Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » A Betrayed American Analyst Calls FBI Anti-Semitic

A Betrayed American Analyst Calls FBI Anti-Semitic

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

A man I’m proud to call my friend, Dr. Lawrence Franklin, accused the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States (FBI) of being anti-Semitic. For a period of time in 2004, he admits to having served as a double agent for the FBI, pretending to “spy” for the America Israel Public Action Committee (AIPAC), while also feeding AIPAC and the Israeli Embassy, through Keith Weissman of AIPAC and Naor Gilon with the Israeli Embassy, false or misleading information. At least that is what I think I have gotten out of the articles I’ve read. According to Arutz Sheva, his claims are backed up by former AIPAC staffer Steven Rosen, who was interviewed by the Jerusalem Post.

This article in the Washington Times, details his long and tortuous story, though it has also appeared previously in Haaretz (in articles written by Yossi Melman) and earlier in Haaretz as well as in the Forward in articles by Nathan Guttman.

The story in the Washington Times recites

“You know, I felt dirty sometimes,” Franklin said, detailing his talks with FBI handlers. “One agent said to me, ‘How can an Irish Catholic from the Bronx get mixed up with all these….,’ and I finished the sentence for him: ‘Jews?’” he recalled.

In the Jerusalem Post, Steve Rosen is quoted as saying,

“What these guys believe is that there’s a Jewish cabal, a Jewish conspiracy.”

Most Jews who grew up in the United States (who are over 50 at least), know that a great deal of Jew-hatred is to rife in certain branches of the government there, with prominent examples being the FBI, West Point, and the State Department. There is just no getting around that. It is there, and you run into it in myriads of ways, small and large. Anti-Israel sentiment fomented in the State Department, and now fomented by the by a man in the White House who has ripped the mask of “friendship” from the Israel-America relationship, revealing it for the bullying imperialism it really is, is just part of the whole picture, something too many American Jews do not have the guts or honesty to understand or to absorb.

I knew Larry Franklin when he was still a student of East Asian studies and an officer of the North Bronx Republican Club, of which I was a member some 35 years ago. I knew him then as a man of honor and decency, a man who stuck by his word and acted as he believed in his heart was in the best interests of the country he loves, the United States of America. His behavior, as the articles in the Washington Times and Haaretz reveal, is that this is still his character after all these years in the jungles of politics and academe.

I do not believe that Dr. Franklin’s spying against Israel was the right thing to do, and I’m not afraid to tell him so straight up; but if Larry says he was talked into it by FBI agents, I will believe him over any badge-carrying liar working for what is increasingly a government that hates Jews. The way I see it, Larry was snookered, and is suffering for his idealism and patriotism. Instead of getting a medal for his honorable behavior in the line of duty, he is a convict, condemned by the country he has loved all of his life.

That stinks. I’m glad I left the United States.

Powered by

About Ruvy

Hi!! Thanks for coming to my article! I was raised in Brooklyn, was graduated from the City University of New York in 1978 with a BA in political science and public administration there. I lived in Minnesota for a number of years. There I managed restaurants and wrote stories. We moved with our children family to Israel where we now reside. My work can be found at Ruvy's Roost, Jewish Indy,, and on Facebook under my full name, Reuven Kossover
  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Do you think it is individual- or or institutional racism, Ruvy? If the former, I wouldn’t be surprised because old prejudices are hard to break. If the latter, then it’s cause for concern.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    This is institutional racism, Roger. If this was “I don’t like Stein because he is a kike”, that would be individual racism. But this stuff goes back decades before I was even born.

    A Jew who could get through West Point was considered rare and tough, because of the institutional Jew-hatred there. That is why the haganá tried to recruit Col. David Marcus after WWII to help organize an Israel Defense Force. He not only had battle experience, he had formal schooling in military tactics, AND he had dealt with the hell of Jew-hatred at West Point.

  • zingzing

    everyone hates you because you’re jewish ruvy. right?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re personalizing it, zing. I have no reason to disbelieve that institutional racism exists.

