@PROFESSOR23MAEHEMM23 Thank you, I have had so many arguments about this phony document which can only be described as a "false document." It's been revised several times and been decisively refuted more times than I can count. Wikipedia as well as several other sources. Ellie Wiesel had a few things to say as well, and I really wonder what Norman Finkelstein would say about this hateful piece of work.
This is what I call "a total upside down." I don't think even Nazis were as hypocritical as Norman Finkelstein. I cannot think of a better example of demagoguery.
For those who defend Israel, especially Westerners who were in Lebanon in 2006: Why didn't you stay in Lebanon in 2006 if Israel is not a dangerous country? Why were Americans and Europeans evicted from Lebanon? The answer is clear: Lebanese should be wiped off the map, while the architects of the war and their compatriots should be protected from all danger. Shame on you.
you've quoted Finkelstein's most inflammatory statements in the description. He goes on to say that "ordinary people, Jewish and Muslim, Jewish and Arab, if left to their own devices, can live in peace, freedom, mutual dignity and mutual respect." I'm inclined to agree. And I wish that my professors had half of the integrity of Finkelstein.
And there's nothing controversial about speaking up for the rights of people to defend themselves against foreign military occupation, aggression, and terrorism.
Norman Finkelstein. Habitual liar, attention seeker, and the filthiest professor of all. Speculates on the memory of his parents (who lived through the Holocaust) everywhere he can. Has been fired by Brooklyn College, N.Y.U., and several other schools for incompetence, mental instability, and abuse of students.
Peter Novick (University of Chicago): "many of [Finkelstein's] assertions are pure invention. ... No facts alleged by Finkelstein should be assumed to be really facts, no quotation in his book should be assumed to be accurate, without taking the time to carefully compare his claims with the sources he cites"
Prof. Omer Bartov (an authority on genocide) called "The Holocaust Industry" "a novel variation on the anti-Semitic forgery, 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' ... brimming with indifference to historical facts, inner contradictions, strident politics ... indecent ... juvenile, self-righteous, arrogant and stupid"
From his April 28, 2005 lecture at University of Buffalo: "...the protagonist in the novel, Exodus, was named 'Ari', which is short for 'Aryan' - an example of the Jew's true intent and Jewish racism. It is the whole admiration for this blond haired, blue eyed type." (Total nonsense. Ari is short for 'Ariel', from Aryeh - Hebrew for lion)
In the same lecture said, "In the last fifteen years, there has not been a single death attributed to anti-Semitism in Europe." (Another nonsense)
He praised Holocaust-denier David Irving as "a good historian!" and as having "made an indispensable contribution to our knowledge of World War II."
Finkelstein often seems to be reasonable. He talks about the way "we reasonable and rational people" think. However, people who claim to be reasonable and rational, and even seem to be, aren't necessarily that way.
He called Dean Elana Kagan of the Harvard Law School "an Eichmann-like bureaucrat," then added, "Were my mother still around, ... she would have taken the first train to Cambridge and - just as she did with the Nazi guards from Maidanek when confronting them at the postwar trial in Dusseldorf in 1979 - called Kagan a whore to her face and then throttled her."
Another example is the mud-slinging fight into which he dragged Alan Dershowitz. First he called Alan Dershowitz "Adolf Eichmann" and accused him of expressing "Nazi moral judgments." Later he commissioned cartoonist Latuff to make a cartoon published on the Website indybay. The cartoon, titled "Dershowitz Hard at Work," shows Dershowitz at an "Israel peep show" masturbating with a rapturous look on his face as he views live film from Beirut of dead Lebanese.
It was accompanied by an article written by Finkelstein titled "Should Alan Dershowitz target himself for assassination?"
Finkelstein is a popular speaker among German neo-Nazis. Ingrid Rimland (wife of Ernst Zuendel) referred to him admiringly as the "Jewish David Irving."
Finkelstein is not irrational, nor is he necessarily hateful. He is like a spokesman for a tobacco company who denies that smoking is harmful because his money and fame depend on it. He has found a pretty niche for himself, a sinecure, where he can make his money and earn prestige among the naive, leftist, and Jew-hating by demonizing his own people or attacking the only Jewish country. And always covers himself with "I am Jewish myself" and "my parents went through Holocaust."
A few quotes from Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah:
"Let's get this bit out of the way. We're not looking for concessions from the West. We want your concept of civilization to be over. We want to destroy it, and replace it with ours."
"Israel is a cancerous, usurping entity without legitimacy or legal character."
"Death to Israel!.. Lebanon is not Ukraine. If anyone thinks you can bring down a state with a few demonstrations, a few scarves, a few shouts, a few media, he is suspect... We will gain more by armed resistance than by politics alone"
From a speech to a pro-Syrian crowd, March 8, 2005
"We have discovered how to hit the Jews where they are most vulnerable. The Jews love life, so that is what we shall take away from them. We are going to win because they love life and we love death"
"If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice I do not say the Israeli"
Because recently someone else on another thread told me that I was a dumb American from a little town who has never traveled abroad and must love country music.
Antisemitism is NOTHING? How can you judge? What do you know about how Jewish people live today? Do you think that just because Hitler failed, everything is hunky-dory? Have you ever experienced anything like endless barrage of hate? Have you been followed? Spat on? Urinated on? Beaten? Have you called your relatives in Israel to find out whether they've survived the latest Palestinian "martyrdom?" What the fuck do you know about what it's like being Jewish today?
I've been through all this, first in Europe (I am from Ukraine), and later in the US. Some decent Muslims I know were shocked when I told them about it. Nothing similar ever happend to them.
It's not just me. I've been to Greece, and I sensed the same familiar fear among Greek Jews.
If you can, watch documentary "The War on Britain's Jews." (It used to be on youtube, but was taken down.)
Just because we don't go around parading things like this and whining about them doesn't mean they are not there. They are there, and they are growing. You are blind not to see them.
@PROFESSOR23MAEHEMM23, please read what I wrote earlier in this forum, where I describe how I have come to this point of view. If you were to do that, you would see that I began by saying I have nothing against questioning Israel's policies. That I did it myself, and that is how I came to conclusion that Israel is innocent.
When all evidence I am presented with turns out to be false, and most outright fabrication, and all co-called "critique" is pure demonization in preparation for extermination, and yet "the struggle continues," against all logic, common sense and basic decency, what am I to say. Notice that when I said "Critics" are antisemites, the word "critics" is in quotes.
This is the problem nowadays: there are few honest questioners and critics, but tons of "questioners and critics" who neither question nor criticize, but are dead set in their self-righteousness and their hatred.
I don't think most "crfitics" recognize Israeli Jews are human beings who have the right to live. Because if they did, they wouldn't profess solidarity with Hezbollah or celebrate successful attacks in Tel Aviv.
All this stuff about Israel committing holocaust, genocide, apartheid, oppression, occupation, persecution, blah blah blah and a kitchen sink - all of that is just total bullshit. Propaganda. Viruses in the brain.
Whenever Israel attacks schools and hospitals, the IDF tell the media militants were involved. Palestinians say the IDF deliberately target citizens. Who do we believe? Well, on 6 Jan '09, a girls school was attacked (40 civilians killed, 55 injured, many children). The United Nations Relief and Works Agency happened to be on the spot. They investigated, questioning survivors, including UN workers at the school. There were no militants. Watch ?v=74DfOGErKwg This is primary source information.
archdeaconj, than you very much for that link to the video about the UNRWA school attack.
It's a very good example of lies.
From article "World duped by Hamas death count" by Yaakov Katz. Jerusalem Post, Feb. 15, 2009
"The international community had been given a vastly distorted impression of the death toll because of 'false reporting' by Hamas, said Col. Moshe Levi, the head of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), which compiled the IDF figures.
"As an example of such distortion, he cited the incident near a UN school in Jabalya on January 6, in which initial Palestinian reports falsely claimed IDF shells had hit the school and killed 40 or more people, many of them civilians.
"In fact, he said, 12 Palestinians were killed in the incident - nine Hamas operatives and three noncombatants.
"Furthermore, as had since been acknowledged by the UN, the IDF was returning fire after coming under attack, and its shells did not hit the school compound.
"'From the beginning, Hamas claimed that 42 people were killed, but we could see from our surveillance that only a few stretchers were brought in to evacuate people,' said Levi, adding that the CLA contacted the PA Health Ministry and asked for the names of the dead.
"'We were told that Hamas was hiding the number of dead.'"
(end of quote)
For a few interesting details, go to "Elder of Ziyon" website and search for "UNRWA school."
From Elder of Ziyon: "If the Palestinian Health Ministry never claimed the initial count of 42 deaths, then who did? The UN said 30, and PCHR said 27 civilians, so it wasnt either of them.
"Was this just another case of some reporter or bystander making up a number and having the world believe them without question? And if so, how many other times has this sort of thing happened?
"And if the IDF turns out to be correct and so far, they are the only ones to release names of the victims then we have solid proof that the UN and PCHR are not reliable."
In your video, Christopher Gunness, UNRWA spokesperson, ups the stakes, saying fatalities have risen from 30 to 40.
You can take a look at "Al-Fakhura school incident" on Wikipedia.
So who lies? Palestinian organizations, Palestinian eyewitnesses, UN sources, NGOs, Red Cross, and media. Everybody. Especially in Gaza. If they didn't lie, if they didn't tow the Hamas line, Hamas would kill them.
Here you can see how Hamas launches mortars form right under a school building. A different school at different time, but it proves Hamas is not above such things:
Mortar Bombs Shot from UN School in Gaza 29 Oct. 2007
watch?v=zmXXUOs27lI
And here is yet another one:
Hamas Uses Schools and Ceasefire to Shoot Rockets at Israel
watch?v=8LGubwghyEw
And here is Hamas booby trapping a school and a zoo:
The UNRWA school case is just one of "Israeli atrocities" cases:
al-Dura's murder, Jenin massacre, Family at the beach, Rachel Corrie protecting a house, mother and four children at Beit Hanoun, killing of Mahmood Mashharawi - all have proven not what they seem. All full or partial lies and propaganda.
@Kurtlane I don't understand how you can possibly quote the IDF as a source for anything to do with this incident. They're the ones in the dock! And I don't know who the Elders of Ziyon are but they sure don't sound neutral investigators. Do you have any independent sources of information? I'm going to have a look at what Wikipedia says. It does now seem that the school was not directly hit. [cont]
The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!
"When people talk about Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking antisemitism." - Martin Luther King
Can you all shut up? You can see nothing past religion. Your hear Dr. Finkelstein and you hear Jew, I hear Doctor. Listen to his words about the conflict, about the murder and atrocities committed by one country against innocent civilians, not his views about Jews against Arabs. Your racist fools.
Demagoguery? Best example of demagoguery? Is it buggery demagoguery! This is a demo for goodness sake, not a lecture in the hallowed halls of academia.
archdeaconj, I am not sure about the meaning of your question, so I will answer it as I understand it.
I have nothing against questioning Israeli government's policies. I have done it myself. This is how I came to this conclusion.
Only, I was questioning, not demonizing or denouncing. And also, my questioning was directed at certain actions and policies of the government, not Israel as a country, nor its population.
That my questioning was honest I have no doubt. Was it thorough enough? I think so.
I have watched the situation intencely since the start of the "peace process" in 1992. I gave peace a chance. I gave it a chance when the first murders of Jews started in the form of bus bombings. At some point it became too much. Little by little it became clear to me that it doesn't work. Then I figured out that it "works" in a very different, mostrous way - what I call "the cycle of the shadow."
Then Arafat started his intifada, and it turned out that the most extreme and the most demonized Israeli right-wingers were right all along. They had predicted correctly everything that followed.
In this slow and very reluctant trip from "give peace a chance" to "not one inch," I have traveled twice to Israel a(including the territories). I have walked the streets, talked to people, saw things, went to cafes, rode busses and taxies.
Not just talked to. I've been spat on, physically pushed, told "Fuck you Jews," "I will put a knife in your back, then we'll be friends" and quite a few other pleasant things. This is how I learned of the Arab attitude (of which Brigitte Gabriel also speaks).
I have also read plenty of articles, and books form all points of view. And keep reading. All of that with a skeptical eye.
I used to compare news items as reported by mainstream news with how they were reported in alternative sources on the left and on the right, particularly in Israeli news such as Arutz Sheva and Jpost. This is what allerted me to the incredible amout of lying thnat is going on, all directed against Israel.
