Accusation of genocide against Israel: This is a rhetorical weapon, not a serious legal or historical argument. The UN Genocide Convention defines genocide narrowly (intent to destroy a group in whole or part), and nothing in Israel’s Gaza war remotely fits the Shoah’s systematic annihilation program.
Equating Gaza with the Shoah: This creates a false equivalence. It trivializes the Holocaust by comparing it to a conventional (albeit tragic and brutal) military conflict. That’s a classic form of Holocaust distortion, which scholars recognize as a component of Holocaust denial.
Exposing the distortion: equating Shoah ↔ Gaza is not just “bad taste” but an active rewriting of history. Naming the antisemitism: Holocaust denial is a recognized form of antisemitism (see IHRA working definition). Turning the charge: Instead of defending Israel on impossible moral terrain (as if Jews must prove innocence of genocide), have unmasked the pig church “moral” denial of Jewish historical trauma.
Holocaust Denier as an accusation: It’s not exactly a counter-argument about Gaza itself (so in that sense it’s not a direct rebuttal). It does however expose the vast under-belly of this Church “morality” pig. Made a valid exposure of the rhetorical abuse—that this morality pig antisemite, openly trafficks in Holocaust denial “illegal drugs” by trivialization.
Released hostage Eli Sharabi met Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong in Canberra yesterday. In Australia, as the headline speaker for… _______________________________________ _______________________________________ The recognition of Israeli national independence and the opposition to UN Resolutions 242, 338, 446, and 2334 can vary significantly among countries, often influenced by their political alignments, historical contexts, and diplomatic relationships. The U.S. recognizes Israel’s right to exist and has historically supported Israel in various international forums. While it has acknowledged the importance of the resolutions, it has often criticized them as biased against Israel. Iran views the resolutions as part of a Western agenda to maintain control over the Middle East and undermine Palestinian rights.
The Iranian government often frames its support for Palestine as a resistance against imperialism and colonialism. The Venezuelan government has adopted an anti-imperialist stance and often criticizes Western policies in the Middle East. All Arab and Muslim countries prior to the Camp David Accords and the Abraham Accords abhorred the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East as defined by the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the Palestine Mandate of 1922.
The language of “withdrawal of Israeli forces from occupied territories” the language of Quartet imperialism. All two-state solutions always resulted in further wars and Great Power intervention. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq & Kuwaite, the Indian Pakistan wars etc.
Prior to the Camp David Accords (1978) and the Abraham Accords (2020), many Arab and Muslim countries rejected the notion of Jewish self-determination in the region. UN Resolution 3379 – Zionism is Racism serves as objective proof. Not till 1964 did the KGB and Arafat opportunism embrace the flag/label of Palestine. During the British mandate Arabs rejected the name Palestine because its a name based upon the Balfour Declaration of 1917.
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Maimonides discuss the same thing — the unchanging basis of all that exists.
Maimonides discusses this as an idea/a subject for contemplation.
Maharishi discusses the same as a personal experience in meditation.
The experience confirms the idea. The idea clarifies the experience. At the same time, the experience clarifies the idea; the idea, in its universality, confirms the experience.
I
“1. The foundation of all foundations and the pillar of wisdom is to know that there is a Primary Being who brought into being all existence. All the beings of the heavens, the earth, and what is between them came into existence only from the truth [i.e. reality] of His being.
2. If one would imagine that He [or: It] does not exist, no other being could possibly exist.
3. If one would imagine that none of the entities aside from Him [or: It] exist, He alone would continue to exist, and the nullification of their [existence] would not nullify His existence, because all the [other] entities require Him and He, blessed be He, does not require them nor any one of them…
4. This is implied by the prophet’s statement: ‘And God, your Lord, is true’ 1 – i.e., He alone is true and no other entity possesses truth that compares to His truth. This is what [is meant by] the Torah’s statement: ‘There is nothing else aside from Him’ 2 – i.e., aside from Him, there is no true existence like His.” 3
II
“This thing that the relative is born of (the Absolute), this is to understand what is behind the relative –changing, changing, changing. [i.e. the ‘Relative’ — always changing — is born of the ‘Absolute’ — never changing]. Now we analyze what this change is and what is the ultimate value of this change. Then we know that the change is very heavy, or very gross, very clear change on the surface.
