oh, just the inquisition, Nazis, crusaders, pogromers, etc. The arabs are in "good" company. /

To obstinately rebuild a yeshiva at the legitimely evacuated settlement is sheer idiocy. And to cry "Gewald" over the palestunian vandalism is a tragicomedy,a farce.

Maybe the settlers should stop setting up illegal settlements which aren't properly secured, or at least not bring holy books to these places.

Never partake in their wisdom. That is their curse. The rest will follow.

for they only carry them, but they did not care mocking their G-d by not carrying out Books' words.

what are you doing in that evacuated place? why should soldiers risk their lives to protect you? don't you have other places to settle? why be a pain in the ass of this country? if you care about the book, as you should, keep them in a safe place. my friends you are looking for trouble and you will find it, and deserve it too.

unless palis believe in different one than the jews. witch will make the one and only mad.

What does that say about the people (I use the term advisedly) who would do that? Hey, United Nations! Where are you? Fact is, were it Moslem books, everyone and his or her brother would cascade down upon Israel. I guess the agenda does not include Jews. Or their holy books. Hypocritical. Sad, too.

what would happen if one of us burned a single copy of the Koran? That's right - it would spark off World War Three. And, you're quite wrong, Attila - The Talmud is one of our most holy books.

Hey world - notice that when Muslims burn holy Jewish books we don't riot, and we don't threaten war. However, publish a cartoon about Mohammed, or tear a page out of a Koran, and the radical Islamic world goes nuts - riots, deaths, threats, fatwas for more deaths. Makes you wonder why people accuse Zionists of being the criminals.

There we go again ! Its just a book, if any fool out there belives theres some magical power in a printed text then i suggest they get help.

COULD NOT FIND PALISTINAIN IN A DICTIONARY COULD NOT FIND OCCUPIED OR DISPUTED TERRITORY AFTER ANY HISTORY OF WAR..**AFTER THE VICTOR WAS ATTACKED

First the Israeli secular destroy the yeshiva then the Arabs burn the books. What's the difference?

Get the book and read the book. It is obvious from your comments that ignorance comes as a result fo not understanding the book. One more things, if someone came and burned your books, which you valued, would you reply "they're only books". What an insipid comment!

They are in essence, removing that which will save them. Jesus said, "MY words are spirit and life" John 6:63

FYI: In Islam, the proper way of handling a damaged copy of the Quran is by burning the paper. You would not want to keep a damaged/torn copy to end up in the dumpster with all kinds of trash. So cremation is the respectful way of handling holy books in Islam and if those who did this were Palestinian Muslims they must have done their Jewish neighbours a favor (to the best of their knowledge).

WE JEWS DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR MISERABLE KURAN AND ISLAMIC LAWS. BURNING ANY OTHERS' RELIGION RELIGIOUS BOOKS IS NOT RIGHT. MUSLIMS DO THIS ALL THE TIME. IT IS WRONG AND YOUR LAWS IN ISLAM ARE ALIEN TO US JEWS. WE DO NOT ACCEPT THEM. THEREFORE, BURNING OUR BOOKS IS HARAM!

THE BOOKS WERE THERE IN TACT AND NOT BURNED BEFORE THOSE MUSLIMS GOT TO THEM. THEY STARTED BURNING THEM WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW. WHY BURN BOOKS THAT WERE NOT BURNED BEFORE?

have you read the article?: ((located at unauthorized yeshiva located in evacuated West Bank settlement)), so have they carried on what commandment those books instruct them to? No they stole the land (unauthorized is the nick name of illegal stolen!). After a second thought, Yes Talmudists make it clear to you that robing goyim (gentiles) is worship to G-d, as if they were in continuous connection with their G-d Who told them something that is contrary to the Torah; a mere veritable mockery which treats G-d as a fool. so I'm so sorry for the word ignorant and just suffice myself with your theft-character.

and mark your holy book, you take with you in your mission, with the word HOLY in bold letters, then I'm sure 100% that your books wont be touched.

If it is acceptible to "thigh" a young girl of age 6-11, who is married to a man 40 years her senior, or worse to consummate the marriage at age 9, (If mohammed did it then everyone can) then what is burning a book.

Talmud law authorizes adult men to have sexual intercourse with girls three years old and younger. Girls at the age of 3 were forced into sex and marriage in both the Talmud and the Bible. "Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse....." Sanhedrin 55b . A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years "and a day" old). Talmud law makes it clear that male homosexuality is not an offense if the adult man uses a boy below the age of nine years and a day.

These quotes do not appear anywhere therein the Sanhedrin 54-55 folios, it's false representation. The discussions of the sources, amongst others, relates to the dowry for virgins and non-virgins. A virgin receives a higher dowry, oft the case in the abrahemic religion all together. While the recognizing sign of virginity is the release of blood due to the breaking of the hyman on the wedding night, there are as you must know, occasions when the hyman has already been broken, for example in situations when the woman suffered an injury etc. And the sanctity of marriage and virginity were very important issues, at least back in the day. The talmudic discussions here and elswhere therein, adds that a sexual act with a male/female minor is not viewed to be a loss of virginity because one of the participants is not yet fully active you see? If the female's hyman may have been broken, being used by an adult or another minor sexually, she has not engaged in what can be classified as a sexual act that can strip away the sanctity of virginity. Though it nowhere condones such acts in any way or fashion, simply it elaborates on if it might happen what will happen. The Talmud context reflects that a sexual act between a male adult and a female under the age of three is not considered a loss of virginity. Since the girl is too young for her hyman to be broken, she is still considered a virgin. But again, nowhere does the Talmud permit such behavior. If you look at the writings of Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut 1:4, Hilchot Na'arah Betulah 2:17; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 26:1, 177:5 for example, as is this obviously a case of child abuse, the Talmud is only discussing the ex post facto what might happen with the sanctity of virginity if such a case occured. All that's being discussed is wether, if such an event ever took place in such a case the girl can be considered a "virgin" later, when she one day comes to marry someone. The answer is an obvious "yes", as far as the sanctity of virginity concerned what happened was just like getting poked with an inanimate object, since it didn't remove her ability to remain innocent. This is the analogy used, if such an act were to happen it does nothing to remove the child's sanctity of virginity from the legal or spiritual sense. It is the manner of the Talmud to examine extreme theoretical cases in order to precisely define and delineate legal concepts. Such study is mandated because the laws are part of the Written and Oral Torah, not necessarily because they have practical application. There are different legal consequences arising from an act of intercourse (related to personal status, punishment for rape, property rights etc.) and the Talmud investigates whether such an act committed on a baby girl has the status of intercourse or not. There is an ancient tradition that states that if the girl is older than the age of three then an act of intercourse was committed; before that age, such an act does not have the status of sexual intercourse for legal purposes (it may be an act of assault, of course).

but does not dive a millimeter to be able to attack Islam. Cant you figure there are people other than the chosen who test the extreme for the sake of nothing but teaching people like you?

that whenever "observer" has nothing better to say, he writes some nonsense that even after reading twice, nobody can figure out whatthe %*(&$ he means!! He is full of typical christian and islam anti Jewish garbage easily found on all their sites, either fabricated quotes, or words ripped out of their context, or purposeful misinterpretation that all their buddies love and circulate among themselves. It does not really matter, cause to begin with they hate us, so it actually doea no harm. Kinda funny, in a sad way to "observe" this from an objective point of view. Oh and the logic "you do it too" doesn't make a wrong right anyhow, it only acknowledges the fact that the author realizes it is wrong! Scenario: thief caught stealing: "but Menahem also steals!" And then to add to the irony, it is found that Menahem didn't actually steal. Observer, you are passive.