This is how I came to the conclusion that Israel is innocent of all this BS leveled against it.
So who am I to believe: the honest word of Mr. Finkelstein or my own lying eyes? (sarcasm)
Mr. Finkelstein here is particularly bad. Lying filthy demagogue. Open your ears: there is almost no information in what he says, it's not even definable or debatable, it's just a bunch of demonological stuff.
Well I'm not shy about denouncing my government's policies. I marched with 2 million against the invasion of Iraq in arguably the greatest moral uprising this country (UK) has ever witnessed. I still hold out vain hopes, along with many of my fellow countrymen, that Blair and his cohorts will one day face a war crimes tribunal. We hold those we elect into power accountable, at least some of us do (we beheaded Charles I, don't forget). So 'only questioning, not denouncing' is anathema to me.
All these incidents I have mentioned have these things in common:
They are cases not just of vile talk, but outright murder. At least I see them as murder.
All the victims were not just Jews, but Israelis.
These were not pre-selected "good Jews," not necessarily supporters of the Palestinian cause. Some of them could have been. But this is not the point for me.
The question is therefore: as unpopular as this ideas has become, do you have the guts to acknowledge that Israeli Jews are human beings and have the right to live?
Is that it? It's just that you said you had written 'quite a bit' in response to my previous post.
You ask, do I have the guts to acknowledge that Israeli Jews are human beings and have the right to live. (I'd like to know what you're implying when you say 'the guts'.)
Well, the brief answer is yes. A more elaborate answer is as follows:
The ordinary people of Israel find themselves today in a conflict not of their making. Most were not even alive when their forebears were invited [cont]
archdeaconj, this is not it. I haven't even begun.
But at least you have acknowledged that Israelis have a right to live and a right to land. This is a good start.
About teh land: you are very confused here, as is to be expected. Let me clarify a few points.
Balfour never said "'a land without people for a people without land." Nor did Zionists. Read Herzl's "Jewish State" - he talks about Arabs living in that land.
The phrase "'a land without people for a people without land' was invented by some Christians sympathetic to Jews.
Wikipedia has a pretty good expose on it. Its conclusion:
A common but inaccurate citation is allegation that Zionists used this phrase to present Palestine as being "without inhabitants." This is incorrect on three counts: 1) the slogan was not actually in use by pre-state Zionists
2) the Christians who did use this phrase were under no illusion that the land was without inhabitants 3) Zionists were under no illusion that the land was without inhabitants
Also, the phrase in form "Land without people for people without land" is often quoted from Chaim Weizmann's speech at a Zionist meeting in Paris in 1914.
I have read this speech. In it, Weizmann mocked people who might have thought the land was empty.
He was well aware of difficulties new settlements in Palestine had been already facing. In the same speech, he talked about the Jewish settlers "who have drenched the soil with their sweat and blood [and who] will defend our possessions, should anything happen in Palestine." What blood is he talking about? Jewish blood, same as now. And who is spilling it? Local Arabs, same as now.
Arabs were always visible to Zionists, even though in the beginning they were so few, one would be justified not noticing them. One only needs to read Mark Twain's "The Innocents Abroad" to see how empty and desolate the place was. Other accounts tell the same story.
But the Palestine the Balfour declaration refers to includes both modern Israel and modern Jordan. In 1922, the British chucked off land beyond Jordan in what was the first step of endless concessions to Arabs and against and Jews.
As Neville Chamberlain said, "If we must offend the Jews or the Arabs, let it be the Jews."
In 1947, UN commission partitioned what was left into 7 areas: 3 for Jews, 3 for Arabs and Jerusalem as an independent city-state. The Jewish administration accepted the division, the Arabs rejected it. It became null and void.
In 1948, the day Israel declared its independence, it was attacked by 5 Arab armies. In the bloody war, it secured some of the land, but failed to get Judea and Samaria (to Jordan) and Gaza (to Egypt).
This is the origin of the "green line" - it's a cease-fire line, that's all.
In 1964, Palestine Liberation Organization was founded. The Palestine it was going to "liberate" was not Judea, Samaria or Gaza. Its terror was not directed against Jordan or Egypt. It was Israel.
In 1967, as a result of 6-day war, Israel captured these lands, as well as Sinai and the Golan. Judea, Samaria and Gaza constitute 22% of "Greater Israel."
From 1967, Israel has been trying to return all the lands captured in that war. At first, the response was the Khartoum resolution, with its 3 nos: no to peace, no to recognition of Israel, no to negotiations. When Egypt rejected the resolution and recognized Israel in 1978, Sinai was returned.
The PLO for a long time rejected it all outright. But beginning in 1992, for reasons I remember very well, Arafat chose a trojan horse strategy.
These are not my words, they come from Arafrat's closest advisor Feisal Husseini.
I can spend a lot of time describing what happened later. But let me jump to 2000 and the claim of separation of the territories (i.e. Judea, Samaria and Gaza) into bantustans, leaving only 22% for the Arabs and 78% for the Jews. This is blatantly false. It's one of the lies propagated by Arafat to justify what he did (i.e. starting a war).
It was refuted by, among others, Dennis Ross, who was one of the people conducting the negotiations.
Arafat, and Abbas after him, have chosen the strategy of no peace, no resolution, no independent state, and endless empty worthless negotiations. Hamas is much the same, except it doesn't bother with negotiations and is preparing (with help from Hezbollah and Iran) for conquest and extermination. This is where we are now.
So when you tak of 78% of land lost by Palestinians, I might just a well talk about 80% of land lost by Jews when the British cut off Transjordan. But I don't talk about that, I let it be and don't nurse bitterness or desire for revenge.
But there is another major fallacy in that approach. Who are Palestinians?
to settle in Israel. The fact that most Israelis take the same view of things as their ruling elite is only to be expected. It is the same in all countries. A state's ideology and mythology is enshrined in all its institutions, not least the media, and imbibed in extremely subtle and sophisticated ways. I mention this apropos of your remark about accessing both 'mainstream' and alternative' sources. Admirable, but what matters is only that those sources be independent and primary. [cont]
Israelis not only have a right to live but they have a right to their land. Yes, I say 'their' land because you cannot turn the clock back. It is as wrong-headed of Palestinians to entertain hopes of claiming back the 78% of the original land now occupied by the Israelis as it would be for the Irish to try reclaim the area 'beyond the pale' or the native Americans to... well, you get the point. Whats done is done. Viz: In 1917 Britain's Lord Balfour gave the land of Palestine to [cont]
the Jews saying it was 'a land without people for a people without land'. This of course was a lie. Bit by bit the Zionists took the land away from the Palestinians, so that now they have only 22 percent left of the original land. This is not the best but the worst of the land, and even that is under occupation. They are still taking land (and not only from the Palestinians) under the guise of 'security'. Throughout history whenever land has been stolen, the indigenous people have fought [cont]
with their lives to keep it. That is the root of the problem.
I have no objection to the use of the word 'terrorist'. They terrorise a population in order to achieve their ends: that is the meaning of terrorist. So they are terrorists. By the same token and the same definition, Israel is a terrorist state, no less brutal. Ordinary Israeli citizens simply have no idea of the atrocities that have been carried out not for 'security' the perennial pretext but ultimately for territory.
No, Israel is not a terrorist state. Security issue is not a guise, it's very real. Ordinary citizens have pretty good idea of of what is happening, since 1) Israel is a democracy with free media, which, like media everywhere, is fairly leftist and barrages its citizens with shame and accusations, and 2) all Israelis serve in the army. So they know.
I have talked to plenty of Israeli soldiers, both current and former. They are normal people, not sadists or mental wrecks, the way they would be if there were truth in your statements about terrorist state and atrocities. They know and understand a lot of what you don't.
Security is just another word for right to live. Rather than be blown into little pieces of flesh.
At least I hope you would agree that denouncing something you don't really know or understand is a recipe for disaster. This is not a left or right issue. You must question before you denounce.
For example, if I say "He took a knife and cut her stomach open," are you imagining a murderer? And what if he is a surgeon saving her life? That would be another story, wouldn't it?
Getting back to our Palestines. To talk of Israeli REGIME or compliant Israeli media is ludicrous. I was born and spent first 16 years of my life in Soviet Union, so I know first hand what a regime is and how compliant media can be. And Israel is not it, just as UK or US or Canada is not it. If you say it is, it only shows how far out on the leftist limb and away form reality you are. Typical leftist spoiled-brat attitude.
I still hold on to vain hopes that Shimon Peres (aka Arafat's camel) and his cohorts will one day answer for his "peace process," "new Middle East" and the horrific muddle into which he threw his country and in which it remains to this day.
As for silencing debate, what debate? It's a barrage of intimidation and hatred. I would be perfectly willing to engage in polite and real debate.
But this is not possible. Instead, in school after school there are Israel-demonizing events worthy of Nazi Germany, and supporters of Israel are given no opportunity to respond at all. I live right next to one such school: UC Irvine. I've seen it first hand, students going from class to class forced to listen to a megaphone screaming about "Israel this.." and "Jews that.." It's just like the antisemitic campaign in Soviet Union in 1952 that my mom told me about so many times.
Just last month, Israel's ambassador was almost shut down at UCI as heckler after heckler stood up to yell some inanity at him in an organized action. Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon received trhe same at Oxford, where a student shouted either "Itbach al-Yahood (Exterminate the Jews)" or "Khaibar Khaibar ya-Yahood."
In Berkeley, Netanyahu was shut down several years ago. Graffiti "Killed the Jews" appeared on campus.
In Concordia U in Montreal, the whole campus went crazy when Netanyahu was about to come, there were riots, several Jewish students were beaten, one ended in a hospital with concussion.
If you have any honesty, you have to admit that it's not a debate, it's not an environment for a debate, it's intimidation, demonization and hatred plain and simple.
Watch this:
Pro-israeli manifestation, Malmö, Sweden 8 feb 2009
Actually, the video shows anti-Israel protesters across the pro-Israel manifestation. Arabs throw 2 pipe bombs and fire 2 small rockets at the pro-Israel people.
And here is the result:
Sweden 2010 - Silent Exodus - Half of all Jews have already left Malmoe
watch?v=_YX7wmt3ZQ0
Same thing more or less everywhere. Here is Florida:
In fact, Palestinians and their supporters avoid real honest debate like a plague. For example, Jummy Carter, who also complained about lack of honest debate, ran awat when Alan Derschowitz proposed to have one. Why? Because they know they will lose.
From morning till night on practically every news source, mainstream or alternative, all one hears is "Palestinian narrative." From the point of view of "Palestinian narrative." The proof of which is in "Palestinian narrative."
Meaning, "If you want to exterminate the Jews, you first have to proclaim them to be Satan's seed." It's demonization in preparation for extermination. The Nazis did exactly the same thing.
You have described the Jew-hatred well enough yourself. But Israel-hatred is merely another, prettier face of the same thing. There are 6 million Jews living in Israel, and Israel-hatred is desire for their extermination. I call it "Jew-hatred light."
There are 6 million Jews living in Israel, and Israel-hatred is desire for their extermination. I call it "Jew-hatred light." But it's still Jew-hatred.
"Anti-semitism." I don't even use this word any more. It's been taken over by Jew-haters, who will say, "I'm not anti-semitic because I don't hate Arabs. I only hate Jews." That's what Nazis used to say.
However, there are plenty of Jews nowadays who are Jew-haters. These are Jewish traitors
This is nothing new. Since at least the Middle Ages, a Jewish traitor has been the worst Jew-hater of all. There were always Jews who converted to Christianity or Islam or whatever was offered and obediently licked the buttocks of their oppressor, spending all possible time to cause as much hell as possible to their own people. In Europe such Jews were used for forced "debates" against the Jewish community. Often they were effective.
Many communities were expelled, and some were massacred as a result of their "debate" efforts.
Now scum like this doesn't convert to another religion. They are more valuable to Jew-haters as Jews, so they can claim "we have nothing against Jews. We are only against Zionists." And trying to do further "debating," which is not really debating but hate-mongering. Just like in the Middle Ages. Indeed, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
I have been asking where this seething hatred of "the Jew" comes from all my life. Honestly asking this question is looking directly at one of the darkest places in the heart of humanity. Why was I called "dirty yid full of shit" even as a little kid, since as long as I can remember? Why was I hounded, beaten, spat on, urinated on by people to whom I haven't done anything? In Ukraine and in America.
