ο Καρυπίδης , η Hanukkah και η Νerit

Αποτελεί ντροπή για το Πολιτικό σύστημα της Ελλάδας η προσπάθεια παρέμβασης της Αμερικανο-Εβραϊκής κοινότητας στα εσωκομματικά Ελληνικών κομμάτων, μάλιστα δε για λόγους ανερμάτιστους . O Σύριζα θα βρεθεί υπόλογος αν υποκύψει στις Ισραηλινές πιέσεις και αποσύρει τον Καρυπίδη.  

Τι είπε τελικά ο Καρυπίδης ?  Μία ιστορική αλήθεια 

Ότι η Χανούκα - Hanukkah των Εβραίων είναι μία γιορτή που γιορτάζουν την "Νίκη" τους κατά του Μακεδόνα Αντιόχου του ΙV, ο οποίος παρενέβη στον εμφύλιο που είχε ξεσπάσει μεταξύ των "παραδοσιακών" Φαρισέων και των "φιλοελληνιστικών" Σαδουκαίων παρεμβαίνοντας υπέρ των δεύτερων. 

Τι άλλο είπε ο Καρυπίδης κατά των Εβραίων ?

Ότι το όνομα ΝΕΡΙΤ (χαιδευτικό της Νera) , είναι Εβραϊκό όνομα που δίνεται σε κορίτσια που γεννήθηκαν την περίοδο εορτασμου της Χανουκα / Hanukkah  (Names such as Menora (meaning candlestick) or Nera (meaning candle) for girls, or Ner (meaning candle or light) for boys may be just the label you are looking for.)

O Aντι-Σιωνισμός δεν είναι Αντι-Σημιτισμός

Αντίθετα υπάρχει απόφαση του ΟΗΕ (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379)  που καθορίζει τον ΣΙΩΝΙΣΜΟ (Zionism) σαν μορφή ρατσισμού (Determines that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.)

Το Σιωνιστικό κατεστημένο και η Σιωνιστική ιδεολογία , είναι ο χειρότερος εχθρός του Ισραηλινού λαού, δεν τον αντιπροσωπεύει  αλλά τον καταδυναστεύει. 

Το να αντιπαλεύει κάποιος την ρατσιστική Σιωνιστική ιδεολογία δεν είναι ρατσισμός ούτε ταυτόσημο με τον ρατσιστικό αντισημιτισμό.

--------------------------
Μερικά ιστορικά στοιχεία >

Judea was part of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt until 200 BCE when King Antiochus III the Great of Syriadefeated King Ptolemy V Epiphanes of Egypt at the Battle of Panium. Judea became at that moment part of theSeleucid Empire of Syria. King Antiochus III the Greatwanting to conciliate his new Jewish subjects guaranteed their right to "live according to their ancestral customs" and to continue to practice their religion in the Temple of Jerusalem. However in 175 BCE, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the son of Antiochus III invaded Judea, ostensibly at the request of the sons of Tobias.  The Tobiads, who led the Hellenizing Jewish faction in Jerusalem, were expelled to Syria around 170 BCE when the high priest Onias and his pro-Egyptian faction wrested control from them. The exiled Tobiads lobbied Antiochus IV Epiphanes to recapture Jerusalem. As the ancient Jewish historian Flavius Josephus tells us:"The king being thereto disposed beforehand, complied with them, and came upon the Jews with a great army, and took their city by force, and slew a great multitude of those that favored Ptolemy, and sent out his soldiers to plunder them without mercy. He also spoiled the temple, and put a stop to the constant practice of offering a daily sacrifice of expiation for three years and six months (The Tobiads were a Jewish or Ammonite faction at the beginning of the Maccabean period. They were phil-Hellene, in other words supporters of the Hellenistic tendencies in Judaism in the early years of the 2nd century BCE.)  

Modern scholars argue that the king Antiochus  was intervening in an internal civil war between the traditionalist Jews (Pharisees) and the Hellenized Jews (Sadducees) in Jerusalem. These competed violently over who would be the High Priest, with traditionalists with Hebrew/Aramaic names like Onias contesting with Hellenizing High Priests with Greek names like Jason and Menelaus.  In particular Jason's Hellenistic reforms would prove to be a decisive factor leading to eventual conflict within the ranks of Judaism.  Other authors point to possible socioeconomic reasons in addition to the religious reasons behind the civil war.

What began in many respects as a civil war escalated when the Hellenistic kingdom of Syria sided with the Hellenizing Jews in their conflict with the traditionalists.  As the conflict escalated, Antiochus took the side of the Hellenizers by prohibiting the religious practices the traditionalists had rallied around. This may explain why the king, in a total departure from Seleucid practice in all other places and times, banned a traditional religion