  • zingzing

    i’m not personalizing it. and i’d bet there are plenty of racists in the fbi, just as there are anywhere else. there’s good old boys who hate the jews and there’s good old jews who hate the arabs and there’s black people hating honkey and little old white grandmas “tolerating the negroes” and the chinese despising the japanese and everyone in east asia looking down on south east asia and the puerto ricans and polish thumbing their noses at the hipsters… blah blah blah.

    but, judging from the actions of the government towards israel, i’d have to say that they don’t believe in a jewish conspiracy or cabal. if there is one, we’re in on it. but there’s not one. for ruvy to suggest that we think there’s a jewish conspiracy to control the earth, then, just a few sentences later, to alternately suggest that we bully and manipulate israel doesn’t make much sense. who’s scared of whom?

    whatever. there’s just too much nonsense flying around for me. ruvy would fight the whole world if he could, even his allies. he’s so convinced that everyone hates the jews. so much fear and paranoia spills from his writing, and he’s not the only one out there. and that’s (part of the reason) why the middle east is a big bloody mess.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I happen to agree. I do believe we’ve progressed beyond the point when Jews were the one and only scapegoat. That ideology has been tried before and, at too great an expense, it failed. Which isn’t to say that institutional racism or anti-semitism doesn’t exist, especially in closed-societies, such as West Point.

    Don’t forget the inbred notion of Anglo-Saxon superiority.

  • zingzing

    “Don’t forget the inbred notion of Anglo-Saxon superiority.”

    just go type in redneck on google image search.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well taken.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    zing,

    Read my article and read the links. The condemnatory accusations are not mine, but those of Larry Rosen who was falsely accused of spying, and of my friend, Larry, who was convinced into spying for the FBI. When he realized that what he was doing was wrong, when his conscience couldn’t swallow the vomit the FBI was serving, he told them to go to hell. For being an honorable man, Dr. Franklin was framed and damned near jailed.

    Re-read what Dr. Franklin told the Washingon Times.

    “You know, I felt dirty sometimes,” Franklin said, detailing his talks with FBI handlers. “One agent said to me, ‘How can an Irish Catholic from the Bronx get mixed up with all these….,’ and I finished the sentence for him: ‘Jews?’” he recalled.

    Larry Franklin is not Jewish, and is not spoiling for a fight with the world. He is a good Catholic, and a patriotic American. And he is disgusted with what he saw in the FBI.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I ran into a site called Dissident Voice. They are a typical pile of left-wing trash. They cannot handle a dissident voice.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Frankly, Ruvy, if someone in the U.S. says something the least bit off-color about Jews they’re labeled anti-Semitic. If the White Anglo-Saxon Protestants opined against Rom,an Catholics, they are branded as anti-Papists. Yet if someone says something against Islam, it seems acceptable.

    I’m sick of labels. I’m weary of religious fundamentalists inserting themselves into our national discourse in such a way that the U.S. is arguably more divided today than it was in Lincoln’s day. As I have indicated before, Ruvy, we have no business in the affairs of the Israeli people. If peace is to be achieved by enlightened youth, Israelis and Arabs need to start talking to each other and leave us the hell out of it. And while we’re at it, this also means that the United States should not give a red cent tp Israel and its’ neighbors. Enough is enough.

  • Ruvy

    Silas,

    You, like so many others, assume that peace is what should be pursued here.

    In doing so, you’ve entirely missed the issues here.

    1. Larry Franklin was concerned about the threat Iran posed to the United States.
    2. He attempted to talk to folks higher up – who didn’t want to listen.
    3. In attempted to reach the unreachable higher-ups, he wound up framed being talked into spying for the FBI against Israel.
    4. After realizing what he was dealing with, he pulled out – and was framed for spying himself by a Jew-hating “law-enforcement” agency.

    Dr. Franklin’s motives have little to do with Arabs against Israel.Enough self-delusion is enough.

  • zingzing

    ruvy: “You, like so many others, assume that peace is what should be pursued here.”

    jesus christ.

  • Ruvy

    jesus christ

    Leave my dead relatives out of this will you, zing?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Funny!