Totally different places, with different ways of life, language, culture, you name it. Everything is different, except this one constant. Why did I immediately find common language and understanding with Jews from Iran (because they've been through the same thing over there)?
Hatred has been hounding my people for at least 2000 years, and there is no sign of it going away. Pagans, Christians, Muslims, atheists, Nazis, Communists, capitalists, aristocracy, middle class, lower class..
you name it - all took part. Entire libraries have been written on the subject. The reasons and explanations given vary enormously, often contradict each other, often go against elementary logic or common sense, often deliberately so.
I have only recently come up with an explanation of where this hatred is from. However, this explanation is so serious and so dark, you are not up to it. If you were to really get it, you would no longer be a leftist.
So let me skip over this one and move to easier subjects.
Palestinians get their seething hatred from many sources. Apparently the biggest one is the mosque. I can give you a ton of most monstrous examples.
The other major source is the media. Not just news media - all the media. The amount and ferocity of Jew-hatred there is equal to the one in the Nazi media.
Especially programs for children. Especially for girls.
Why girls? Because girls will become mothers, thus assuring that Jew-hatred is literally passed on with mothers' milk, and that two generations from now there are just as many Jew-haters.
Then there is school, history and geography and religious education. They are taught about Mohammed massacring Jewish Qurayza tribe, and the massacre of Jews at Khaibar, and the rest. They are taught how glorious it was to slaughter elderly Jews in Hebron in 1929.
Then there are extracurricular activities, where both Hamas and Fatah are very active indoctrinating children into their mentality and preparing them to fight and kill.
They are taught to chant "Palestine baladna wal Yahood kelabna (Palestine is our land and Jew are our dogs)" and "Khaibar! Khaibar! Ya Yahoud! Jayesh Mohammed sawfa ya'oud. (Khaibar, Khaibar, The Jews, Mohammed's Army is coming for you)."
Imagine someone shouting "Auschwitz, Auschwitz, The Jews, Hitler's Army is coming for you!"
They are taught that Jews are sons of pigs and monkeys, that Jews are to be butchered and killed. When they are a bit older, they are taught how to butcher and kill. And then they are sent to do what they were taught. Still as children. Watch this:
From "PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY: DIRECT THE HEAT TOWARD ISRAEL" by Khaled Abu Toameh
"The Palestinian Authority is now searching for any excuse to increase tensions with Israel, hoping that this will invite outside pressure on the government of Binyamin Netanyahu to make as many concessions as possible.
"Netanyahus recent decision to include two religious sites in Israels national heritage list is already being exploited by Abbass government to send schoolchildren in Hebron and Bethlehem to throw stones and firebombs at Israeli soldiers."
And then there is plain culture. Children all over the world learn form slightly older children who in turn learn form slightly older, etc.
Just this week, Palestinian teens again threw rocks from top of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on the Jews praying below at the Western wall. In 1833, Sir Moses Montefiore visited Jerusalem, and noted that Arab teens threw rocks from top of the Temple Mount on the Jews praying below at the Western wall.
Where was Zionism or occupation in 1833? Nowhere. Teens today have learned this from earlier teens, going all the way back to that time and much earlier.
The stuff about being herded into these enclaves, losing 78% of the land, devastation caused by Israeli tanks, rubble that were once their homes, family members etc. killed indiscriminately, the Wall, occupation, etc. etc, and a kitchen sink these are all either lies or half-truths.
The bombing of hospitals and schools, deliberate targeting of civilians, white phosphorus, etc. more lies and half-truths.
If you give me an opportunity, I can try to undo these little by little. However, this is quite a bunch and will take quite a bit of time and effort. So before I even begin, would you please tell me if there is any end to it, or you will just barrage me with endless "whatabouts?"
But the biggest of all lies is the statement "They want an end to the occupation and a restoration of land to 67 boundaries."
Because if they wanted it, they would already have it.
Just today I have read "PA TV continues to teach children that all of Israel is 'occupied Palestine.'" by Itamar Marcus. Google and read it.
Here is Hamas:
"Hamas: We killed a Zionist settler in occupied Tel Aviv"
JPOST Apr 8, 2008
"Several hours after the body of a man, was found in Tel Aviv, a Hamas affiliated TV station transmitting from Gaza reported that a 'Zionist settler was stabbed to death in occupied Tel Aviv.'"
It looks like Hamas claim is nonsense-it was either criminal murder or suicide. But " occupied Tel Aviv" speaks for itself.
"Our position is that even if the Zionist State is the size of a postage stamp it has no right to exist." (Imam Achmad Cassiem. National Chairperson of the South African Islamic Unity Convention. From a speech on May 23, 2002)
I have a ton of quotes like this. And a ton of quotes that go far beyond, looking forward to extermination on all Jews.
One of the pieces of evidence that all these things are lies or half-truths is that they are so intensely promoted. I know, it doesn't sound logical, but who said people are logical? Were all the Jew-hating things intensely promoted in Nazi Germany true? Is the blood libel thats been around for thousands of years true?
You might also think about these quotes from Arab leaders:
"There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity, because it is in the interest of the Arabs to encourage a separate Palestinian identity in contrast to Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons.
"The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity."
- Zuheir Mohsein, Member of the Supreme Council of the PLO. From Trouw (Dutch newspaper) March 31, 1977
"There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."
- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, a local Arab leader, to the Peel Commission, 1937
"There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not."
- Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testifying against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946
"Palestine was part of the Province of Syria [...] politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity" - Representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the UN in a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947
@Kurtlane You say there are plenty of 'Jews' who are 'Jew-haters' when what you really mean is that there are plenty of Jews who are appalled at Israel's actions. This bit of mischief is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind when I alluded to linguistic techniques of manipulation in an earlier posting. If you really do think the terms 'Jew' and 'Supporter of Israel's actions' are synonymous, it does rather throw a different light on your claim to have been pissed on because you were a 'Jew'.
archdeaconj, your phrase "'Supporter of Israel's actions" (and its opposite, "Crfitic of Israel's actions") belie so much hypocrisy, it's hard to know where to start.
Notice I said "hypocrisy," not "piss" like you.
Is Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbullah, a critic of Israel's actions? Is Finkelstein, in professing his support for Hizbullah, criticizing Israel's actions?
'The blood-dimmed tide is loosed / The ceremony of innocence is drowned...' yes yes. I think you understand my point well enough though, Kurtlane. If I were to go about extolling the actions of the Yorkshire Ripper, I might get pissed on too - metaphorically if not literally. I might subsequently protest that I had every right under freedom of speech to express my views - and might even have a point. But I wouldn't have the chutzpah to say that I was pissed on because I was a Yorkshireman.
OK. You ended your posting to me with: 'The worst are full of passionate intensity.' This is a line from The Sacred Coming by W. B. Yeats, isn't. it. Presumably you didn't just come out with a line of Yeats spontaneously without knowing it. I recognised it and quoted the preceding two lines from the poem. The rest of the posting and the one before that is a comment on your claim (alluded to more than once) to have been 'urinated on' because you were a Jew.
archdeaconj, I was urinated on when I was 13 years old. Literally. I had no political opinions at the time, I was not a bully or a nasty kid, I had no hatred towards anyone. The boy who did it, and others who helped him by tricking me. had no other reason to do it except that they were Russians or Ukrainians and I was a Jew. Though in this case they didn't say anything, I heard plenty about me being a Jew in similar circumstances, when I was ganged up on, beaten, called names, etc.
If 13 is too old for you, I had been subject to this since as long as I can remember. If there is some other reason here than me being Jewish, what is it? If they called me "dirty yid full of shit," "satan's spawn" etc. what other reason was there? All this when I was a little kid.
Do you really believe that Jews are human beings and have a right to live?
In British English slang, 'piss' used as a verb means 'urinate'. It can take several prepositions, one of which is 'on'. I don't know whether American English has the same usage. The Yorkshire Ripper is a notorious serial killer - perhaps not notorious enough if you have not heard of him.
I thought you were talking about Hezbollah being like Yorkshire ripper, and Finkelstein - like the smart ass who glorifies him, and then covers up behind freedom of speech arguments.
Hre is another case from my life. This took place in 2001 in America:
I took a course at a local community college. There were a lot of women in hijabs and abayas. So once I thought, "If they wear hijabs and abayas, can I wear a scullcap? Not to offend anyone, not to be religious, but simply because I can. Call it a fashion statement if you want.
Well, I thought I could. I wore it for a total of 5 days, basically from parking lot to class and back to the parking lot.
In 5 days, one guy spat on me, and another stalked me, saying, "Hey, give me money. I want money." I didn't say a word to either one. It was all merely because I was wearing a little round cap.
That was quite an experience. You should try it, if you have the courage. Put on a Jewish scullcap and go like that to your campus.
In general, if I got your point right, don't think for a moment that I have these views and therefore was treated badly. It's exactly the other way around: I was treated like shit, and therefore formed these views.
This is the same logic you apply to your beloved "Palestinians" - if they are so hateful, it's because they are treated so badly.
Should you ever apply this logic to Jews?
But I am not seething with hatred like your beloved. Nowhere near to the same extent.
Here is one more situation for you to ponder. A scene my father told me. I was there too, but I was a baby then and don't remember it. In a bus, two elderly Jews were talking in Yiddish. A drunk came to them and started threatening, "Why are you telling evil things about other nations?" See, if it's Yiddish or Hebrew, some people assume it must be something evil. The couple said, "We were talking about our children," but the drunk didn't stop.
Well, all I can say is that no Jew I know, including my wife's best friend who is Jewish, has ever complained about anti-Semitism. Even the BNP (a rabidly racist political party in the UK) doesn't go on about Jews anymore. The only ones trying to give it the kiss of life are apologists for Israel who write columns in the print media conflating it with condemnation of Israel. It's just another card drawn from the 'holocaust' pack and it's disgraceful. Arguments should stand on their own merits.
Try to watch "The War on Britain's Jews" (It used to be on youtube, but I can no longer watch it. Maybe you can.) It shows quite a lot, from "I didn't know you were Jewish" to destroyed desecrated Jewish graves to measures that have to be taken by British police to make it safe for Jewish kids in a Jewish school to "I hope Jews realize that they have no place in this country."
I had more videos on Jew-hatred in Britain, but youtube has taken them down.
Still, here are just a few things I know just in 2009 just in Britain:
Edgware. June 16, 2009. A young woman is left scarred by brutal antisemitic attack.
London, Jan. 5, 2009. Brondesbury Park Synagogue is the target of an attempted arson. A rag soaked in gasoline is placed against a side door. Also a rock is thrown at the window, but it fails to break it.
London. Jan. 10, 2009. Major anti-Israel rally turns into a riot. Rioters chase police through the streets until they corner them outside the Israeli embassy. On the way, at least one Starbucks restaurant is ransacked. Bottles, shoes, sticks and a metal bar are thrown through a window of a Chinese restaurant. Top Gun clothes store has its windows smashed, leather wallets and bags looted, red paint is thrown into it.
A dental practice and newsagents are attacked. 3 policemen and 20 rioters are injured. At the Israeli embassy, missiles were fired at the police. The damage is over 1 million pounds.
London. Jan. 10, 2009. Three protesters chain themselves to the door of the Ahava store in Covent Garden, forcing it to close for around 5 hours. They also hang a banner in the window accusing the company of funding Israeli war crimes in Gaza. They are arrested.
London. Jan. 10-11, 2009. Tesco Metro supermarket is targeted . Several windows are smashed and words Kill Jews are painted. The same slogan is painted on the wall of a childrens playground on Whitechapel Chicksand a week earlier.
London. Jan. 13, 2009. A group of Palestinian supporters enter the offices of British Israel Communication & Media (pro-Israel lobby in central London.) They use loudspeakers to shout anti-Israel messages and scare staff working at the office.
Then they turning over desks, cut telephone lines and throw leaflets before fleeing. They leave a suspected package. Police arrive and make it safe. Later, the group of Palestinians claim that its aim was to stop the propaganda war -- disrupt Israels PR operation.
London. Jan. 14, 2009. A Starbucks at Londons East End is smashed. The manager is inside and hides inside the office. Hoodlums paint racist graffiti and throw a Molotov cocktail through the window.