Deep within the change is lesser change, lesser change, lesser change. At the deepest value of change there is least change. Only when we try to know what exists underneath the change, what is the reality of change, then we come to know that there is no field of change.
This is what physics does. All these molecules and then atoms and then electrons and then the subatomic particles and then very fine particles, and high energy, fine particles are high energy and then eventually ground state, least variation. Least variation means maximum order. Order increases. Disorder becomes less and less and less and less. That means activity becomes less and less and then eventually, vacuum state. This vacuum state may be said to be Absolute, non-changing, no change, nothing. And a little, little manifest value we may say, is that ground state where the things are not moving, no activity. But the ground state itself breathes life. There is something there, very fine, relative.
So, this is analysis of the relative which eventually locates the Absolute in an area where relativity is nonexistent, beyond the finest relative existence, Absolute. So, this is physical analysis or analysis of the activity.
In Indian philosophy it’s called Karma Mimamsa; Karma – action.
Mimamsa – of action, analysis of action, analysis of action. What kind of action? Gross action, subtle action, subtler action, subtlest action. Now all this on the basis of a field of life which has no activity in it, vacuum state according to physics, Absolute according to the Science of Creative Intelligence, ultimate reality.
Now it’s like the top of the mountain, very windy and as you come along the slope the wind is less and less and less and less. You come down the foot of the hill, no wind, it’s all protected. Great activity, less activity, less activity, no activity at the foot. Just like that, top of the mountain, the top. Now what is happening you’re on the top of the mountain? You are able to see vast distances. And as you come along on the slope you see less, you see less. Vision becomes restricted, vision becomes, because the height is less. You come to the foot of the mountain and you can see only this much.
Now, the reality of vision at the foot of the mountain is completely different from the reality of the vision on the middle of the mountain.
And this is completely different from the reality vision from the top of the mountain. So, when a man standing on the top of the mountain, he says, “Oh I’m seeing this much”, a man at the foot of the hill says, “I’m seeing this much”, both are correct. No one is false, correct because he sees only this much, he can only see this much and he can describe only this much. So, this is the reality of this stand. A man on the middle of the mountain, he has a different level of stand. From his level whatever he sees he describes. He is capable of describing more than the man on the foot of the mountain. But still that more is much less compared to the man on the top of the mountain.
So, it depends upon at what level of awareness one experiences the environment. In Unity one experiences the environment. One finds no differences, nothing, he has a different picture of the world. In God Consciousness, completely a different picture of the world; the world is very fascinating, it’s beautiful. In CC, it has a completely different status, it’s always changing, I’m not changing. I have great superiority over all that which…. I’m the lord of all I survey and all that… CC. In transcendence the world doesn’t exist. In waking state everything is so dear and so fine and so nice, localized values, all localized. In dream it has a different fascination. In sleep nothing exists.” 4
III
Both Maharishi and Maimonides are telling us that full human perception embraces both the ever-changing creation and its/our unchanging source, too. Short of that, we’re not fully developed human beings.
Is there a Biblical model for this?
Yes — the perception of Adam and Havah/Eve in the Garden of Eden. Afterwards, Torah describes those for whom this perception was a normal experience as ones who “walked with God.” Later, the prophets exemplify this. King David — writer and singer of the Psalms — represents this, too.
The promise of Torah and TaNaCh is that this will someday be the norm for all humanity, forever. As the Hasidic text “Tanya” teaches:
“This, in fact, is the whole [purpose] of man and the purpose for which he, and all the worlds, both upper and lower, were created: that G‑d should have such a dwelling place here below…” 5
5Tanya; ch. 33 _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Maimonides on parallel tracks. Both of them failed to distinguish two radically different systems of law – the fundamental day and night distinction between Jewish common law from Roman statute law.