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    You, like so many others, assume that peace is what should be pursued here.

    You’re damned right peace is what should be pursued here! And, I’ll take it a step further, a tribe of people who claim to be the chosen people of God doesn’t have license to impose their beliefs upon those who do not submit. That can be said of Jews, Muslims and Christians. After all look at the C Street operation where demons like Ensign, Sanford and others dwell. Those freaks believe THEY are the “chosen people,” Ruvy. Yet these same people are the ones who fund the hatred that emanates from Israel. It’s time for enlightenment, NOT imposition.

  • Ruvy

    Silas,

    I am little worried about C Street, J Street or all the other “Streets” that fools design. I primarily worry not my Arab neighbors will not “submit”, butr that their goal is my death. And I’ll not go quietly into the night, Silas. It may be my fate to die violently in this country, Silas. But if it is, my enemies will go with me to their deaths as well – to rot in whatever hell they create for themselves.

  • zingzing

    ruvy: “Leave my dead relatives out of this will you, zing?”

    aww, i see that sense of humor. it’s pretty.

    anyway, if you believe genesis, ain’t we all relatives anyway? meh. with all the begotting, i get lost.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    There are two Genesis, zing, I and II.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    There are indeed. Two Genesis creation stories anyway.

    In the first version (Gen. 1.1-2.3), God creates the Earth, the heavens and the oceans, populates them with living things and then delivers the coup de grâce by creating Man and Woman – SIMULTANEOUSLY. He does this over a period of seven days.

    In the second version (Gen. 2.4-25), God creates Man first, then fashions the Earth (aka the Garden of Eden), then finishes up by plucking out one of the man’s ribs and making Woman (they are not yet referred to as Adam and Eve).

    They are two quite separate, distinct and contradictory creation myths, and it’s amazing that many people don’t realize this.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Touche, Dreadful. Surprised you’re aware of it.

  • Clavos

    Touche, Dreadful. Surprised you’re aware of it.

    What did you do to Roger, Doc?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I hope I wasn’t disrespectful, Clavos.

  • zingzing

    but remember that god decided to wipe us out (original genocide?) and start over with noah. right? noah? anyway, wasn’t he an old man at that point? and doesn’t it get dangerous (for the mental health of the child) to have kids past a certain age? that would explain something about us…

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    DD,

    You are right that there are two descriptions of the creation of Man.

    The first is essentially a description of the universe with the Divine camera, as it were slowly focusing in on the sun and the third planet from it, and the life created on it.

    The second deals with the specific creation of what makes Man different from all the animals, the creation of a neshamá, a spirit that communicates with the Almighty, and with the issues of good and evil, and of free will.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I thought the term was “Nefesh Chaya”:

    “In addition to his material self, however, man possesses a soul which is unique among all of God’s creations. In describing the creation of Adam, the Torah says, “God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils a soul-breath of life (Nishmat Chaim). Man [thus] became a living creature (Nefesh Chaya)” (Genesis 2:7).”

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re right. Nefesh Chaya is the result.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    The verses dealing with Noah and the flood are the most difficult in the whole Torah, zing, from the point of view of “believability”. The Talmudic sages are divided as to the extent of the mabúa the Flood, some arguing that the waters covered the entire earth. Frankly, this is not credible to me and many others, and there is a minority Talmudic opinion that says that the mabúa covered only the Middle East.

    This interpretation would allow for the descendants of kaín Cain to have survived with a “mark”, the “mark of Cain”. According to one scholar, this mark was the lack of a beard – and accounts for the sparse beards and absent beards on Asiatic men and “Native Americans” respectively.

  • zingzing

    well, asians have flood myths as well, so someone forgot to inform them that they lived through it.

    and aren’t there two different versions of the biblical flood story as well? one in which there are 7 pairs of each animal. except for the dirty pigs. and he sends out a crow instead of a dove (they didn’t have the poetry down at that point, i guess).

    hell, we’ve gone over the 2nd 10 commandments before i’m sure. the one about not boiling the kid of a goat in its mother’s milk gets me every time.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    well, Asians have flood myths as well, so someone forgot to inform them that they lived through it.