The manager than runs to the fire escape and raises the alarm. Fire fighters manage to stop the flame. The attack is trumpeted at Indimedia website as peace activism.
London. Jan. 14, 2009. A gang of youths hurl a brick at a Tesco delivery van, then attack the driver. The driver is later treated for head injury.
London. Jan. 18, 2009. Jewish man is assaulted in a Jewish North London neighborhood. He is punched in the face and knocked to the round, then kicked and punched.
London. Jan. 18, 2009. Jewish man is assaulted in a Jewish North London neighborhood. He is punched in the face and knocked to the round, then kicked and punched. Attackers have their faces covered. One of them says, This is for Gaza.
Oxford. Jan. 14, 2009. David Lowe, an orthodox Jew, was attacked by two men, one wearing a Palestinian flag on his jacket, the other wearing a keffiyeh. He was punched in the head. Knocked to the ground and kicked.
"Jewish people are four times more likely to be attacked in Britain because of their religion than Muslims, according to figures compiled by the police.
"One in 400 Jews, compared with one in 1,700 Muslims, are likely to be victims of faith-related hate attacks every year."
Read "The Jihad against Britain's Jews" by Melanie Phillips. Feb 06, 2009. Spectator
I don't know where you live, because it seems to me that Britain and France are the two most Islamized places in Europe. With everything that follows, including Jew-hatred.
watch?v=YQ1z8dgMYO0
Here is Noor Rashid, sophomore at Oxford, shouting either "Itbakh al-Yahood" ("Slaughter the Jews") or "Khaibar Khaibar ya-Yahood" (something like "Auschwitz, Auschwitz, the Jews") at Danny Ayalon at Oxford on Feb. 8, 2010.
Is this anti-Zionism or anti-Semitism? Who is collating the two here, apologists for Israel or its enemies?
Same thing with chants at Arab-Muslim-leftist rallies: Kutile al-Yahood: (kill the Jews), "Itbakh al-Yahood" (exterminate the Jews), "Falastin baladna wal Yahood kelabna" (Palestine is our land and Jews are our dogs).
In a milder form the same is described in Nick Cohen's article "Hatred is Turning Me Into a Jew"
So go on, try to separate "good condemnation of Israel" from "bad condemnation of the Jews." You won't succeed. Nobody is interested in your distinctions.
And that is the way it should be. From "Separate anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism?" By Dennis Prager. Jewish World Review. May 30, 2006:
"Imagine someone saying that he seeks the destruction of Italy because he regards Italian national identity as racist.
"Further, imagine that this person constantly denies being anti-Italian, because he does not hate all Italians, only Italy and all those who believe Italy should exist.
"Now substitute 'Jewish' for 'Italian' and 'Israel' for 'Italy' and you understand the absurdity of the argument that one can be anti-Zionist but not anti-Jewish."
You have one point I agree with: arguments should stand on their own merits.
So would you please stop giving me stuff I didn't say. Like "self-hating Jews." Yes, it's a silly cliche, used by some Jews. We Jews are human beings, and we too can be subject to cliches, banalities, etc. It's a minor flaw, it doesn't mean we should be killed for it.
I think that there is a struggle in you: on one hand you agree that arguments should stand or fall on their own merits,
and on the other you "condemn Israel" (notice, Israel, not Israeli government's actions) just like a child tears a little animal into pieces, not quite realizing what he is doing.
The "card from Holocaust pack" - first of all, don't cling to Holocaust alone (some Jews do, it's another banality, and again, we shouldn't be killed for it). There are 1700 years of hell, and Holocaust is only the "latest greatest" in it.
Emanuele Ottolenghi wrote that our time is actually more like the time of inquisition, and I agree with him. But don't tell me that inquisition was good. And if you see it in this light, and honestly examine the arguments, you will see that they fall into nothingness and what is left is simply a new page in the history of the same old hatred.
But if you persist in your desire to tear little animal into pieces, then nothing can help you.
I've been looking at some websites and I have to concede that anti-Semitism does still exist, much to my surprise. I shall look into this further. That said, you have trawled through news archives for examples of 'anti-Semitism' in the UK in 2009 and most of them are connected with anti-Israel protests. Straightforward protests against the Israeli government, you classify as anti-Semitic. Ive said it before and I'll say it again: it is absurd to classify such protests as 'anti-Semitic'.
How can the hanging up of a banner about Israel's war crimes be anti-Semitic? How can a protest against a company donating money to Israel be anti-Semitic? If a Zimbabwe businessman is set upon because he has donated millions to the Mugabe's regime, is it direct action against repression in Zimbabwe or a racist attack on a black man? Was the demo in protest against Bush's visit to the UK a protest against the Iraq war or an expression of hatred toward the American people?
Is a demonstration outside the Russian embassy a protest against what is happening in Chechnya or an expression of hatred for the Russian people? Why should exactly the same kind of protests and demos against the Israeli government's actions against its neighbours be deemed anti-Semitic? You have it the wrong way round, 'arse about face'. People dont hate Israel because they hate 'the Jews', though a few imbeciles hate 'the Jews' because of the actions of the Israeli government.
These are the same specimens of homo non-sapiens who hate 'the bloody Americans' because of the US government's imperialist ventures overseas or 'the bloody Chinese' because of Tibet. Why were metal bars thrown through the window of a Chinese restaurant? Lunatics! The Chinese owners weren't responsible for what the Chinese government was doing to the Tibetan people back home.
This is a silly and false analogy by Prager. It's not even properly formulated. He asks us to imagine something, then to make certain substitutions, and he leaves it at that. OK, Ive imagined it. What then? Presumably what he's saying is that those who denounce the Israeli government's actions and policies seek the destruction of Israel as a state while denying they are anti'Israeli. No, they don't seek the destruction of Israel. What they do seek is more humanity from its government.
The bizarre notion that we give expression to our unconscious hatred of a people by denouncing their government has no basis in psychology. It is also against all common sense and is confounded by observation. If it were true, the Jamaican government would come in for stick because of racism toward Afro-Caribbeans, the Irish government because of anti-Irish feeling and so on. Who would seriously suggest that protests against China's policy in Tibet is rooted in hatred of the Chinese people?
@Kurtlane Am I a traitor because I would like to see Blair et al before a war crimes tribunal? The Germans who were not Nazis, were they traitors? Were Russian dissidents under Stalin traitors? Are Israelis who condemn their government traitors? Pick the odd one out. When what an individual sees as wrong what his government declares is right, what should he do? Follow his/her conscience or not?
achdeaconj, I can just the same ask if Tokyo Rose or Lord Haw-Haw were not traitors.
Closer to our case, were Gerónimo de Santa Fe (Joshua Lorqui), or Pablo Christiani not traitors?
The answer, just as the answer to your charge about Israeli "regime," is in reality.
I have just read a book about Israel, where an Arab Knesset member tells everyone "We Arabs hold you Jews by the balls." It's broadcast on TV. Nothing happens to him. Is that a regime? Some regime.
You're quite right, Balfour never used that phrase (I've checked). Thx for pointing this out to me - but I couldnt help wondering why you have to be so ungracious Being factually wrong about something doesn't amount to being 'very confused' (it's not an error of logic). And remarks like 'typical leftist spoiled-brat attitude' isn't exactly conducive to a civilised exchange. [cont]
archdeaconj, you have a point. When I said "leftist spoiled-brat attitude," I was taking a risk.
But my risk was that perhaps you might have aq thought, "what if he is right? What if I do take too many things for granted? Why am I so sure that my good wishes will not bring evil results?" And maybe beyond this, you will begin to question the leftist attitudes, and re-learn their legacy.
So Balfour and everyone else knew the land was inhabited - though, as you say, very sparsely. How sparsely? What was the population in those early days? Do we know? Is there a population density less than which you think it ethically OK to settle in a land but greater than which it is not? I'm not sure where I stand myself on this. You're right, there was never a state of Palestine, only a land whose indigenous people shared a common culture. [cont]
archdeaconj, when judge whether it was just for Jews to go to Palestine and create a Jewish state there, you must take into account the Jewish issue.
What is the Jewish issue? It is 1700 years of utter hell visited on the Jewish people. The Nazi Holocaust - the "Final Solution" to that issue - was only the "latest greatest" in this hell. I think I have described enough of what I went and keep going through, and I belong to the lucky generation that has not experienced a pogrom.
Can Jews live without a Jewish State? The entire 1700-year-long history of exile gives one clear answer: No.
So, if a Jewish State is necessary for Jews to survive, where can it be? The whole world is taken. If a Jewish State were to be built in Uganda, would the native peoples of Uganda rebel? Of course, they would.
Same goes for every other part of the globe. Even Antarctica is taken.
So, if the whole world is taken, why not the Holy Land? Why not our ancestral home, to which the hearts of our people have turned for 2,000 years? Besides, if one looks objectively at the situation of 1850-1914, is this not one of the best places?
@PROFESSOR23MAEHEMM23 Thank you, I have had so many arguments about this phony document which can only be described as a "false document." It's been revised several times and been decisively refuted more times than I can count. Wikipedia as well as several other sources. Ellie Wiesel had a few things to say as well, and I really wonder what Norman Finkelstein would say about this hateful piece of work.
HelgiWartooth777 1 year ago
@POOFTER23 my my, you have been a busy bee!
Fancy you trolling on here as well!
You really must find yourself a boyfriend.
I'm starting to think you're just a sorry ass stack of dogshit with NO LIFE
at all off youtube...and to think, you were gonna "flame me" HILARIOUS!!
peckhammanor 1 year ago
This is what I call "a total upside down." I don't think even Nazis were as hypocritical as Norman Finkelstein. I cannot think of a better example of demagoguery.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
@Kurtlane how so?
Ryguy1450 1 year ago
For those who defend Israel, especially Westerners who were in Lebanon in 2006: Why didn't you stay in Lebanon in 2006 if Israel is not a dangerous country? Why were Americans and Europeans evicted from Lebanon? The answer is clear: Lebanese should be wiped off the map, while the architects of the war and their compatriots should be protected from all danger. Shame on you.
mariasawaya 1 year ago
you've quoted Finkelstein's most inflammatory statements in the description. He goes on to say that "ordinary people, Jewish and Muslim, Jewish and Arab, if left to their own devices, can live in peace, freedom, mutual dignity and mutual respect." I'm inclined to agree. And I wish that my professors had half of the integrity of Finkelstein.
pazomblez 1 year ago
@pazomblez
And there's nothing controversial about speaking up for the rights of people to defend themselves against foreign military occupation, aggression, and terrorism.
pazomblez 1 year ago
"If the Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide"
Oct. 22, 2002
When Finkelstein professes his support for this, the parallel with Kaganovich toasting Ribbentrop in Kremlin in 1939 comes up by itself.
But I suppose that you will just say that that was "criticism of British and American actions."
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Norman Finkelstein. Habitual liar, attention seeker, and the filthiest professor of all. Speculates on the memory of his parents (who lived through the Holocaust) everywhere he can. Has been fired by Brooklyn College, N.Y.U., and several other schools for incompetence, mental instability, and abuse of students.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Peter Novick (University of Chicago): "many of [Finkelstein's] assertions are pure invention. ... No facts alleged by Finkelstein should be assumed to be really facts, no quotation in his book should be assumed to be accurate, without taking the time to carefully compare his claims with the sources he cites"
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Prof. Omer Bartov (an authority on genocide) called "The Holocaust Industry" "a novel variation on the anti-Semitic forgery, 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' ... brimming with indifference to historical facts, inner contradictions, strident politics ... indecent ... juvenile, self-righteous, arrogant and stupid"
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
When Finkelstein spoke at Yale on Nov. 10, 2005, he said, "In academia, you can say anything as long as it is footnoted."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
From his April 28, 2005 lecture at University of Buffalo: "...the protagonist in the novel, Exodus, was named 'Ari', which is short for 'Aryan' - an example of the Jew's true intent and Jewish racism. It is the whole admiration for this blond haired, blue eyed type." (Total nonsense. Ari is short for 'Ariel', from Aryeh - Hebrew for lion)
In the same lecture said, "In the last fifteen years, there has not been a single death attributed to anti-Semitism in Europe." (Another nonsense)
(cont)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
He praised Holocaust-denier David Irving as "a good historian!" and as having "made an indispensable contribution to our knowledge of World War II."
