extortion for temporary appeasement of terrorism, is nothing less than mass expulsion, as detailed out in Numbers 33:50—53.
The threat of terrorism will not end until the entire population from which 100% of the terrorism originates is forcibly relocated. This is true for the case of this local conflict at the very least.
So are the Israeli’s installing implantable gps locators in their soldiers yet? I’ve done some cursory digging and it seems there are chips the size of a grain of rice that are powered by electrical impulses of the body, and which can relay their location down to about 5ft. Seems like a good idea, knowing where your soldiers are in case of capture.
So happy for Shalit and his family. Best wishes on a successful recovery.
Here is a link to the aforementioned gps tracker. http://www.lightninggps.com/personal-tracking/gps-implant.html