    That’s why the minority Talmudic view of the mabúa – the Flood, where it only covers the MIddle East, is so attractive to me. Before I’m going to believe in something that looks impossible, I want some plausibility in it.

    and aren’t there two different versions of the biblical flood story as well?

    No. There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two. And while you might like 16th century English poetry, I read the Hebrew and translate from what I see on the page in Hebrew.

    As for the dietary laws of the Children of Israel, kashrút, they are found in Leviticus, and have nothing to do with the Ten Commandments whatsoever.

  • zingzing

    “As for the dietary laws of the Children of Israel…”

    no, no, no. exodus 34:11–27.

    “There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two.”

    ahem: “In Genesis 6-8, there are two stories of the Great Flood, a common story in the literature of the Middle East. These stories have been intermingled in the text by the editors and redactors. The older of the stories is found in Genesis 6:8-10; 7:1-10, 16c; 8:6-12, 20-22. This story comes from 1000 BCE and may have Egyptian influence. The newer story is found in Genesis 6:9-22; 7:11-24; 8:1-5, 13-19; 9:1-17, and comes from 500 BCE with Babylonian influence.”

    the two stories contradict each other in various ways, including the amount of animals to bring, who’s going to die, why they are going to die, the length of the flood, etc. funny thing is, because of the way it’s written (or slapped together), we get certain bits of our “common knowledge” about the flood from one story, and certain bits from the other. it’s a strange thing, the bible, all muddled and unclear because it’s been written and rewritten and chopped up and thrown together again. fucked up thing to base one’s life on.

    “And while you might like 16th century English poetry, I read the Hebrew and translate from what I see on the page in Hebrew.”

    or, “god damn your mp3 digital music–get me my records, you little whippersnapper! hell, i’ll play my polka on the cylinders!”

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two.

    No, there are two: referred to by scholars as the J and P sources. They’re trickier to distinguish because they’re edited together, not left separate as with the Creation accounts. Nevertheless there are a number of differences: J has Noah taking seven pairs of every clean beast and two of every unclean while P has him taking two individuals of each species; in J it rains for 40 days and nights and the actual flood lasts for 150, but P says that the flood itself lasted for 40 days; J has Noah sending out a dove, in P it’s a raven; etc.

  • zingzing

    that’s what i said, dreadful.

    and it’s right at the beginning of the book, ruvy.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    You and I must have been composing our comments at the same time, zinger.

    Let me just say that I don’t see the parallel stories in Genesis as compromising the integrity of the book. It was an earnest attempt by the early Hebrew scholars to set down an account of their origins, based on the best sources of knowledge available to them. I think they knew that their two creation myths were mutually contradictory, but they had no data which particularly supported one over the other – so they put them both in and let people make up their own minds.

    The two flood stories had numerous differences as to the logistics, chronology and other details, but because they appeared to describe the same event they were merged.

    The major difference between the accounts in both pairs is that there seems to have been an editorial impasse between the poetic rabbi and the one who wanted ‘just the facts’. The result is a highly interesting piece of literature.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dreadful,

    Since you’re so au courant about codices, I’ve got to refer you to a heckuva literary analysis of Genesis by Harold Bloom, The Book of J, where he argues that the Genesis story is a far later creation, by a scribe in the court of Solomon, and by a woman.

    Whether you accept the argument or not, it’s a tremendous read.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Correct. It’s a work of redacting.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    “As for the dietary laws of the Children of Israel…”

    no, no, no. exodus 34:11″27.

    “There is only one Flood story in the Torah, not two.”

    ahem: “In Genesis 6-8, there are two stories of the Great Flood,

    What did you do, zing? Take a night course in “Higher Criticism” at Eastern District High School?

    You want to tell me what the Torah is talking about? I live according to the rules set down there – to you they are an old tome, nothing more.

    Sh’mot/Exodus 34:11-27 all deal with Passover, following the Sabbath, redeeming the first born, the holidays of Sh’vuot and Sukkot, three pilgrimages to the central sacrificial Temple. They do not cover dietary laws per se, but deal with sacrifices.