Finkelstein often seems to be reasonable. He talks about the way "we reasonable and rational people" think. However, people who claim to be reasonable and rational, and even seem to be, aren't necessarily that way.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
He called Dean Elana Kagan of the Harvard Law School "an Eichmann-like bureaucrat," then added, "Were my mother still around, ... she would have taken the first train to Cambridge and - just as she did with the Nazi guards from Maidanek when confronting them at the postwar trial in Dusseldorf in 1979 - called Kagan a whore to her face and then throttled her."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Another example is the mud-slinging fight into which he dragged Alan Dershowitz. First he called Alan Dershowitz "Adolf Eichmann" and accused him of expressing "Nazi moral judgments." Later he commissioned cartoonist Latuff to make a cartoon published on the Website indybay. The cartoon, titled "Dershowitz Hard at Work," shows Dershowitz at an "Israel peep show" masturbating with a rapturous look on his face as he views live film from Beirut of dead Lebanese.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
It was accompanied by an article written by Finkelstein titled "Should Alan Dershowitz target himself for assassination?"
Finkelstein is a popular speaker among German neo-Nazis. Ingrid Rimland (wife of Ernst Zuendel) referred to him admiringly as the "Jewish David Irving."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Finkelstein is not irrational, nor is he necessarily hateful. He is like a spokesman for a tobacco company who denies that smoking is harmful because his money and fame depend on it. He has found a pretty niche for himself, a sinecure, where he can make his money and earn prestige among the naive, leftist, and Jew-hating by demonizing his own people or attacking the only Jewish country. And always covers himself with "I am Jewish myself" and "my parents went through Holocaust."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
My hunch is that he doesn't hate Zionism at all. He's all pretence, and he's making money and fame. In a weird way, Zionism is feeding him.
"[Finkelstein is] poison, he's a disgusting self-hating Jew, he's something you find under a rock." - Leon Wieseltier
But all of this is not the worst. The worst is his support for Hizbullah, as one can see in this very video.
A few quotes from Hizbullah leader Haqssan Nasrallah:
Kurtlane 1 year ago
A few quotes from Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah:
"Let's get this bit out of the way. We're not looking for concessions from the West. We want your concept of civilization to be over. We want to destroy it, and replace it with ours."
"Israel is a cancerous, usurping entity without legitimacy or legal character."
January 2000
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. quotes from Nasrallah)
"Death to Israel!.. Lebanon is not Ukraine. If anyone thinks you can bring down a state with a few demonstrations, a few scarves, a few shouts, a few media, he is suspect... We will gain more by armed resistance than by politics alone"
From a speech to a pro-Syrian crowd, March 8, 2005
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
"We have discovered how to hit the Jews where they are most vulnerable. The Jews love life, so that is what we shall take away from them. We are going to win because they love life and we love death"
"If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice I do not say the Israeli"
The New Yorker, Oct. 14, 2002
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Comment removed
Kurtlane 1 year ago
"If the Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide"
Oct. 22, 2002
When Finkelstein professes his support for this, the parallel with Kaganovich toasting Ribbentrop in Kremlin in 1939 comes up by itself.
But I suppose that you will just say that that 1939 toast was "criticism of British and American actions."
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Norman Finkelstein is a hero !!
triflind 1 year ago
Also, can I ask that you don't type me.
Because recently someone else on another thread told me that I was a dumb American from a little town who has never traveled abroad and must love country music.
All false.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
@PROFESSOR23MAEHEMM23, antisemitism in Europe is skyrocketing. The Jews of Europe are leaving for the US, Canada or Israel.
Watch this:
Sweden 2010 - Silent Exodus - Half of all Jews have already left Malmo
/watch?v=_YX7wmt3ZQ0
You are from Spain. Read Pilar Rahola. She has an article "JUDÍOS DE SEIS BRAZOS (Jews with Six Arms)"
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Antisemitism is NOTHING? How can you judge? What do you know about how Jewish people live today? Do you think that just because Hitler failed, everything is hunky-dory? Have you ever experienced anything like endless barrage of hate? Have you been followed? Spat on? Urinated on? Beaten? Have you called your relatives in Israel to find out whether they've survived the latest Palestinian "martyrdom?" What the fuck do you know about what it's like being Jewish today?
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I've been through all this, first in Europe (I am from Ukraine), and later in the US. Some decent Muslims I know were shocked when I told them about it. Nothing similar ever happend to them.
It's not just me. I've been to Greece, and I sensed the same familiar fear among Greek Jews.
If you can, watch documentary "The War on Britain's Jews." (It used to be on youtube, but was taken down.)
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Just because we don't go around parading things like this and whining about them doesn't mean they are not there. They are there, and they are growing. You are blind not to see them.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
@PROFESSOR23MAEHEMM23, please read what I wrote earlier in this forum, where I describe how I have come to this point of view. If you were to do that, you would see that I began by saying I have nothing against questioning Israel's policies. That I did it myself, and that is how I came to conclusion that Israel is innocent.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
When all evidence I am presented with turns out to be false, and most outright fabrication, and all co-called "critique" is pure demonization in preparation for extermination, and yet "the struggle continues," against all logic, common sense and basic decency, what am I to say. Notice that when I said "Critics" are antisemites, the word "critics" is in quotes.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
This is the problem nowadays: there are few honest questioners and critics, but tons of "questioners and critics" who neither question nor criticize, but are dead set in their self-righteousness and their hatred.
I don't think most "crfitics" recognize Israeli Jews are human beings who have the right to live. Because if they did, they wouldn't profess solidarity with Hezbollah or celebrate successful attacks in Tel Aviv.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Here is something that may bring some sense of reality. Listen to the end:
watch?v=-uQ-ZRl47G8
But it will only bring it to those willing to let it in.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
All this stuff about Israel committing holocaust, genocide, apartheid, oppression, occupation, persecution, blah blah blah and a kitchen sink - all of that is just total bullshit. Propaganda. Viruses in the brain.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Whenever Israel attacks schools and hospitals, the IDF tell the media militants were involved. Palestinians say the IDF deliberately target citizens. Who do we believe? Well, on 6 Jan '09, a girls school was attacked (40 civilians killed, 55 injured, many children). The United Nations Relief and Works Agency happened to be on the spot. They investigated, questioning survivors, including UN workers at the school. There were no militants. Watch ?v=74DfOGErKwg This is primary source information.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, than you very much for that link to the video about the UNRWA school attack.
It's a very good example of lies.
From article "World duped by Hamas death count" by Yaakov Katz. Jerusalem Post, Feb. 15, 2009
"The international community had been given a vastly distorted impression of the death toll because of 'false reporting' by Hamas, said Col. Moshe Levi, the head of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), which compiled the IDF figures.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. quote from article)
"As an example of such distortion, he cited the incident near a UN school in Jabalya on January 6, in which initial Palestinian reports falsely claimed IDF shells had hit the school and killed 40 or more people, many of them civilians.
"In fact, he said, 12 Palestinians were killed in the incident - nine Hamas operatives and three noncombatants.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. quote from article)
"Furthermore, as had since been acknowledged by the UN, the IDF was returning fire after coming under attack, and its shells did not hit the school compound.
"'From the beginning, Hamas claimed that 42 people were killed, but we could see from our surveillance that only a few stretchers were brought in to evacuate people,' said Levi, adding that the CLA contacted the PA Health Ministry and asked for the names of the dead.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. quote from article)
"'We were told that Hamas was hiding the number of dead.'"
(end of quote)
For a few interesting details, go to "Elder of Ziyon" website and search for "UNRWA school."
From Elder of Ziyon: "If the Palestinian Health Ministry never claimed the initial count of 42 deaths, then who did? The UN said 30, and PCHR said 27 civilians, so it wasnt either of them.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. from ElderOfZiyon)
"Was this just another case of some reporter or bystander making up a number and having the world believe them without question? And if so, how many other times has this sort of thing happened?
"And if the IDF turns out to be correct and so far, they are the only ones to release names of the victims then we have solid proof that the UN and PCHR are not reliable."
(end of quote)
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
In your video, Christopher Gunness, UNRWA spokesperson, ups the stakes, saying fatalities have risen from 30 to 40.
You can take a look at "Al-Fakhura school incident" on Wikipedia.
So who lies? Palestinian organizations, Palestinian eyewitnesses, UN sources, NGOs, Red Cross, and media. Everybody. Especially in Gaza. If they didn't lie, if they didn't tow the Hamas line, Hamas would kill them.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Here you can see how Hamas launches mortars form right under a school building. A different school at different time, but it proves Hamas is not above such things:
Mortar Bombs Shot from UN School in Gaza 29 Oct. 2007
watch?v=zmXXUOs27lI
And here is yet another one:
Hamas Uses Schools and Ceasefire to Shoot Rockets at Israel
watch?v=8LGubwghyEw
And here is Hamas booby trapping a school and a zoo:
Hamas Booby Trapped School and Zoo 11 Jan. 2009
watch?v=uHhs9ihSmbU
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Hamas using children as human shields
watch?v=GWQQFJXMrg4
Utterly trashing Geneva conventions, btw.
The UNRWA school case is just one of "Israeli atrocities" cases:
al-Dura's murder, Jenin massacre, Family at the beach, Rachel Corrie protecting a house, mother and four children at Beit Hanoun, killing of Mahmood Mashharawi - all have proven not what they seem. All full or partial lies and propaganda.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
The most well known of these, and among the most investigated is the case of Mohammad al-Dura. Watch the Pallywood series:
According to Palestinian Sources
(2 parts)
watch?v=mA4WQ-MbjRo
watch?v=KlDadDjnKZA
The Birth of an Icon
(2 parts)
watch?v=tmgrboysdzs
watch?v=IFBa878N0HE
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Icon of Hatred
(2 parts)
watch?v=fx2xPdvOT0Y
watch?v=ujMFz9E68W0
And here is the one on the Family at the beach
Gaza Beach Tragedy
watch?v=U6S96bskAwI
Ask me about others, Ill tell you about Jenin "Massacre" or "killing" of Mahmood Mashharawi.
Do you see how you are being used?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
@Kurtlane I don't understand how you can possibly quote the IDF as a source for anything to do with this incident. They're the ones in the dock! And I don't know who the Elders of Ziyon are but they sure don't sound neutral investigators. Do you have any independent sources of information? I'm going to have a look at what Wikipedia says. It does now seem that the school was not directly hit. [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
"Critics" are antisemites. Simply or not simply.
The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!
"When people talk about Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking antisemitism." - Martin Luther King
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Can you all shut up? You can see nothing past religion. Your hear Dr. Finkelstein and you hear Jew, I hear Doctor. Listen to his words about the conflict, about the murder and atrocities committed by one country against innocent civilians, not his views about Jews against Arabs. Your racist fools.
Landmarkmoon 1 year ago
This speech is the best example of demagoguery I've ever heard.
Kurtlane 2 years ago
Demagoguery? Best example of demagoguery? Is it buggery demagoguery! This is a demo for goodness sake, not a lecture in the hallowed halls of academia.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
Whether a demo or a lecture, or a cartoon book, this is demagoguery.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
On what grounds?
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, I am not sure about the meaning of your question, so I will answer it as I understand it.
I have nothing against questioning Israeli government's policies. I have done it myself. This is how I came to this conclusion.
Only, I was questioning, not demonizing or denouncing. And also, my questioning was directed at certain actions and policies of the government, not Israel as a country, nor its population.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
That my questioning was honest I have no doubt. Was it thorough enough? I think so.
I have watched the situation intencely since the start of the "peace process" in 1992. I gave peace a chance. I gave it a chance when the first murders of Jews started in the form of bus bombings. At some point it became too much. Little by little it became clear to me that it doesn't work. Then I figured out that it "works" in a very different, mostrous way - what I call "the cycle of the shadow."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Then Arafat started his intifada, and it turned out that the most extreme and the most demonized Israeli right-wingers were right all along. They had predicted correctly everything that followed.
In this slow and very reluctant trip from "give peace a chance" to "not one inch," I have traveled twice to Israel a(including the territories). I have walked the streets, talked to people, saw things, went to cafes, rode busses and taxies.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
What I saw was tremendous desire for peace and total lack of hatred for Arabs.
You can hear it yourself if you listen to Brigitte Gabiel tell her story:
watch?v=-sL54rHPwqA
This is the same attitude I saw.
