David Klinghoffer Pushes Phony "Noahide Laws"

David Klinghoffer, whom Skull and Bones Bill Buckley employed as a writer for his National Review (the opinion-shaping rag for his "respectable conservative movement") is revealing what Buckley's "respectable conservative movement" formula, which The Remnant and others have apparently adopted, is really about.

A Gentile Torah-Believer's Testimony

David Klinghoffer

Friday May 15, 2009

Recently a particularly thoughtful commenter on this blog mentioned in passing that he identifies as a Noachide, that is, a Gentile believer in Torah. I was so interested to hear this that I wrote to him and asked for his story, which he graciously provided. I am copying it below. It's truly a privilege for me to have such a person among my readers.

But first a note of introduction. A few weeks back I startled some Jewish readers by saying that Judaism in its classical sources is a missionary religion. Not that Jews are enjoined to convert Gentiles to Judaism, but rather to draw them to the primordial Torah religion of Noachism. This is assumed to be the faith practiced by Noah and bequeathed to humanity.

In this model, which the Talmud details in tractate Sanhedrin, Jews follow the moral and ritual Mosaic code, while Gentiles follow the Noachide code. But the model of spiritual reality revealed in the Torah is a gift given to both Jews and Gentiles.

Maimonides makes it very clear in his Mishneh Torah that Jews are commanded to use whatever means are at our disposal to encourage (that's putting it mildly) non-Jews in this Noachide path (Laws of Kings 6:10). Yes, Judaism is an aggressively missionary religion, if not in current practice then in theory.

That having been said, I'll introduce you to my reader and friend, Brian Beckman:

I'm a physicist, and was brought up as a very conservative, traditional Catholic. The church changed dramatically in my youth. From my point of view, it wasn't wrenching, because I didn't change. That left me without an emotional connection to God, but also free to pursue a more durable, intellectual connection.


It can be tricky to look for God in a science-saturated life, but if one digs deep enough, one will find the need either for an Original Cause or for an Anthropic Principle. While I grant that anthropism is logically coherent, I find it empty, like a tautology. It's equally sound to suppose that the universe is here because God wants it. At that point, all one needs to compose a logically coherent notion of God is to study and sift good ideas from bad ones, which, as a physicist, I know how to do.

I am an unofficial Noahide. I follow the Seven Laws of Noah found in the Torah and detailed by Maimonides. I'm unofficial only because I have not yet had the chance to take a formal oath, but I would certainly do so. In ancient Israel, I might have been ger toshav -- a legal alien, and I might have aspired to be ger tzedek -- a righteous gentile, a very high calling indeed, likely beyond my ability to achieve.

These laws contain nothing surprising to any typical American with a passing acquaintance with the Bible and the Ten Commandments. According to my reading of Rabbi Elijah Benamozegh (see Jewish and Christian Ethics, and Israel and Humanity), a typical American Christian trying to follow basic Christian ethics would, in fact, be a de-facto Noahide even if not aware of it. 




That's kind of the point though. How did an nice, ordinary, American Catholic boy like me end up in such an unusual place? Visions? Dramatic conversions? No, much more boring. I found it by studying and listening to smart people.

There are three aspects to my Noahism: how I act, how I think, and what I believe. 

Practically, I study Torah almost daily and, when I have the privilege, I share Shabbat and other events with my Orthodox Jewish friends. These are new habits for me, but not conflicting with the life I've led since I went into religious "dry docks" in the early 1970s. Like many others, my traditionalist ship was unable to respond quickly enough to the tidal changes in the Catholic Church and I just put religion in-toto into safe storage and got on with other things. 




In my thinking, I've reached a synthesis that I can articulate and defend. Orthodox Jews and Catholics regard the Torah (the five books of Moses) as a direct revelation from God. But there is a fork in the road: Orthodox Jews regard it as permanent and immutable, like the laws of physics. Catholic doctrine studies the Bible in the light of St. Paul and the Church fathers. In that light, Jesus' resurrection changed everything and the Old Law doesn't apply any more, even though Jesus himself didn't repudiate it. So which is it? After four years exploring the "permanent and immutable" hypothesis (just beginning, really), I haven't found anything yet to refute it. I know of no place where the Torah states that it is changeable, and I know many places where it states that it is permanent. So if it is, in fact, true, then it seems it must be permanent and immutable.

There are those who reject revelation and treat the Torah not like the laws of physics but as ordinary human literature. I like to note that the claim of Sinai (two million eye witnesses to the theophany) is so outrageous that it must either be true or the most astounding hoax in human history. I have met people who can name their ancestors back to Sinai and claim unbroken verbal transmission of the eye-witness account. It is impressive that a claim like this can last more than 3,000 years with an entire nation believing it. I'll take it on faith.