    All this garbage about “stories combined from different sources” are just that – garbage. There is but one Flood story and I do not give a damn how many secular fools with doctorates you quote. Let them take apart the Christian book before they bother with ours. Once they have thoroughly trashed and disproven Christianity, they can start in on Judaism – and they will find that proofs exist to make their arguments worthless.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Interesting review, Roger. Mr Bruggemann makes an excellent point that it’s impossible to say at this point whether the author of J was a woman, not to mention that Bloom seems to provide no support for his assertion. You might as well say that the book was written by a scribe named Eli, and no-one would be able to prove or disprove your thesis.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Nevertheless there are a number of differences: J has Noah taking seven pairs of every clean beast and two of every unclean while P has him taking two individuals of each species; in J it rains for 40 days and nights and the actual flood lasts for 150, but P says that the flood itself lasted for 40 days; J has Noah sending out a dove, in P it’s a raven; etc.

    Bingo!! Higher Criticism – the garbage I had to study in college 40 years ago.

    Contrary to what you “scholars” think, the Torah Codes disprove all this. The Torah Codes are not designed to predict the future, the way so many fools try to misuse it to do; they are designed to give the Watermark of One G-d as the Author of the Torah – to demonstrate One Author wrote it all. When a code runs from Genesis through to Deuteronomy, that is exactly what is being demonstrated. The subject of the code is only important in that you can identify with what is being talked about.

  • zingzing

    “You want to tell me what the Torah is talking about?”

    well, there are two (maybe three) differing sets of ten commandments presented as “the ten commandments,” and there are two flood stories. if you don’t want to believe what’s in your book, you don’t have to.

    “They do not cover dietary laws per se, but deal with sacrifices.”

    i never really said anything about that. i just said that the one about the goat was funny.

    “All this garbage about “stories combined from different sources” are just that – garbage. There is but one Flood story and I do not give a damn how many secular fools with doctorates you quote.”

    well, it’s a contradictory story then. either it’s from two different sources, or god is one confused mother fucker.

    “I live according to the rules set down there – to you they are an old tome, nothing more.”

    bomb, bomb, bomb tehran. i don’t think you’re living up to your ideals. and to me, it’s more than an “old tome.” it’s certainly much more important than that.

  • zingzing

    “Contrary to what you “scholars” think, the Torah Codes disprove all this. The Torah Codes are not designed to predict the future, the way so many fools try to misuse it to do; they are designed to give the Watermark of One G-d as the Author of the Torah – to demonstrate One Author wrote it all.”

    well, the man needs an editor. the continuity is a mess.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It was just an exercise in alternative reading, Dreadful – not a dogmatic statement. But Bloom certainly casts doubt as to the authorship by Moses.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I guess the difference between me and you “scholars” is that I read the Bible – in the original – while you read interpretations of interpretations of the Bible – third hand. And I read that Bible every week, at least for several hours a week, to gain a better understanding of what is said there.

    I do not spend my time on “alternative” reading or commentary – unless I actually trust the knowledge of the commentator. That means I read the works of rabbis or archaeologists – or of people who have totally alien motives to religion, but who stumble across it in spite of their original motives.

  • zingzing

    but it’s right there on the damn page! it’s not like these people are making this shit up. and you certainly aren’t reading it “in the original.” you may be reading a very, very old version of it, but it’s nowhere near “original.”

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Which original, Ruvy? Some of Christ’s sayings are in Aramaic and in Syriac. I have too, in the Hebrew original, when I was in the seminary. And in the Septuaigint, Koine, and Vulgate.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And you shouldn’t suppose that German scholars who started the school of High Criticism couldn’t either.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    and you certainly aren’t reading it “in the original.” you may be reading a very, very old version of it, but it’s nowhere near “original.”

    Some of Christ’s sayings are in Aramaic and in Syriac. I have too, in the Hebrew original, when I was in the seminary. And in the Septuaigint, Koine, and Vulgate.