I have relatives and friends there, with whom I'm in regular contact. I've also talked to plenty of Arabs, here in America.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Not just talked to. I've been spat on, physically pushed, told "Fuck you Jews," "I will put a knife in your back, then we'll be friends" and quite a few other pleasant things. This is how I learned of the Arab attitude (of which Brigitte Gabriel also speaks).
I have also read plenty of articles, and books form all points of view. And keep reading. All of that with a skeptical eye.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I used to compare news items as reported by mainstream news with how they were reported in alternative sources on the left and on the right, particularly in Israeli news such as Arutz Sheva and Jpost. This is what allerted me to the incredible amout of lying thnat is going on, all directed against Israel.
This is how I came to the conclusion that Israel is innocent of all this BS leveled against it.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
So who am I to believe: the honest word of Mr. Finkelstein or my own lying eyes? (sarcasm)
Mr. Finkelstein here is particularly bad. Lying filthy demagogue. Open your ears: there is almost no information in what he says, it's not even definable or debatable, it's just a bunch of demonological stuff.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Well I'm not shy about denouncing my government's policies. I marched with 2 million against the invasion of Iraq in arguably the greatest moral uprising this country (UK) has ever witnessed. I still hold out vain hopes, along with many of my fellow countrymen, that Blair and his cohorts will one day face a war crimes tribunal. We hold those we elect into power accountable, at least some of us do (we beheaded Charles I, don't forget). So 'only questioning, not denouncing' is anathema to me.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
All these incidents I have mentioned have these things in common:
They are cases not just of vile talk, but outright murder. At least I see them as murder.
All the victims were not just Jews, but Israelis.
These were not pre-selected "good Jews," not necessarily supporters of the Palestinian cause. Some of them could have been. But this is not the point for me.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
The question is therefore: as unpopular as this ideas has become, do you have the guts to acknowledge that Israeli Jews are human beings and have the right to live?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Is that it? It's just that you said you had written 'quite a bit' in response to my previous post.
You ask, do I have the guts to acknowledge that Israeli Jews are human beings and have the right to live. (I'd like to know what you're implying when you say 'the guts'.)
Well, the brief answer is yes. A more elaborate answer is as follows:
The ordinary people of Israel find themselves today in a conflict not of their making. Most were not even alive when their forebears were invited [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, this is not it. I haven't even begun.
But at least you have acknowledged that Israelis have a right to live and a right to land. This is a good start.
About teh land: you are very confused here, as is to be expected. Let me clarify a few points.
Balfour never said "'a land without people for a people without land." Nor did Zionists. Read Herzl's "Jewish State" - he talks about Arabs living in that land.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
The phrase "'a land without people for a people without land' was invented by some Christians sympathetic to Jews.
Wikipedia has a pretty good expose on it. Its conclusion:
A common but inaccurate citation is allegation that Zionists used this phrase to present Palestine as being "without inhabitants." This is incorrect on three counts: 1) the slogan was not actually in use by pre-state Zionists
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
2) the Christians who did use this phrase were under no illusion that the land was without inhabitants 3) Zionists were under no illusion that the land was without inhabitants
Also, the phrase in form "Land without people for people without land" is often quoted from Chaim Weizmann's speech at a Zionist meeting in Paris in 1914.
I have read this speech. In it, Weizmann mocked people who might have thought the land was empty.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
He was well aware of difficulties new settlements in Palestine had been already facing. In the same speech, he talked about the Jewish settlers "who have drenched the soil with their sweat and blood [and who] will defend our possessions, should anything happen in Palestine." What blood is he talking about? Jewish blood, same as now. And who is spilling it? Local Arabs, same as now.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Arabs were always visible to Zionists, even though in the beginning they were so few, one would be justified not noticing them. One only needs to read Mark Twain's "The Innocents Abroad" to see how empty and desolate the place was. Other accounts tell the same story.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
But the Palestine the Balfour declaration refers to includes both modern Israel and modern Jordan. In 1922, the British chucked off land beyond Jordan in what was the first step of endless concessions to Arabs and against and Jews.
As Neville Chamberlain said, "If we must offend the Jews or the Arabs, let it be the Jews."
The future Jewish state thus lost 80% of land.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
In 1947, UN commission partitioned what was left into 7 areas: 3 for Jews, 3 for Arabs and Jerusalem as an independent city-state. The Jewish administration accepted the division, the Arabs rejected it. It became null and void.
In 1948, the day Israel declared its independence, it was attacked by 5 Arab armies. In the bloody war, it secured some of the land, but failed to get Judea and Samaria (to Jordan) and Gaza (to Egypt).
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
This is the origin of the "green line" - it's a cease-fire line, that's all.
In 1964, Palestine Liberation Organization was founded. The Palestine it was going to "liberate" was not Judea, Samaria or Gaza. Its terror was not directed against Jordan or Egypt. It was Israel.
In 1967, as a result of 6-day war, Israel captured these lands, as well as Sinai and the Golan. Judea, Samaria and Gaza constitute 22% of "Greater Israel."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
From 1967, Israel has been trying to return all the lands captured in that war. At first, the response was the Khartoum resolution, with its 3 nos: no to peace, no to recognition of Israel, no to negotiations. When Egypt rejected the resolution and recognized Israel in 1978, Sinai was returned.
The PLO for a long time rejected it all outright. But beginning in 1992, for reasons I remember very well, Arafat chose a trojan horse strategy.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
These are not my words, they come from Arafrat's closest advisor Feisal Husseini.
I can spend a lot of time describing what happened later. But let me jump to 2000 and the claim of separation of the territories (i.e. Judea, Samaria and Gaza) into bantustans, leaving only 22% for the Arabs and 78% for the Jews. This is blatantly false. It's one of the lies propagated by Arafat to justify what he did (i.e. starting a war).
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
It was refuted by, among others, Dennis Ross, who was one of the people conducting the negotiations.
Arafat, and Abbas after him, have chosen the strategy of no peace, no resolution, no independent state, and endless empty worthless negotiations. Hamas is much the same, except it doesn't bother with negotiations and is preparing (with help from Hezbollah and Iran) for conquest and extermination. This is where we are now.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
So when you tak of 78% of land lost by Palestinians, I might just a well talk about 80% of land lost by Jews when the British cut off Transjordan. But I don't talk about that, I let it be and don't nurse bitterness or desire for revenge.
But there is another major fallacy in that approach. Who are Palestinians?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
to settle in Israel. The fact that most Israelis take the same view of things as their ruling elite is only to be expected. It is the same in all countries. A state's ideology and mythology is enshrined in all its institutions, not least the media, and imbibed in extremely subtle and sophisticated ways. I mention this apropos of your remark about accessing both 'mainstream' and alternative' sources. Admirable, but what matters is only that those sources be independent and primary. [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
Israelis not only have a right to live but they have a right to their land. Yes, I say 'their' land because you cannot turn the clock back. It is as wrong-headed of Palestinians to entertain hopes of claiming back the 78% of the original land now occupied by the Israelis as it would be for the Irish to try reclaim the area 'beyond the pale' or the native Americans to... well, you get the point. Whats done is done. Viz: In 1917 Britain's Lord Balfour gave the land of Palestine to [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
the Jews saying it was 'a land without people for a people without land'. This of course was a lie. Bit by bit the Zionists took the land away from the Palestinians, so that now they have only 22 percent left of the original land. This is not the best but the worst of the land, and even that is under occupation. They are still taking land (and not only from the Palestinians) under the guise of 'security'. Throughout history whenever land has been stolen, the indigenous people have fought [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
with their lives to keep it. That is the root of the problem.
I have no objection to the use of the word 'terrorist'. They terrorise a population in order to achieve their ends: that is the meaning of terrorist. So they are terrorists. By the same token and the same definition, Israel is a terrorist state, no less brutal. Ordinary Israeli citizens simply have no idea of the atrocities that have been carried out not for 'security' the perennial pretext but ultimately for territory.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
No, Israel is not a terrorist state. Security issue is not a guise, it's very real. Ordinary citizens have pretty good idea of of what is happening, since 1) Israel is a democracy with free media, which, like media everywhere, is fairly leftist and barrages its citizens with shame and accusations, and 2) all Israelis serve in the army. So they know.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I have talked to plenty of Israeli soldiers, both current and former. They are normal people, not sadists or mental wrecks, the way they would be if there were truth in your statements about terrorist state and atrocities. They know and understand a lot of what you don't.
Security is just another word for right to live. Rather than be blown into little pieces of flesh.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Here is some mone in response of what you wrote earlier.
Well, clearly we are on opposite sides politically. I am on the right, and reasons why I am on the right would take a thick book to describe.
I have studied at several universities, and therefore have extensive experience with leftists. This is why I am on the right.
Perhaps if you read David Horowitz's "Radical Son," you might begin to get at least a glimpse of what's wrong with the left.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
At least I hope you would agree that denouncing something you don't really know or understand is a recipe for disaster. This is not a left or right issue. You must question before you denounce.
For example, if I say "He took a knife and cut her stomach open," are you imagining a murderer? And what if he is a surgeon saving her life? That would be another story, wouldn't it?
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Getting back to our Palestines. To talk of Israeli REGIME or compliant Israeli media is ludicrous. I was born and spent first 16 years of my life in Soviet Union, so I know first hand what a regime is and how compliant media can be. And Israel is not it, just as UK or US or Canada is not it. If you say it is, it only shows how far out on the leftist limb and away form reality you are. Typical leftist spoiled-brat attitude.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I still hold on to vain hopes that Shimon Peres (aka Arafat's camel) and his cohorts will one day answer for his "peace process," "new Middle East" and the horrific muddle into which he threw his country and in which it remains to this day.
As for silencing debate, what debate? It's a barrage of intimidation and hatred. I would be perfectly willing to engage in polite and real debate.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
But this is not possible. Instead, in school after school there are Israel-demonizing events worthy of Nazi Germany, and supporters of Israel are given no opportunity to respond at all. I live right next to one such school: UC Irvine. I've seen it first hand, students going from class to class forced to listen to a megaphone screaming about "Israel this.." and "Jews that.." It's just like the antisemitic campaign in Soviet Union in 1952 that my mom told me about so many times.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Just last month, Israel's ambassador was almost shut down at UCI as heckler after heckler stood up to yell some inanity at him in an organized action. Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon received trhe same at Oxford, where a student shouted either "Itbach al-Yahood (Exterminate the Jews)" or "Khaibar Khaibar ya-Yahood."
In Berkeley, Netanyahu was shut down several years ago. Graffiti "Killed the Jews" appeared on campus.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
In Concordia U in Montreal, the whole campus went crazy when Netanyahu was about to come, there were riots, several Jewish students were beaten, one ended in a hospital with concussion.
If you have any honesty, you have to admit that it's not a debate, it's not an environment for a debate, it's intimidation, demonization and hatred plain and simple.
Watch this:
Pro-israeli manifestation, Malmö, Sweden 8 feb 2009
watch?v=mB3QdpJonb4
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Actually, the video shows anti-Israel protesters across the pro-Israel manifestation. Arabs throw 2 pipe bombs and fire 2 small rockets at the pro-Israel people.
And here is the result:
Sweden 2010 - Silent Exodus - Half of all Jews have already left Malmoe
watch?v=_YX7wmt3ZQ0
Same thing more or less everywhere. Here is Florida:
Pro-Hamas Demonstration - Fort Lauderdale FL
watch?v=j3Xl68kP4wo
Some debate.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
In fact, Palestinians and their supporters avoid real honest debate like a plague. For example, Jummy Carter, who also complained about lack of honest debate, ran awat when Alan Derschowitz proposed to have one. Why? Because they know they will lose.
From morning till night on practically every news source, mainstream or alternative, all one hears is "Palestinian narrative." From the point of view of "Palestinian narrative." The proof of which is in "Palestinian narrative."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
It's crass, simplistic and full of lies, but hardly anyone nowadays has heard anything else.
It's like "Flat Earth Society," but with billions of members. And anyone who says otherwise is immediately cut off and blacklisted.
It is exactly as Max Nordau said at the First Zionist Congress in 1897, "If you want to drown a dog, you first have to proclaim it to be mad."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Meaning, "If you want to exterminate the Jews, you first have to proclaim them to be Satan's seed." It's demonization in preparation for extermination. The Nazis did exactly the same thing.
