Jovial (30 Dec 2011)
"Tikun Olam, Hashem , and other terms"

Someone posted an article from http://anothervoicerev184.blogspot.com/2011/12/at-white-house-hanukkah-ceremony-obama.html , which kind of helps explain what the problem is with the whole misunderstanding.  some of the parallel arguments help explain what is wrong.
 
It also says ""Hashem" is the god of the kabbalah, not the God of the Bible."  When Jews see "YHWH" in Scripture, they pronounce it as "HaShem" on Weekdays, "Adonai" on Sabbath.  "HaShem" literally means "The Name", and is a euphemism for YHWH.  There is no question that this is a traditional Jewish reference for the God of the Bible.
 
It also quotes the Talmud as saying, "Jews must destroy the books of the Christians, i.e. the New Testament" and cites Shabbat 116a as its source.  However, that is not in Shabbat 116a or any other part of the Talmud.  At worst, a downright lie made up to make any Jewish source look bad.  Some of the other quotes look invented as well, though I ahve not checked the sources in that I don't have them available.
 
Judaism has a rule that old books too worn to be used anymore cannot be burned if they contain the Divine Name.  Shabbat 116a is a discussion of whether books that include the Divine Name can be burned.  I just went back and reread Shabbat 116a, and it discusses whether books from the "Minim" can be burned.  But it also discusses whether Jewish scrolls can be burned as well.  So this author was trying to twist what was said to make Judaism look bad for teaching something it does not teach.  But no where in that discussion does it include the quote he alleges exist. It does not encourage burning books of the minim simply because the source is 'minim'. I would not be surprised if his quotations from his 'kaballistic' sources are invented too.  This is someone who is willing to make up quotes to make those who disagree with him look worse than the merits of their beliefs warrant.  So before quoting an author like this, you need to check his sources to make certain that it really says what he is claiming it says because he does not care about the integrity of the quotes he uses.  He may be banking on the fact that most people will not look up those sources.
 
There are some folks out there who want to demonize anyone or anything they disagree with.  That is wrong.
 
Some people will invent quotes when an accurate quote will not demonize someone enough, and this author did exactly that for the Talmud.  When they can't invent a quote due to credibility sake, they will twist one or try to make what someone said sound like it had an intent it did not.  That is what was done to Obama.  They tried to make "tikun olam" sound like an evil phrase because....well...they dislike Obama and obviously dislike Jewish thought as well.  So they tried to make anything Jewish sound evil.  Everything Jewish is relabelled "Kaballah" in this author's article, including the use of "Hashem".
 
You may have some disagreements with Obama, but you should direct those disagreements towards the merits of what he has said, and not try to make him out to be something he is not.  You may have some disagreements with Judaism, but again, but you should direct those disagreements towards the merits of what Judaism has said and not invent quotes that don't exist.  Trying to demonize someone or some group and make them look worse than they deserve turns you into an immoral person.  Accurately assess people on the merits of what they believe, then deal with that issue. 
 

Shalom, Joe