Rabbi Marvin Hier
In response to the barbaric atrocity in Mumbai, Rabbi Marvin Hier, the founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center has made an angry speech this week in Westwood, California. It lasts 10 minutes. It can viewed on YouTube below.
I recommend everyone view this speech. Rabbi Hier minces no words. He says what CAIR will not say: that the attackers were Islamic fundamentalists who had no regard for human life. He demands that the UN make the problem of suicide terror a priority. Yet, knowing the failures of the UN, he derides their willingness to call special sessions over a myriad of lesser issues as they ignore what is the most serious issue facing the world today.
In addition, Hier also points out the culpability of Muslim imams who preach hatred to their congregations, hatred that leads to acts of barbarism like what occurred at Mumbai.
Hier also referred to the Holocaust and pointed out that the children of Jewish victims did not seek vengeance by blowing up hospitals, schools, restaurants and hotels in contrast to those who take out their grievances by killing innocents.
Ignoring the rules of political correctness, Rabbi Hier angrily compares the light that emanated out of the Chabad House in Mumbai and the goodness of Rabbi Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka with the ideology that spurred the killers. Hier closed with a vow that Jewish life will continue and prosper long after the ideology of the terrorists has been consigned to the dustbin of history, where it belongs.
Well spoken, Rabbi Hier.
Wow. Pretty powerful stuff.
ReplyDeleteI think that only thing that I'd nitpick is that you refer to his speech as being "angry." Righteous indignation is more like it. When he talks about how little Moshe will be taught kindness and love, his speech is definitely filled with more hope than anger. (Like I said though - a nitpick.)
And he brings up a VERY good point when he talks about how Streicher was hung even though he never killed anybody. These Imams who preach this sort of hate are the real villains here. You could also compare them to somebody like Charles Manson. They have so much blood on their hands that they could turn the sea red with it. (Apologies to Shakespeare for stealing his Macbeth metaphor - but it fits.) They should be brought to justice and made to face the survivors of their crimes.
Oh, and just a little technical help, in case you're so inclined, you can embed a YouTube video on to your blog by doing the following:
Copy the "embed" code which is to the right of the video. (Highlight it and press Ctrl-C.)
Then when writing your blog, click the "Edit HTML" tab. Then paste (Ctrl-V) the code into the box where you write your blog.
Thanks for the tip. I'll see what I can do.
ReplyDeleteYou know, having been in Erlangen, Sreicher was always a figure who fascinated me. There are very few books on him and the ones that have been written focus mostly on Der Stuermer because that is all documented and in archives.
Even most of his Nazi associates despised him because he was such an odious figure.
I have also been checking out the Sufis. It seems they are sort of a fringe group that not all Muslims recognize. It also seems that they might be compared to Buddhist monks who spend most of their time meditating. That's a lot better than setting off bombs.
Meditating is better than setting off bombs? You with the bold statements - sure you want to go on record with that? Heh.
ReplyDeleteAnd it looks like my little video embedding lesson worked. Nice job.
As for Streicher, I've read bits and pieces of his writing. It would be comical if one didn't know the context - EVERYTHING was the fault of the Jews according to that guy. He could wake up and stub his toe on the bed post and figure out a way to blame it on the Jews. To think I have a photo of my grandfather walking next to that guy!
After reading Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, I learned that much of the Muslim world has a similar view toward Jews. Crazy stuff. She wrote about how her teacher in Somalia taught them that Saddam Hussein was a Jew. Go figure.
Lance,
ReplyDeleteYou are correct about the photo with Streicher. And thanks for the video lesson. Now I can do it.
The Rabbi had a right to be angry. If you notice he was angry at those who deny the root cause of this tragedy. This was a bit more than righteous indignation, it was anger. Anger directed at those who believe that what they say and do will have no consequences for there have been none in the past.
ReplyDeleteAnd I believe that there will be no consequences now for this. The world has made it very clear: Any Muslim has the right to kill a Jew. But no one has the right to either stop them or punish them.
Findalis,
ReplyDeleteA big part of the problem is that so much of the world has allowed itself to be intimidated by the Islamists.
By "righteous indignation", I was trying to say that he had transcended simple anger in his speech. Sure, it was there, but he went so far beyond that. Anybody can express anger - this was the sort of speech that not just anybody could give.
ReplyDeleteI think indignation might not be strong enough to fit the situation. How about "outrage"?
ReplyDeleteYeah...I think we're just getting into an issue of semantics. I was just trying to say that his speech went beyond just one simple emotion.
ReplyDelete