Transcript of interview with Yossi Gurwitz, (courtesy of Ken Adachi):

"Judaism as a religion has been frozen in time for the last 1800 years. Generally speaking, Rabbinical Judaism, as it appers in the Talmud - unlike what is generally taught in secular schools - the source of Judaism is not the Bible. The source of Judaism is the Talmud...





Okay, let's get this exactly right: it defines only Jews who believe in the religion are men - as full humans. And everyone else is some level of 'other', that must be pushed aside or, in extreme cases, destroyed.





But if you kill a non-Jew then you're guilty, but there is no penalty. God will punish you. And that is - how shall I put it? - a bit problematic. When you say something is a crime, but there's no punishment for committing it, then it's not really a crime. That's the Talmud.





The worst case, in my opinion, is the case of Maimonides, who decrees...that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a 3-year old girl. That age of consent is - problematic. And second of all, he decrees that if a Jew rapes a three-year-old non-Jewish girl, then she must be executed. Her, not him - because she tempted him to sin. And for this reason, you have to treat her like an animal that puts obstacles in a person's way. And he quotes some verse about a bull or something like that. And the rabbis know that these parts of the religion that are misanthropic, that are discriminatory to non-Jews, pose a problem for them. Because if they try to implement them - there are some rules that are very unpleasant, like that three-year-old-girl we were just talking about - if they try to implement them, there will be a pogrom.





So to avoid that situation, the Talmud defines two different states of reality. There's one called "Darkei Shalom" [Peaceful Ways]. In other words, "This is the actual religious law, this is how you are supposed to act." "However, since it would cause a huge mess, and people will die. So due to 'peaceful ways', you don't act that way." Now, until what point does the "peaceful ways" rule still apply? Just as long as the other situation does not exist, which is "When Israel is Mighty". That's when there is a Jewish regime. It is independent, and it is merciless, it can do what it likes. Under those circumstances - it's all over, you go back to the letter of the law.





No more "peaceful ways", no more nothing. Now when you think about Jewish history, lots of people talk about the Hasmonean Wars which was pretty much one of the only times that Jews wielded weapons and they think about what the Hasmoneans did to the Hellenized Jews [who assimilated Greek culture]. Which was to make them extinct, to destroy them. A small genocide. And I remind people of this frequently, every time Hanukah rolls around. But they didn't stop there.





They embarked on campaigns of looting and conquest and at the beginning, during their first 20 years, wherever they arrived, they would destroy the local temples. It was prohibited for a place that was under Jewish rule to have a pagan temple. That's what we're talking about. They also forced the Edomites to convert to Judaism on pain of death. It was a forced conversion. Something we learn the [Spanish] Inquisition did later on. They took people and told them: ;"Either you're dead, or you're converting to Judaism". And things only got worse from there.





Now, when religious zionists look at reality, they say: "We've got a state. We've got weapons. We've got a Jewish army. This hasn't happened for 2, 000 years." "What this means is that God wants us to bring about the Messiah, that God wants us to build the Temple."





In other words, the only difference between the time of Maimonides - he died in 1204 - and the time of the Messiah, is who is subordinate to whom. Are the Jews subordinate to "kingdoms", to other nations? Or can they subordinate other nations? And that is how Maimonides begins his Book of Kings . He explains what the rules are for a king, what a king can do. It emerges from the belief that, yes, there can be a king. You don't have to first have a temple. You don't need God to come down from the sky and point at someone and say, "That's the Messiah". You can have a king, and if he is victorious, then he'll also be the Messiah. And then you look at what religious zionists are doing about this. They want a Messiah. They want him now.





There must be cleansing. Religious law prohibits contact with non-Jews. Of course, the Kosher laws prohibit you from eating with them. Other laws forbid you from treating them fairly. You are forbidden to return a lost item to a non-Jew - except in order to "keep the peace". There is no prohibition on stealing from a non-Jew - except in order to "keep the peace". You can';t say "hello" to them - unless there is no alternative. And so on and so forth.





There are all kinds of prohibitions that are entirely psychotic that are based on a religion of vengeance. Religious zionists have a serious problem with the fact that there are any non-Jews here. The Land of Israel is supposed to be only for Jews. So, ironically, they would manage to get along with the Muslims more or less if we weren't involved in a military conflict with them. Because according to Judaism, Muslims are not idolaters. Muslims believe in one God. They don't have idols, they don't have statues, they don't have anything like that. So ironically, during the Medieval Era, Jews got along better with Muslims than with Christians. But what can you do?





We conquered a territory populated mainly by Muslims. and the Muslims are fighting us - so those defenses fall away. And look, now they are starting to talk about genocide. You have the [book] "Torah Hamelech" [King's Torah]. which tells you that you can kill children if there is a reason to believe that one day they could cause harm. Now, if you killed someone's entire family and left only him alive, he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. If you stole his lands, turned him into a refugee, tossed him to Jordan or Lebanon - he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. Many people said that the book's arguments are not sound according to religious law, and so on and so forth, but no one really tackled it head-on. And it's no wonder that it became a best seller. Because in general, what religious zionists actually want is for the Land of Israel to be for Jews only.





Now the situation for the Christians, on the other hand, will be really bad. [According to Judaism], they are idolaters, and you have to kill them even if they do not resist Jewish rule. In Jerusalem, religious seminary students have a despicable habit: they urinate or defecate on churches. If you go there and talk to the church staff, you'll hear it from every church. Spitting on clergymen on the street is something that happens regularly. If the priest has the gall to hit the person back, to slap him or something similar, then he is deported quietly. They cancel his residence permit in the country. If you want to justify a pogrom, all you have to do is say the words "missionary threat".





And from that perspective, Christianity, which is the historical arch enemy of Judaism is going to get a serious beating once the religious zionists are in power. The Christian Fundamentalists who send them money apparently don't understand what they're dealing with. But you know, it's really a case of "a pox on both your houses".