T’NaCH\Talmudic משנה תורה Legislative review-Constitutional common law – inductive, precedent-based, always applied within the צדק צדק תרדוף “Torah Faith” of courtroom context (עדות, דינים, פרשנות). Knowledge of God (ידע), directly bound to how justice defines Faith as an eternal obligation of Israel’s acceptance of the Torah at Sinai. Based upon the precedent and testimony of Moshe and Aaron standing before the Court of Par’o and the abuse of beating Hebrew slaves.
“Foundation of foundations” in Rambam’s Yesodei HaTorah a false codified abstraction—but in the Mishna/Gemara world, “foundation” means judicial justice; procedural rules wherein judges and common law Sanhedrin lateral courtrooms build precedent-based “Brief” wherein the prosecutor and defense attorneys – Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel argue their precedent “Briefs” before one another in court. This latter common law “foundation”, it and it alone functions as the legal bedrock יסוד, not assimilated Greek or Roman metaphysical speculation abstractions.
Roman statute law (and Indian metaphysics) – deductive, top-down, treating truth as an absolute principle or essence outside of human courtroom process. The 8th middah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev defines truth as “PATH” or “Halacha”. Both Maharishi and Rambam slip into the Greek/Roman assimilation mold; a direct Torah violation of negative commandments. Their philosophical Absolute – a static ontological given. Not a lived בניני אבות Sinai oath alliance to rule the conquered lands of Canaan with Sanhedrin common law courtroom justice; which like a korban dedicates the Chosen Cohen People to pursue tohor time-oriented commandments to pursue justice – fair compensation of damages – among our People. Both these latter day men, they replicate Catholic dogmatism – “unchanging source” – in purely ontological terms (what exists beneath existence), instead of Torah faith which defines acceptance of the Torah at Sinai as צדק צדק תרדוף.
Maharishi frames faith in terms of direct experience in meditation (phenomenology). Whereas Rambam frames faith in terms of rational proof and contemplation (philosophy). He prioritizes gnostic knowledge above “Fear of Heaven”; meaning the walk to build and protect ones’ ‘Good Name’ reputation.
But both of these “Latter Day Saints” bypass the Talmudic way of the Cohen worship through tohor middot; specifically applicable through the concrete practice of common law courts, precedent based “Briefs”, and justice—which strives to make fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B among the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot.
If we bring the T’NaCH model of mussar-aggadic common law in properly: Adam & Havah “walking with God” does not compare to these assimilated “Latter Day Saints” mystical union. Shalom among our Chosen Cohen People within the borders of the oath sworn lands: “walking in trust” the יסוד bedrock upon which stands שלום and NOT hatred without cause among our people. Later “Enoch walked with God,” “Noach walked with God,” and Avraham – chosen “to keep the way of the Lord … to do justice and righteousness” (la‘asot tzedaka u-mishpat). The real Torah framework: knowledge of God = justice done in community to restore שלום among our divided people who always struggle with our Yatzir Ha’Rah to fight Civil Wars among ourselves.
Contrast this with the ערב רב שאין להם יראת שמים – the assimilated Roman/Indian metaphysics = Absolute/essence/unchanging source. This נידוי narishkeit stands outside of the oath brit alliance to pursue justice among and between our people. Unlike Maharishi’s “phenomenology,” aggadah does not chase mystical states—it illustrates the human cost of injustice and commands judges to persue precedent-based בניני אבות judicial fairness. Maharishi and Rambam both speak in terms of “Absolute Being” but collapse Torah’s judicial Faith framework based upon the false foundations of Greek/Roman metaphysics. By stark contrast Torah faith = צדק צדק תרדוף. Sanhedrin common law, courtroom-precedent based legalism; fair compensation for damages inflicted, mussar-aggadic framework of walking with God by doing tohor time-oriented commandments with k’vanna.
