Free Speech and its Limitations

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Netanel Livni says:

    I am a little uncomfortable by the equivalence made between the islamist terrorists and those Jews (like Yigal Amir, Baruch Goldstein, Natan-Zada) who took similar actions. Surely there is a significant difference. All the Jews mentioned took whatever actions they did in order to achieve a certain specific aim (stop Oslo, stop another massacre in Hebron, stop Gaza expulsion). The killing itself was not the goal. This is not the case for the islamists where the very act of killing is considered virtuous regardless of the results.

    I understand that many western Jews feel embarrassed by the actions of those Jews who have used violence to achieve political ends. Does this embarrassment entitle us to judge them as harshly as the worst of our enemies?

  2. Menachem Petrushka says:

    I have 2 comments to make.

    When Rabbi Rosenblum refers to no Torah True Jew ever killing a sinner, I suppose he is referrung to modern times and not being tautological about it. Even so, the statement is correct only because of the will of Hashem and/or the incompetence of Torah True Jews.
    This summer, a ‘Charedi’ fellow stabbed 2 marchers, one in the neck, in the gay parade in Jerusalem to protest the toevah.

    We do not truly know the motives of Goldstein and Nada. If what Nada did was to stop the disengagement, then how could anyone come to his defense. The only thing that would have stopped the disengagement was dead Jews not dead Arabs. What Mr. Livni is saying is that Nada wanted to have the Arabs retaliate for his actions,murdering enough Jews to force Sharon to halt the disengagement. I believe that Mr. Livni is correct and that Nada and his ilk are the greatest threat to the yidden the world over becuase they want to start a milchemes gog umagog which they are sure that they will win.

Pin It on Pinterest