    There was no Kinko’s out there in the desert of norhern Arabia where Moses got the law. Nor was there a printing prwess. So a whole series of rules sprung up around copying the Torah – designed to prevent the kind of lose play that took place with the Christian books. In all the versions of the Hebrew Torah that we use – known as the Koren Version – there are nine letter differences in the whole text between the témani and mizráHi texts and the ashkenazí text. That’s nine letter differences out of some 305,000 letters over a period of over 2,000 years. That’s a hell of a lot better than a scanner, a hell of a lot better than a monk straw boss dictating letter by letter to scribes in a monastary writing by candle-light.

    The King James Translation has seen more change over 300 years. And remember that the Septuagint had errors in it, errors deliberately placed there to placate the editorial views of Greeks reading the text.

    As for what Jesus said, the one line that sticks out in my head in the Aramaic, “elí elí, láma safakhtháni” is generally rendered wrongly by Christian writers who blindly copy the Greek and write down “eloi”.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski
  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Roger, that is why I read the original and NOT the translation. That way, I translate what I read and check it against other translations.

    The Greeks, who have a poisonously pagan and static mentality, have messed up the Bible more than I care to consider.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    well, Asians have flood myths as well, so someone forgot to inform them that they lived through it.

    Isaac Mozeson, a linguistics scholar researching linguistics roots, noted the following.

    “The Polynesian people have a tradition of a Flood that killed everyone except Nu’u, his wife, three sons and their wives.”

    Nu?

  • http://wp.blogcritics.org/writers/elvira-black Elvira Black

    Ruvy:
    I’m still going through the comments here, and great article by the way…

    Perhaps this is an ignorant question, but what is the “official” or orthodox view regarding evolution?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Elvira,

    There is no official view. There is the Litvish view and the view of the Lubavicher Rebbe and his followers, which is very simple. The universe is nearly 5,770 years old and was created in 6 days.

    This nonsense is disputed by none other than the Ramba”m, who stated that the story of Creation (and therefore evolution) is cloaked and hidden. When looking at this view, and taking into consideration all the other views of the Ramba”m on science and faith, one can reasonably assume deduce that his view was to go along with what science can prove.

    Finally, there are the views of the m’kubalím, the Kabbala masters, who state unequivocally that the universe is about 14 billion years old based on their own calculations. This leaves room for the obvious development of life over a long period of time.

    I hope this helps you out.

  • http://wp.blogcritics.org/writers/elvira-black Elvira Black

    Thanks so much, Ruvy–you are a true gentleman and a scholar. Very enlightening indeed.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Contrary to what you “scholars” think, the Torah Codes disprove all this. The Torah Codes are not designed to predict the future, the way so many fools try to misuse it to do; they are designed to give the Watermark of One G-d as the Author of the Torah – to demonstrate One Author wrote it all. When a code runs from Genesis through to Deuteronomy, that is exactly what is being demonstrated. The subject of the code is only important in that you can identify with what is being talked about.

    Oh, good grief, Ruvy. You believe some discredited fringe theory that a code runs through the entire Torah, therefore millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars – reading, I might add, the ‘original’ – must be wrong.

    Oy vey.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s codex, BTW; codices in the plural.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re not a biblical scholar unless you’re a rabbi – that’s the verdict. Forget the Germans because they surely must have an ax to grind.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Of course, different standards apply to the New Testament, because it’s not so sacred a book. Only the New Testament therefore has been subject to redacting, revisions and voting in the numerous Church Councils as to which books are regarded as genuine or sacred and which as apocryphal.

  • zingzing

    germans hate the bible.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Spoken like a true biblical scholar.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    You believe some discredited fringe theory

    Don’t embarrass yourself, DD. I understand how the Codes work. You don’t. You only whine over what some pack of bigoted fools call “discredited” in the political world of “science”. And the world of science is at least as politcal as the world of business or the business of politics. These “scientists” couldn’t stomach the idea that the Torah has any legitimacy. So they dishonestly smeared honest mathematicians and had the editor of the magazine declare the subject closed, preventing the mathematicians from answering the smear campaign in the same forum. That is what occurred when the Torah Code was “discredited”. That’s not science – that’s political maneuvering and lying. Atheists will lie like rugs to preserve their faith.