I believe there is One God, the God of Israel. This much is in keeping with Catholic doctrine, which adds the Mystery of the Trinity. I personally come to grips with this as follows. If Jesus is divine, then he is completely identical with God the Father (according to the doctrinal Mystery). It would then seem inconceivable that Jesus could have any objection at all to devoting oneself to God and to the selfsame Torah that Jesus himself embraced. I realize that this is a personal syllogism and that Catholics will barbecue me over it, but it's the way I have always seen things even when I was a churchgoer.




I am very fortunate to have found this path, and it is only because of the wisdom and kindness of certain Orthodox Jewish acquaintances, now dear friends, that I was even aware of it, let alone enabled to pursue it.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/kingdomofpriests/2009/05/a-gentile-torah-believers-testimony.html

See:

Who Says Judaism Isn't a Proselytizing System?

The REAL Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow

Skull and Bones Buckley: Dead

Buckley's Skull and Bones "conservatism" won't be buried with him, unfortunately. Naturally, the scoundrel is missed by his kosher-conservative ideological offspring:

William F. Buckley, RIP

William F. Buckley is Dead: RIP

William F. Buckley Jr. dies at 82

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- National Review founder and conservative commentator William F. Buckley Jr. was found dead Wednesday in the study of his Stamford, Connecticut, home, officials at the magazine said. He was 82.

"Buckley died while at work," said Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of the National Review Online, in a written statement. "If he had been given a choice on how to depart this world, I suspect that would have been exactly it. At home, still devoted to the war of ideas."

Buckley's assistant, Linda Bridges, said he had suffered from emphysema for a few years, but the exact cause of death is unknown. She said Buckley was found dead by his cook at 10 a.m. Wednesday.

"Even though he had been ailing, this took us completely by surprise," said Bridges, who worked with Buckley for nearly 40 years.

"He was a great hero of American conservatism -- a brilliant and exciting writer and public performer," she added. "And he was somebody I was very proud and glad to call a friend."

Buckley's writings are widely credited for supporting the growth of the U.S. conservative movement in the latter half of the 20th century.

Full article:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/27/buckley.obit/?iref=mpstoryview

Also see:

CIA/Skull-and-Bonesman Wm. F Buckley Jr. Obituary

William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment

Fleshing Out Skull & Bones: Investigations into America's Most Powerful Secret Society

Skull and Bones Bush's Ideal Crusader

Pentagon Official, Ms. Debra Cagan is claimed to have informed British MP's that she "hates all Iranians."

Here we have the symbolism of the pentagon, the whore/scarlet woman, the hermaphrodite, and the crusader all in one. This is tikkun olam par excellance. This is where humanity is headed under it's current leadership.

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=484762&in_page_id=1#StartComments

Student Presses John Kerry on Skull and Bones, Tazered by Cops

This story has been circulating in the news and on the internet, usually framed as a matter of politics or controversy related to the 2004 presidential election. Indeed, a student asks Kerry, speaking at The University of Florida, why he conceded the 2004 election to George Bush so quickly when there was evidence of improprieties in the election. But if you watch the video you will see that the student then mentions Kerry's membership in the secret society, Skull and Bones, and that the microphone is cut off precisely at this point and he is then forced to the back of the room and eventually, apparently, tazered.

As this is taking place John Kerry makes a joke about the student "swearing him in as president."

This seems to be a revelation of the method event which presents a brief flash message: pain awaits those who pry too deeply into secret society business. The establishment media's suggestive message to the subconscious about "annoying" people who ask "strange questions" is patent:

"So he got tazed for asking John Kerry a strange question about the 2004 presidential election. Hmmn. You do the math on that one."

Bush's Macabre Judeo-Masonic Jest

Skull and Bones member, George W. Bush jokes about the lie that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Iraq:

MIA WMDs - For Bush it's a joke

Last night I was at the Radio and Television Correspondents' Association Dinner. It's a formal-and-fun affair where thousands of media folks assemble at the Hilton for a fancy dinner and fab pre- and post-parties. I'm not going to denigrate such soirees. I enjoy them. While bookers and producers jiggled and jostled on the dance floor and media and political celebs dissected the news du jour (this time it was Richard Clarke's dramatic appearance before the 9/11 commission), I was able to chat with former weapons hunter David Kay and learn about some troubling developments in the intelligence community (more on that down the road). And there was free sushi.