You have described the Jew-hatred well enough yourself. But Israel-hatred is merely another, prettier face of the same thing. There are 6 million Jews living in Israel, and Israel-hatred is desire for their extermination. I call it "Jew-hatred light."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
There are 6 million Jews living in Israel, and Israel-hatred is desire for their extermination. I call it "Jew-hatred light." But it's still Jew-hatred.
"Anti-semitism." I don't even use this word any more. It's been taken over by Jew-haters, who will say, "I'm not anti-semitic because I don't hate Arabs. I only hate Jews." That's what Nazis used to say.
However, there are plenty of Jews nowadays who are Jew-haters. These are Jewish traitors
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
This is nothing new. Since at least the Middle Ages, a Jewish traitor has been the worst Jew-hater of all. There were always Jews who converted to Christianity or Islam or whatever was offered and obediently licked the buttocks of their oppressor, spending all possible time to cause as much hell as possible to their own people. In Europe such Jews were used for forced "debates" against the Jewish community. Often they were effective.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Many communities were expelled, and some were massacred as a result of their "debate" efforts.
Now scum like this doesn't convert to another religion. They are more valuable to Jew-haters as Jews, so they can claim "we have nothing against Jews. We are only against Zionists." And trying to do further "debating," which is not really debating but hate-mongering. Just like in the Middle Ages. Indeed, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Finkelstein is the king of these creatures.
I have been asking where this seething hatred of "the Jew" comes from all my life. Honestly asking this question is looking directly at one of the darkest places in the heart of humanity. Why was I called "dirty yid full of shit" even as a little kid, since as long as I can remember? Why was I hounded, beaten, spat on, urinated on by people to whom I haven't done anything? In Ukraine and in America.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Totally different places, with different ways of life, language, culture, you name it. Everything is different, except this one constant. Why did I immediately find common language and understanding with Jews from Iran (because they've been through the same thing over there)?
Hatred has been hounding my people for at least 2000 years, and there is no sign of it going away. Pagans, Christians, Muslims, atheists, Nazis, Communists, capitalists, aristocracy, middle class, lower class..
(cont)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
you name it - all took part. Entire libraries have been written on the subject. The reasons and explanations given vary enormously, often contradict each other, often go against elementary logic or common sense, often deliberately so.
I have only recently come up with an explanation of where this hatred is from. However, this explanation is so serious and so dark, you are not up to it. If you were to really get it, you would no longer be a leftist.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
So let me skip over this one and move to easier subjects.
Palestinians get their seething hatred from many sources. Apparently the biggest one is the mosque. I can give you a ton of most monstrous examples.
The other major source is the media. Not just news media - all the media. The amount and ferocity of Jew-hatred there is equal to the one in the Nazi media.
Especially programs for children. Especially for girls.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Why girls? Because girls will become mothers, thus assuring that Jew-hatred is literally passed on with mothers' milk, and that two generations from now there are just as many Jew-haters.
Then there is school, history and geography and religious education. They are taught about Mohammed massacring Jewish Qurayza tribe, and the massacre of Jews at Khaibar, and the rest. They are taught how glorious it was to slaughter elderly Jews in Hebron in 1929.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Then there are extracurricular activities, where both Hamas and Fatah are very active indoctrinating children into their mentality and preparing them to fight and kill.
They are taught to chant "Palestine baladna wal Yahood kelabna (Palestine is our land and Jew are our dogs)" and "Khaibar! Khaibar! Ya Yahoud! Jayesh Mohammed sawfa ya'oud. (Khaibar, Khaibar, The Jews, Mohammed's Army is coming for you)."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Imagine someone shouting "Auschwitz, Auschwitz, The Jews, Hitler's Army is coming for you!"
They are taught that Jews are sons of pigs and monkeys, that Jews are to be butchered and killed. When they are a bit older, they are taught how to butcher and kill. And then they are sent to do what they were taught. Still as children. Watch this:
watch?v=g5IfmIi8DGQ
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
From "PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY: DIRECT THE HEAT TOWARD ISRAEL" by Khaled Abu Toameh
"The Palestinian Authority is now searching for any excuse to increase tensions with Israel, hoping that this will invite outside pressure on the government of Binyamin Netanyahu to make as many concessions as possible.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. from Abu Toameh's article)
"Netanyahus recent decision to include two religious sites in Israels national heritage list is already being exploited by Abbass government to send schoolchildren in Hebron and Bethlehem to throw stones and firebombs at Israeli soldiers."
And then there is plain culture. Children all over the world learn form slightly older children who in turn learn form slightly older, etc.
So what do Palestinian children learn?
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Just this week, Palestinian teens again threw rocks from top of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on the Jews praying below at the Western wall. In 1833, Sir Moses Montefiore visited Jerusalem, and noted that Arab teens threw rocks from top of the Temple Mount on the Jews praying below at the Western wall.
Where was Zionism or occupation in 1833? Nowhere. Teens today have learned this from earlier teens, going all the way back to that time and much earlier.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
And this is just one example among hundreds.
The stuff about being herded into these enclaves, losing 78% of the land, devastation caused by Israeli tanks, rubble that were once their homes, family members etc. killed indiscriminately, the Wall, occupation, etc. etc, and a kitchen sink these are all either lies or half-truths.
The bombing of hospitals and schools, deliberate targeting of civilians, white phosphorus, etc. more lies and half-truths.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
If you give me an opportunity, I can try to undo these little by little. However, this is quite a bunch and will take quite a bit of time and effort. So before I even begin, would you please tell me if there is any end to it, or you will just barrage me with endless "whatabouts?"
But the biggest of all lies is the statement "They want an end to the occupation and a restoration of land to 67 boundaries."
Because if they wanted it, they would already have it.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Just today I have read "PA TV continues to teach children that all of Israel is 'occupied Palestine.'" by Itamar Marcus. Google and read it.
Here is Hamas:
"Hamas: We killed a Zionist settler in occupied Tel Aviv"
JPOST Apr 8, 2008
"Several hours after the body of a man, was found in Tel Aviv, a Hamas affiliated TV station transmitting from Gaza reported that a 'Zionist settler was stabbed to death in occupied Tel Aviv.'"
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
It looks like Hamas claim is nonsense-it was either criminal murder or suicide. But " occupied Tel Aviv" speaks for itself.
"Our position is that even if the Zionist State is the size of a postage stamp it has no right to exist." (Imam Achmad Cassiem. National Chairperson of the South African Islamic Unity Convention. From a speech on May 23, 2002)
I have a ton of quotes like this. And a ton of quotes that go far beyond, looking forward to extermination on all Jews.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
One of the pieces of evidence that all these things are lies or half-truths is that they are so intensely promoted. I know, it doesn't sound logical, but who said people are logical? Were all the Jew-hating things intensely promoted in Nazi Germany true? Is the blood libel thats been around for thousands of years true?
You might also think about these quotes from Arab leaders:
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
"There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. We are all part of one nation. It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity, because it is in the interest of the Arabs to encourage a separate Palestinian identity in contrast to Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. quote)
"The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity."
- Zuheir Mohsein, Member of the Supreme Council of the PLO. From Trouw (Dutch newspaper) March 31, 1977
"There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."
- Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, a local Arab leader, to the Peel Commission, 1937
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
"There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not."
- Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testifying against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946
"Palestine was part of the Province of Syria [...] politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity" - Representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the UN in a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria." (Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, to the UN Security Council)
These are major Arab leaders, knowledgeable, and no friends of Zionists.
So what is Palestine and who are Palestinians?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
@Kurtlane You say there are plenty of 'Jews' who are 'Jew-haters' when what you really mean is that there are plenty of Jews who are appalled at Israel's actions. This bit of mischief is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind when I alluded to linguistic techniques of manipulation in an earlier posting. If you really do think the terms 'Jew' and 'Supporter of Israel's actions' are synonymous, it does rather throw a different light on your claim to have been pissed on because you were a 'Jew'.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, your phrase "'Supporter of Israel's actions" (and its opposite, "Crfitic of Israel's actions") belie so much hypocrisy, it's hard to know where to start.
Notice I said "hypocrisy," not "piss" like you.
Is Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hizbullah, a critic of Israel's actions? Is Finkelstein, in professing his support for Hizbullah, criticizing Israel's actions?
A bit more to clarify the cituation:
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
'The blood-dimmed tide is loosed / The ceremony of innocence is drowned...' yes yes. I think you understand my point well enough though, Kurtlane. If I were to go about extolling the actions of the Yorkshire Ripper, I might get pissed on too - metaphorically if not literally. I might subsequently protest that I had every right under freedom of speech to express my views - and might even have a point. But I wouldn't have the chutzpah to say that I was pissed on because I was a Yorkshireman.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, you lost me.
Please re-phrase what you just said. I don't get it.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
OK. You ended your posting to me with: 'The worst are full of passionate intensity.' This is a line from The Sacred Coming by W. B. Yeats, isn't. it. Presumably you didn't just come out with a line of Yeats spontaneously without knowing it. I recognised it and quoted the preceding two lines from the poem. The rest of the posting and the one before that is a comment on your claim (alluded to more than once) to have been 'urinated on' because you were a Jew.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, I was urinated on when I was 13 years old. Literally. I had no political opinions at the time, I was not a bully or a nasty kid, I had no hatred towards anyone. The boy who did it, and others who helped him by tricking me. had no other reason to do it except that they were Russians or Ukrainians and I was a Jew. Though in this case they didn't say anything, I heard plenty about me being a Jew in similar circumstances, when I was ganged up on, beaten, called names, etc.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
If 13 is too old for you, I had been subject to this since as long as I can remember. If there is some other reason here than me being Jewish, what is it? If they called me "dirty yid full of shit," "satan's spawn" etc. what other reason was there? All this when I was a little kid.
Do you really believe that Jews are human beings and have a right to live?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Comment removed
archdeaconj 1 year ago
Comment removed
archdeaconj 1 year ago
In British English slang, 'piss' used as a verb means 'urinate'. It can take several prepositions, one of which is 'on'. I don't know whether American English has the same usage. The Yorkshire Ripper is a notorious serial killer - perhaps not notorious enough if you have not heard of him.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
I thought you were talking about Hezbollah being like Yorkshire ripper, and Finkelstein - like the smart ass who glorifies him, and then covers up behind freedom of speech arguments.
Is this what you meant?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Hre is another case from my life. This took place in 2001 in America:
I took a course at a local community college. There were a lot of women in hijabs and abayas. So once I thought, "If they wear hijabs and abayas, can I wear a scullcap? Not to offend anyone, not to be religious, but simply because I can. Call it a fashion statement if you want.
Well, I thought I could. I wore it for a total of 5 days, basically from parking lot to class and back to the parking lot.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
In 5 days, one guy spat on me, and another stalked me, saying, "Hey, give me money. I want money." I didn't say a word to either one. It was all merely because I was wearing a little round cap.
That was quite an experience. You should try it, if you have the courage. Put on a Jewish scullcap and go like that to your campus.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
In general, if I got your point right, don't think for a moment that I have these views and therefore was treated badly. It's exactly the other way around: I was treated like shit, and therefore formed these views.
This is the same logic you apply to your beloved "Palestinians" - if they are so hateful, it's because they are treated so badly.
Should you ever apply this logic to Jews?
But I am not seething with hatred like your beloved. Nowhere near to the same extent.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
@Kurtlane Why not just make a video response instead of spamming the whole message board. Typical filibuster move of a Zionist.
Ryguy1450 1 year ago
Here is one more situation for you to ponder. A scene my father told me. I was there too, but I was a baby then and don't remember it. In a bus, two elderly Jews were talking in Yiddish. A drunk came to them and started threatening, "Why are you telling evil things about other nations?" See, if it's Yiddish or Hebrew, some people assume it must be something evil. The couple said, "We were talking about our children," but the drunk didn't stop.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
My father got extremely mad and began shouting at him. He was holding me in his arms, and I began screaming. It was quite a scene.
Another "nice" Jewish memoir.
Did those two elderly people deserve being treated like that? Was that drunk right when he accused them of talking evil things about other nations?
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Well, all I can say is that no Jew I know, including my wife's best friend who is Jewish, has ever complained about anti-Semitism. Even the BNP (a rabidly racist political party in the UK) doesn't go on about Jews anymore. The only ones trying to give it the kiss of life are apologists for Israel who write columns in the print media conflating it with condemnation of Israel. It's just another card drawn from the 'holocaust' pack and it's disgraceful. Arguments should stand on their own merits.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
Well, I don't know what world you live in.