On August 31, 1526, Zwingli wrote a very gossipy letter full of information, telling how Eck used at Baden the Complutensian Polyglot, which had the Latin version side by side…. ______________________________________________________ Ulrich Zwingli, a leader of the Protestant Reformation in Switzerland, held war-crime views of Jews in general and Judaism in particular. He believed that the Jewish people had rejected Christ and often referred to them in derogatory terms. Cursed to wander the Earth with the mark of Cain. Zwingli’s writings included calls for war-crimes of mass expulsion of Jews from Swiss and German kingdoms. Exposing the poisoned broader trend of Church antisemitism in his time. His views influenced by the prevailing snake venom attitudes of the early church to Shoah generations. Witchcraft Xtian theology often slandered Jews as outsiders and heretics, at every available opportunity.
Ulrich Zwingli, without any doubt one of the most inflammatory preaching Jew haters in all recorded history. He casually threw out the term “Christ-killers”, when he made hate speeches on Sundays. This label, often used to vilify Jews, like a knee reflex. So convenient to slander Jews with derogatory false blood libel slanders; suggesting that their actions and teachings absolutely responsible for the death of Jesus Christ. A deeply offensive and historically charged accusation which resulted in pogroms and forced mass population transfers. Repeated annually every Easter season. Such derogatory slander, part of the broader conflict between Catholics and Protestants during the Reformation. Both haters spew slanders at the opposing churches as if they equaled the cursed hated and abhorred Jews. They served to delegitimize Zwingli’s movement and rally support for the Catholic cause in the 30 Years War. In addition to “Christ-killers” slanders, Zwingli and his followers often labeled Jews with other derogatory terms
These terms, part of a broader anti-Jewish Fascist-like hatred that defines the utter insanity of the people of Europe to this very day. The Reformation, hard compares to the barbarism of Christendom during 20th Century .
Some of these inherited terms of insane hate included: “Synagogue of Satan”: This phrase was used to describe Jewish communities, condemned Jewish opposition of this false Messiah imaginary man – Harry Potter fiction. Xtains abhorred the fact that Jews reject the new testament as a fraud Roman forgery, on par with the Czar of Russia’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
“Unbelievers”: This term, often spat at Jews to condemn our absolute refusal to categorize Jews accept Jesus as the Messiah; Torah common law stands upon precedents. The precedent for the mitzva of Moshiach, the anointing of the House of Aaron as Moshiach by Moshe Rabbeinu and the service of korbanot dedications which require swearing a specific and defined Torah oath. The oath of Moshiach: the oath to pursue righteous judicial justice in the oath sworn lands which HaShem swore to give to the chosen Cohen seed of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov. “Infidels”: This label vomited upon Jews, suggesting that they existed as a cursed sub-human cast out Cain, an abomination of the true faith. “Heretics”: While primarily directed at those who opposed Catholic doctrine, this term equally extended to Jews whenever convenient; framing them as deviants from the accepted religious norms. Jews depicted as having the horns and tail of Satan.
These poisonous derogatory slanders contributed to a climate of hostility and discrimination and promoted violent oppression against Jewish communities during the Reformation. They reflect the corruption inherited by both Catholic and Protestant war criminals which shaped and defined the social, and political factors of not just a generation, but all generations of European history. Zwingli’s theological positions and the broader Protestant movement often intersected with these evil Nazi-like sentiments, leading to a disgraced legacy regarding attitudes toward Jews, and the bankrupt reputation of morality of the Xtian church for all generations. Hence the T’NaCH teaches: That which is crooked can never be made straight.
Martin Luther, his later works, such as “On the Jews and Their Lies,” he advocated for violent pogroms against Jews, including the burning of synagogues, with all the Jews of that town slaughtered and burned. Naturally the church could then confiscate all Jewish wealth and property. His rhetoric despicably & deeply antisemitic. Often cited as a precursor to later antisemitic ideologies, including those of the Nazis. Zwingli’s antisemitism, more reflective of the societal norms of his time, while Luther’s later writings had a more direct and lasting impact on antisemitic thought, influencing future generations, especially the Nazis of Hitlers’ Germany. Thus, both war-criminals directly guilty of criminal antisemitic views, Luther’s later writings, often considered far more extreme and influential in the context of modern antisemitism.
Conflict Resolution 