But an awful you're-all-alone moment came during George W. Bush's comments that followed the sit-down dinner. The current president is often the honored guest at this annual affair, and the audience toasts him in what is supposed to be a sign of communal and nonpartisan spirit. And, the tradition is, that the president has to be funny; he has to provide us with an amusing speech that pokes fun at himself and his political foes. After all, political journalists love to see politicians engage in self-deprecating humor. Bill Clinton was quite good at these performances. Bush seems to enjoy them less. Rather than do straight standup, he sometimes relies on a humorous slide show, and that was how he chose to entertain the media throng this time.

It's standard fare humor. Bush says he is preparing for a tough election fight; then on the large video screens a picture flashes showing him wearing a boxing robe while sitting at his desk. Bush notes he spends "a lot of time on the phone listening to our European allies." Then we see a photo of him on the phone with a finger in his ear. There were funny bits about Skull and Bones, his mother, and Dick Cheney. But at one point, Bush showed a photo of himself looking for something out a window in the Oval Office, and he said, "Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere."

The audience laughed. I grimaced. But that wasn't the end of it. After a few more slides, there was a shot of Bush looking under furniture in the Oval Office. "Nope," he said. "No weapons over there." More laughter. Then another picture of Bush searching in his office: "Maybe under here." Laughter again.

Disapproval must have registered upon my face, for one of my tablemates said, "Come on, David, this is funny." I wanted to reply, Over 500 Americans and literally countless Iraqis are dead because of a war that was supposedly fought to find weapons of mass destruction, and Bush is joking about it. Instead, I took a long drink of the lovely white wine that had come with our dinner. It's not as if I was in the middle of a talk-show debate and had to respond. This was certainly one of those occasions in which you either get it or don't. And I wasn't getting it. Or maybe my neighbor wasn't.

At the end of the slide show, Bush displayed two pictures of himself with troops and noted these were his favorites. The final photograph was a shot of special forces soldiers--with their faces blurred to protect their identities--who were posing in Afghanistan where they had buried a piece of 9/11 debris in a spot that had once been an al Qaeda camp. Bush spoke about the prayer the commander had said during the burial ceremony and noted he had this photograph hanging in his private study.

So what's wrong with this picture? Bush was somber about the sacrifice being made by U.S. troops overseas. But he obviously considered it fine to make fun of the reason he cited for sending Americans to war and to death. What an act of audacious spin. One poll recently showed that most Americans believe he either lied about Iraq's WMDs or deliberately exaggerated the case to justify the war. And it is undeniable that in seeking public support for the war he made many false assertions that went beyond quoting intelligence that turned out to be wrong. (I've written about this in many other places. If you still don't believe Bush mugged the truth, check out this short guide.) As the crowd was digesting the delicious surf-and-turf meal, Bush was transforming serious scandal into rim-shot comedy.

Few seemed to mind. His WMD gags did not prompt a how-can-you silence from the gathering. At the after-parties, I heard no complaints. Was I being too sensitive? I wondered what the spouse, child or parent of a soldier killed in Iraq would have felt if they had been watching C-SPAN and saw the commander-in-chief mocking the supposed justification for the war that claimed their loved ones. Bush told the nation that lives had to be sacrificed because Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction that could be used (by terrorists) against the United States. That was not true. (And as Kay pointed out, the evidence so far shows these weapons were not there in the first place, not that they were hidden, destroyed or spirited away.) But rather than acknowledge he misinformed the public, Bush jokes about the absence of such weapons.

Even if Bush does not believe he lied to or misled the public, how can he make fun of the rationale for a war that has killed and maimed thousands? Imagine if Lyndon Johnson had joked about the trumped-up Gulf of Tonkin incident that he deceitfully used as a rationale for U.S. military action in Vietnam: "Who knew that fish had torpedoes?" Or if Ronald Reagan appeared at a correspondents event following the truck-bombing at the Marines barracks in Beirut--which killed over 200 American servicemen--and said, "Guess we forgot to put in a stop light." Or if Clinton had come out after the bombing of Serbia--during which U.S. bombs errantly destroyed the Chinese embassy and killed several people there--and said, "The problem is, those embassies--they all look alike."
Yet there was Bush--apparently having a laugh at his own expense, but actually doing so on the graves of thousands. This was a callous and arrogant display. For Bush, the misinformation--or disinformation--he peddled before the war was no more than material for yucks. As the audience laughed along, he smiled. The false statements (or lies) that had launched a war had become merely another punchline in the nation's capital. 

Also refer to the audio lecture, "The Masqueraders Jest" by Michael A. Hoffman