Cochin Jews -Anybody here ?

[pagan]

I am from Kerala. Close to Cochin. There used to be a community of Jews in Cochin. Most of them emigrated to Israel after its establishment . Some 52 or so remain.



I would be interested to know whether there is any Cochin Jews or a descendant here ?
Any Israeli here know any Cochin Jew personally ?

Just curiosity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochin_Jews

[andak01]

...

[Steven]

So how many were ethnically cleansed, and what are their plans to get compensation?

So how many were treated as second class citizens? Stop acting like if Muslims do not kill us, things are all ok. They are not, we here know that.

[andak01]

...

[Steven]

And stop acting as if the natural progression in every part of the world with the exception of America, Israel and a few countries in West Europe is anything other than a drastically shrinking Jewish population.

An estimated 9,000 people in the northeastern Indian states of Mizoram and Manipur started practicing Halachik Judaism in the 1970s, being the descendants of the Tribe of Manasseh. They have since been recognized by Israel as a lost tribe, and most have left, or plan to leave India and emigrate to Israel after undergoing a conversion to Orthodox Judaism. However, India, under pressure from Christian Missionaries, has since halted conversions to Judaism and exodus to Israel. [3]

.The majority of Indian Jews have "made aliya" (migrated) to Israel since the creation of the modern state in 1948. A total of 75,000 Indian Jews now live in Israel, (1% of the nations total population).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Jews

This has nothing to do with dhimmi status.

[andak01]

...

[pagan]

So how many were ethnically cleansed, and what are their plans to get compensation?

They went to Israel of thereon . Nobody persecuted them. They are proud of their old country.
One Indian Jew in Israel said" For 2000 years we were Jews in India ,now we are Indians in Israel"

[pagan]

So how many were ethnically cleansed, and what are their plans to get compensation?

They went to Israel of thereon . Nobody persecuted them. They are proud of their old country.
One Indian Jew in Israel said" For 2000 years we were Jews in India ,now we are Indians in Israel"


Now Adak stop trolling this thread,I am waiting for a Cochin Jew.

[andak01]

...

[Steven]

I'm still waiting for anyone to tell me where anyone is paying jizyah today.

Do you even read? I just posted 2 articles with in the last week. Christians in Iraq and Jews in Yemen last year and that is only what we know off.
Hamas has also talked about bringing it back. And stop playing word games, Jews and Christians are oppressed across the Islamic world. You show absolutely no respect for Christians and Jews.

Save your very obvious, well it is not the govt of those countries doing it. The govts are not stopping it either.

[andak01]

...

[Steven]

[QUOTE=andak01;272115]

And those articles spoke about jizyah? Dhimmis?



That's legitimate. But it isn't actually in place today.




No, I have plenty of respect. But hate crimes, oppression, etc. is not dhimmitude. You're applying a term that isn't accurate for propaganda effect.

Yes the articles spoke about jizyah and bull that oppression is not dhimmitude. Stop with the lies already.




Dhimmis who did not pay this tax, either had to convert to Islam or face the death penalty. This tax, higher than the tax Muslims had to pay, was on several occasions one of the most important sources of income for the rulers, and, therefore, they were often little inclined to encourage conversion to Islam, as this would represent a decrease in their income.
It was an early endeavour of the Sharia to add details to the regulations of the jizya. These involved that the Christians could keep all of their churches and convents, but were neither allowed to erect new structures nor restore ruined buildings. The Dhimmis had to give lodging to Muslims for up to 3 days and they had to show Muslims their respect. They could not perform religious rituals in public and no crosses could be used in Muslim quarters. They could not ride on horseback with saddles, nor could they carry weapons or sell alcoholic beverages to Muslims.
Non-Muslims were not allowed to build houses taller than their neighbours' houses. In public they had to carry visible tokens of the religion to which they belonged. If there was a case at the court, Muslim statements were considered of more value than the ones from non-Muslims. But there were no limitations to the professions in which non-Muslims could engage.
Later there were more regulations imposed, as in 853, when Caliph al-Mutawakkil forbade Dhimmis to ride on horses; they had to limit themselves to donkeys and mules. In 14th century Egypt, Jews had to wear a a yellow turban, Christians a blue one.

[andak01]

...

[Steven]

There's no lie. Jews up until the 19th century were treated equally as bad or worse in Christian lands as they were in Muslim lands (assuming they were even allowed to exist at all, which for many decades they weren't.

Things improved in the 19th century, with fewer incidents like the Dreyfus affair and papal kidnappings occuring than previously and pogroms only in Eastern Europe. The 20th century came and Jews had it better in Europe until the Holocaust. The periods since the creation of Israel and 20th century prior to the Holocaust are unusual in that Jews have had it worse in the Muslim countries than in Europe. Even then Eastern Europe is holding their own in this ugly beauty pageant.

You can keep telling these lies about history for as long as you can keep people ignorant. The real fact is that poor treatment, oppression, ethnic cleansing, etc. have been the providence of the Jews almost equally across Christian and Muslim lands. The current period is the exception rather than the rule.

This is important. First of all, there is always a danger that Christians can revert to the worst excesses of the past. Second, Muslims have a capacity to do much better than they are even within the context of a Sharia state. Third, going back to any sort of theocratic rule by Christians shows that any theocracy has the capacity for intolerance that is presently being displayed by those Muslim states today.

Therefore, we should struggle together to dismiss theocracy, whether in Saudi Arabia or Bhutan or wherever it raises its head, including the Kahanists who would create a theocracy in Israel. That is a common and a worthy goal.

Another smokescreen. You said dhimmitude does not oppress and it does. We are not ignorant, you are the one that was lied to and given the sugar coated version of Islam, by Muslims. I think I will remain concerned with the actions of Muslims of today over Christians might revert.

[andak01]

...