Try to watch "The War on Britain's Jews" (It used to be on youtube, but I can no longer watch it. Maybe you can.) It shows quite a lot, from "I didn't know you were Jewish" to destroyed desecrated Jewish graves to measures that have to be taken by British police to make it safe for Jewish kids in a Jewish school to "I hope Jews realize that they have no place in this country."
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I had more videos on Jew-hatred in Britain, but youtube has taken them down.
Still, here are just a few things I know just in 2009 just in Britain:
Edgware. June 16, 2009. A young woman is left scarred by brutal antisemitic attack.
London, Jan. 5, 2009. Brondesbury Park Synagogue is the target of an attempted arson. A rag soaked in gasoline is placed against a side door. Also a rock is thrown at the window, but it fails to break it.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
London. Jan. 10, 2009. Major anti-Israel rally turns into a riot. Rioters chase police through the streets until they corner them outside the Israeli embassy. On the way, at least one Starbucks restaurant is ransacked. Bottles, shoes, sticks and a metal bar are thrown through a window of a Chinese restaurant. Top Gun clothes store has its windows smashed, leather wallets and bags looted, red paint is thrown into it.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
A dental practice and newsagents are attacked. 3 policemen and 20 rioters are injured. At the Israeli embassy, missiles were fired at the police. The damage is over 1 million pounds.
London. Jan. 10, 2009. Three protesters chain themselves to the door of the Ahava store in Covent Garden, forcing it to close for around 5 hours. They also hang a banner in the window accusing the company of funding Israeli war crimes in Gaza. They are arrested.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
London. Jan. 10-11, 2009. Tesco Metro supermarket is targeted . Several windows are smashed and words Kill Jews are painted. The same slogan is painted on the wall of a childrens playground on Whitechapel Chicksand a week earlier.
London. Jan. 13, 2009. A group of Palestinian supporters enter the offices of British Israel Communication & Media (pro-Israel lobby in central London.) They use loudspeakers to shout anti-Israel messages and scare staff working at the office.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Then they turning over desks, cut telephone lines and throw leaflets before fleeing. They leave a suspected package. Police arrive and make it safe. Later, the group of Palestinians claim that its aim was to stop the propaganda war -- disrupt Israels PR operation.
London. Jan. 14, 2009. A Starbucks at Londons East End is smashed. The manager is inside and hides inside the office. Hoodlums paint racist graffiti and throw a Molotov cocktail through the window.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
The manager than runs to the fire escape and raises the alarm. Fire fighters manage to stop the flame. The attack is trumpeted at Indimedia website as peace activism.
London. Jan. 14, 2009. A gang of youths hurl a brick at a Tesco delivery van, then attack the driver. The driver is later treated for head injury.
London. Jan. 18, 2009. Jewish man is assaulted in a Jewish North London neighborhood. He is punched in the face and knocked to the round, then kicked and punched.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
London. Jan. 18, 2009. Jewish man is assaulted in a Jewish North London neighborhood. He is punched in the face and knocked to the round, then kicked and punched. Attackers have their faces covered. One of them says, This is for Gaza.
Oxford. Jan. 14, 2009. David Lowe, an orthodox Jew, was attacked by two men, one wearing a Palestinian flag on his jacket, the other wearing a keffiyeh. He was punched in the head. Knocked to the ground and kicked.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
David Lowe is a founding member of MyJewz, the Muslim-Jewish dialogue group at Oxford University.
Willesden. Jan. 4, 2009. Synagogue is set on fire. Police increase patrols to protect Jewish residents in the area.
Same thing all over Europe and in some other places.
From article "Jews attacked 4 times more than Muslims, police say" By Tom Harper and Ben Leapman. LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH. Dec. 18, 2006:
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
"Jewish people are four times more likely to be attacked in Britain because of their religion than Muslims, according to figures compiled by the police.
"One in 400 Jews, compared with one in 1,700 Muslims, are likely to be victims of faith-related hate attacks every year."
Read "The Jihad against Britain's Jews" by Melanie Phillips. Feb 06, 2009. Spectator
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I don't know where you live, because it seems to me that Britain and France are the two most Islamized places in Europe. With everything that follows, including Jew-hatred.
watch?v=YQ1z8dgMYO0
Here is Noor Rashid, sophomore at Oxford, shouting either "Itbakh al-Yahood" ("Slaughter the Jews") or "Khaibar Khaibar ya-Yahood" (something like "Auschwitz, Auschwitz, the Jews") at Danny Ayalon at Oxford on Feb. 8, 2010.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Is this anti-Zionism or anti-Semitism? Who is collating the two here, apologists for Israel or its enemies?
Same thing with chants at Arab-Muslim-leftist rallies: Kutile al-Yahood: (kill the Jews), "Itbakh al-Yahood" (exterminate the Jews), "Falastin baladna wal Yahood kelabna" (Palestine is our land and Jews are our dogs).
In a milder form the same is described in Nick Cohen's article "Hatred is Turning Me Into a Jew"
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
So go on, try to separate "good condemnation of Israel" from "bad condemnation of the Jews." You won't succeed. Nobody is interested in your distinctions.
And that is the way it should be. From "Separate anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism?" By Dennis Prager. Jewish World Review. May 30, 2006:
"Imagine someone saying that he seeks the destruction of Italy because he regards Italian national identity as racist.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
(cont. quote from Praeger)
"Further, imagine that this person constantly denies being anti-Italian, because he does not hate all Italians, only Italy and all those who believe Italy should exist.
"Now substitute 'Jewish' for 'Italian' and 'Israel' for 'Italy' and you understand the absurdity of the argument that one can be anti-Zionist but not anti-Jewish."
You have one point I agree with: arguments should stand on their own merits.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
So would you please stop giving me stuff I didn't say. Like "self-hating Jews." Yes, it's a silly cliche, used by some Jews. We Jews are human beings, and we too can be subject to cliches, banalities, etc. It's a minor flaw, it doesn't mean we should be killed for it.
I think that there is a struggle in you: on one hand you agree that arguments should stand or fall on their own merits,
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
and on the other you "condemn Israel" (notice, Israel, not Israeli government's actions) just like a child tears a little animal into pieces, not quite realizing what he is doing.
The "card from Holocaust pack" - first of all, don't cling to Holocaust alone (some Jews do, it's another banality, and again, we shouldn't be killed for it). There are 1700 years of hell, and Holocaust is only the "latest greatest" in it.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Emanuele Ottolenghi wrote that our time is actually more like the time of inquisition, and I agree with him. But don't tell me that inquisition was good. And if you see it in this light, and honestly examine the arguments, you will see that they fall into nothingness and what is left is simply a new page in the history of the same old hatred.
But if you persist in your desire to tear little animal into pieces, then nothing can help you.
So let me next address the arguments.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
I've been looking at some websites and I have to concede that anti-Semitism does still exist, much to my surprise. I shall look into this further. That said, you have trawled through news archives for examples of 'anti-Semitism' in the UK in 2009 and most of them are connected with anti-Israel protests. Straightforward protests against the Israeli government, you classify as anti-Semitic. Ive said it before and I'll say it again: it is absurd to classify such protests as 'anti-Semitic'.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
How can the hanging up of a banner about Israel's war crimes be anti-Semitic? How can a protest against a company donating money to Israel be anti-Semitic? If a Zimbabwe businessman is set upon because he has donated millions to the Mugabe's regime, is it direct action against repression in Zimbabwe or a racist attack on a black man? Was the demo in protest against Bush's visit to the UK a protest against the Iraq war or an expression of hatred toward the American people?
archdeaconj 1 year ago
Is a demonstration outside the Russian embassy a protest against what is happening in Chechnya or an expression of hatred for the Russian people? Why should exactly the same kind of protests and demos against the Israeli government's actions against its neighbours be deemed anti-Semitic? You have it the wrong way round, 'arse about face'. People dont hate Israel because they hate 'the Jews', though a few imbeciles hate 'the Jews' because of the actions of the Israeli government.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
These are the same specimens of homo non-sapiens who hate 'the bloody Americans' because of the US government's imperialist ventures overseas or 'the bloody Chinese' because of Tibet. Why were metal bars thrown through the window of a Chinese restaurant? Lunatics! The Chinese owners weren't responsible for what the Chinese government was doing to the Tibetan people back home.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
This is a silly and false analogy by Prager. It's not even properly formulated. He asks us to imagine something, then to make certain substitutions, and he leaves it at that. OK, Ive imagined it. What then? Presumably what he's saying is that those who denounce the Israeli government's actions and policies seek the destruction of Israel as a state while denying they are anti'Israeli. No, they don't seek the destruction of Israel. What they do seek is more humanity from its government.
archdeaconj 1 year ago
The bizarre notion that we give expression to our unconscious hatred of a people by denouncing their government has no basis in psychology. It is also against all common sense and is confounded by observation. If it were true, the Jamaican government would come in for stick because of racism toward Afro-Caribbeans, the Irish government because of anti-Irish feeling and so on. Who would seriously suggest that protests against China's policy in Tibet is rooted in hatred of the Chinese people?
archdeaconj 1 year ago
@Kurtlane Am I a traitor because I would like to see Blair et al before a war crimes tribunal? The Germans who were not Nazis, were they traitors? Were Russian dissidents under Stalin traitors? Are Israelis who condemn their government traitors? Pick the odd one out. When what an individual sees as wrong what his government declares is right, what should he do? Follow his/her conscience or not?
archdeaconj 1 year ago
achdeaconj, I can just the same ask if Tokyo Rose or Lord Haw-Haw were not traitors.
Closer to our case, were Gerónimo de Santa Fe (Joshua Lorqui), or Pablo Christiani not traitors?
The answer, just as the answer to your charge about Israeli "regime," is in reality.
I have just read a book about Israel, where an Arab Knesset member tells everyone "We Arabs hold you Jews by the balls." It's broadcast on TV. Nothing happens to him. Is that a regime? Some regime.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
You've asked where Arabs get this seething hatred of Jews. Watch this:
Hamas: Muslim Arabs "Ruled by Brothers of Apes and Pigs"!
watch?v=pNzA1N77FZc
Palestinian MP Fathi Hammad, Director of Al-Aqsa TV
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
You're quite right, Balfour never used that phrase (I've checked). Thx for pointing this out to me - but I couldnt help wondering why you have to be so ungracious Being factually wrong about something doesn't amount to being 'very confused' (it's not an error of logic). And remarks like 'typical leftist spoiled-brat attitude' isn't exactly conducive to a civilised exchange. [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, you have a point. When I said "leftist spoiled-brat attitude," I was taking a risk.
But my risk was that perhaps you might have aq thought, "what if he is right? What if I do take too many things for granted? Why am I so sure that my good wishes will not bring evil results?" And maybe beyond this, you will begin to question the leftist attitudes, and re-learn their legacy.
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Comment removed
archdeaconj 1 year ago
So Balfour and everyone else knew the land was inhabited - though, as you say, very sparsely. How sparsely? What was the population in those early days? Do we know? Is there a population density less than which you think it ethically OK to settle in a land but greater than which it is not? I'm not sure where I stand myself on this. You're right, there was never a state of Palestine, only a land whose indigenous people shared a common culture. [cont]
archdeaconj 1 year ago
archdeaconj, when judge whether it was just for Jews to go to Palestine and create a Jewish state there, you must take into account the Jewish issue.
What is the Jewish issue? It is 1700 years of utter hell visited on the Jewish people. The Nazi Holocaust - the "Final Solution" to that issue - was only the "latest greatest" in this hell. I think I have described enough of what I went and keep going through, and I belong to the lucky generation that has not experienced a pogrom.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Only my grandfather was murdered for being a Jew.
Let me sum it up. Jews have a right to live!
There, I have said it. The rest follows.
Can Jews live without a Jewish State? The entire 1700-year-long history of exile gives one clear answer: No.
So, if a Jewish State is necessary for Jews to survive, where can it be? The whole world is taken. If a Jewish State were to be built in Uganda, would the native peoples of Uganda rebel? Of course, they would.
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago
Same goes for every other part of the globe. Even Antarctica is taken.
So, if the whole world is taken, why not the Holy Land? Why not our ancestral home, to which the hearts of our people have turned for 2,000 years? Besides, if one looks objectively at the situation of 1850-1914, is this not one of the best places?
(cont.)
Kurtlane 1 year ago