    And I will be happy to accuse the statisticians who smeared the good names of Eliyahu Rips and Doron Witztum of defamation – even if Professors Rips and Witztum would rather not. And I would be even happier to accuse the editor of the magazine involved of unfair practice – even if Professors Rips and Witztum would rather not.

    Why do I know the Codes work? They work because the Mossad came to one of the Code developers and begged him to help them figure out when Saddam Hussein would attack Israel with Scud missiles. The Code developer pointed out that you cannot use the Codes for divination of future events, and why, so the Mossad agents provided all the information they could in place of dates.

    Three dates came up on the arrays run by the Code developer. The closest one to the cluster of key words was the one chosen by the Mossad as the most likely date – and that was the date that Saddam Hussein ordered the bombardment of Israel with Scud missiles. But any of the three dates could have been the date. Because until he actually ordered the launch, Saddam Hussein had the free will to launch or not to launch. That is hard science.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    The millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars – ARE wrong.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Don’t embarrass yourself, DD.

    I don’t appear to be the one doing that.

    These “scientists” couldn’t stomach the idea that the Torah has any legitimacy. So they dishonestly smeared honest mathematicians

    No, that’s what you’d prefer to have been their motivation. You’re attributing motives and projecting – an ad hominem and a strawman all wrapped up in one neat package.

    Three dates came up on the arrays run by the Code developer. The closest one to the cluster of key words was the one chosen by the Mossad as the most likely date – and that was the date that Saddam Hussein ordered the bombardment of Israel with Scud missiles.

    ‘T a minute. Wasn’t that you arguing just now that the Codes don’t predict the future?

    Because until he actually ordered the launch, Saddam Hussein had the free will to launch or not to launch. That is hard science.

    Which discipline?

    The millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars – ARE wrong.

    There’s literally no answer to that.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    As I said, Dreadful, you’ve got to be Jewish to have access to God’s word. If you’re not one of the chosen, you’re damned.

  • zingzing

    ruvy, you are being so gullible.

  • zingzing

    ruvy: “The millions of man-hours of research by thousands of theological scholars – ARE wrong.”

    dd: “There’s literally no answer to that.”

    yes there is. it’s “are not.” and then you thumb your teeth at him, sir.

  • zingzing

    damn it. close enough.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    But I thought Jesus came to fulfill Scripture and make the Old Testament null and void — a thing of the past? You don’t have to maim your male young to be Christian. There’s no more dietary laws to speak of. And, if Jesus did fulfill Scripture, why are Far Right Religious Whack-O’s saying that the final battle will be in Jerusalem in accordance with the Torah? The more I dig into this web of ancient deceit, the more confused I become.

  • zingzing

    silas, all you have to do is read your torah in the original and turn it into a word search–all the answers will appear to you as if you knew it already. and then you’ll be ruvy.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    After the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon and Qur’an I think I’ll take in some light reading by…

    … L Ron Hubbard.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Ruvy wrote: Three dates came up on the arrays run by the Code developer. The closest one to the cluster of key words was the one chosen by the Mossad as the most likely date – and that was the date that Saddam Hussein ordered the bombardment of Israel with Scud missiles.

    Dreadful responded: ‘T a minute. Wasn’t that you arguing just now that the Codes don’t predict the future?

    The Codes don’t predict the future. To have legitimate data, you generally need a date. The Mossad didn’t have that. That’s what they were looking for. They were trying to perform divination. The Code developer told them that this couldn’t be done. Basic rules of physics (laws of chance and game theory) state you cannot predict a decision before it is made. The Mossad provided all sorts of data in place of the date, hoping that they would tease one out of the array. They got three dates and chose the one that appeared closest to the cluster of key words submitted, hoping that this would be the date. It turned out to be that date after all. Bu there was NO way of knowing this before the actual launch occurred AND suceeded in hitting an Israeli target.

    The Mossad went in and gambled. And they won.