Jump to content

Anyone Know What The Fundamentalist Jew Is Up To


snookums
 Share

Recommended Posts

Vigile, you misunderstand a little here. That the Media is owned by a few mega-corporations, there's no doubt about it.

 

It could also be very true that a majority of media is owned and controlled by the Jews, but I'd like to have something tangible proof for this claim.

 

My problems is that when looking at some of these companies in the top 10 list, one is a German company that made Nazi propaganda movies under Hitler, and one is Japanese with possible Shinto people in the top. I don't know. I still think it is a stretch to call Nazis and Shintoists for Jews. Unless someone can prove to me that those companies also are run and owned by Jews somehow.

 

Rupert Murdoch, CEO of News Corporation (owns Fox, NY post etc), he might be Jewish, but he sure supports the Christian Neo-cons intensively. And the News Corporation is a publicly traded company. Is he aggressive as a manager to make the company grow for the benefit of the owners (according to his job description), or to further some dark Semitic agenda of taking over the world (very unlikely since he seems to further the Christian cause)?

 

I also know the VP/CFO of AOL is of Jewish heritage, and the same for Disney, but it takes too long to research if the Nazi propaganda producer Bertelsmann is owned and run by Jews too, or GE, Viacom, Liberty Media Corp, AT&T, Vivendi Universal or Sony. So if someone have that information at hand, I would be interested to see it.

 

 

On a side-note, here's an interesting fact: a Christian cult, the Unification Church, owns and runs these companies:

Washington Times

UPI

Insight Magazine

News World Communications – company owning the Unification Church's media holdings

New York Tribune

Noticias del Mundo (Spain)

Washington Institute for Values in Public Policy

 

They're not big, but yet, quite big enough. So if someone is tired of the propaganda from the other media, then read Washington Times and get a good angle of the news from the Moonies. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • snookums

    18

  • gangstaknitta

    13

  • Crunk Bishop

    11

  • Ouroboros

    7

 

Lookie here....

 

i agree with sage.

 

"Fundy" Jews have hardly any political pull in Israel. The invasion of Lebanon happened for fully secular reasons. To me, when people suggest some religious conspiracy behind Israeli politics or US-Israeli relations.... i'm just wondering when the world-wide Zionist Occupationist Government and the Protocol of the Elders of Zion crap comes next.

 

Sorry, I missed that. while writing my last few posts, people posted more replies and I added mine before I got to read them.

 

On one hand, I think that the recent bullshit started because Hizbullah kidnapped 2 Israelis and started launching rockets into Israel. Any government, secular or religious, would take action against that. However, there is already-existing animosity between religious groups in the Middle East, and that cannot be discounted when analyzing any conflict going on over there.

 

 

I don't like conflicts much...but I don't like to feel a certain bias coming out of posts ....both Crank and yourself could have been more open in stating your affiliations. Your call thou'...

 

You don't like conflict, eh? Your syntax and vocabulary choice seem to indicate otherwise.

Yes, I could have, but it's been my experience that any phrase that starts off with "Well, I'm a member of [insert minority group here], and I think..." gets greeted with eye-rolling and even outright dismissal. I also thought it would be patently obvious that I was jewish from my posts and I was okay with people on this forum making an assumption. And when you asked me directly, I gave you a response. I'm not trying to "hide" anything.

 

I don't think its good enough to discredit the census data like the way you have...unless you are falling into the same kind of mistake you have accused Zoe and myself of.....generalising and not providing adequate resources. However...I don't mind an opinion....and I read that in yours...the census data is silly..okay - best you not refer to any of it yourself..or any kind of survey or research. Okaay. *grins*

 

Well, aren't you clever? Nowhere did I refute the 81% figure. Nor do I now. Clearly, you are selectively reading my posts. I have mentioned time and time again that there is more diversity in Jewish thought and practice than people like you are willing to admit. I should think that one would easily be able to see since "Jewish" means different things to different Jews that not all of the 81% would agree on everything. I do not claim that all Jews are the same and that they are united under one big umbrella of belief in terms of what it means to be Jewish. I don't know how much clearer I can be on this. There are probably a chunk of that figure that thinks that Jews in Israel are too secular (just read any of the editorials in Israeli newspapers and you'll eventually come across this line of thought) and would think that 81% is too high. Yes, there are Jews that believe that you cannot be Jewish without the religious element, but there are also Jews who believe that you can. I'm tired of banging my head against the wall with you, snookums. You continually try to make generalizations based upon surface data, without looking at the implications of such an exercise. And when called on it, you turn into a blame-shifting fool.

 

Personally thou'....I don't accept the chrisitian as being an 'authority' of christianity...so I'm treating you the same way...as jews.

Fair enough. My personal practice of Judiasm is informed by not only my own experience, but also from years of being in the academic field of religion and reading. A lot. I do not expect anyone to take me as an "authority" on Judaism, nor do I want to be one. Just out of curiosity, who do you take as an authority on Christianity? From where do you derive this information? How are you any more of an authority figure than anyone else? Is this all based on your personal beliefs? How is that any different than what you have done by attempting to demonstrate that you know more about Jewish belief and practice than I do?

Just curious, as you seem to have fallen into your own trap here.

 

 

just curious.....why come on a 'ex christian' site?...I've also read here that you or Crank identify as a Baptist...........?

what the fuck is that...?

 

Do you actually read things, or do you just look at all the pretty words? First of all, Crunk Bishop and I are 2 different people. Secondly, his profile clearly states that he used to be Christian. I never have been. I found this site and I was interested in what ex-Christians had to say. I grew up in the South, where you're simply not allowed to really dismiss Jesus as savior. I can't tell you how many times I had friends, acquaintances or students tell me that they only identified as Christian for the sake of their families. I thought it unusual and even a positive sign that there was a public forum for those who have "strayed from the Lamb" to get together and share their stories and experiences. As a Jew who has been continually marginalized by this same Christian population in America, I thought maybe there would be some common ground. A lot of people here seem to think that monotheism is the enemy, which is fine (I myself am not much of a monotheist), but lumping Jews and Christians together is a bad move. There is no "Judeo-Christian" tradition as far as I am concerned--it is simply a phrase that the evangelicals use to justify their deplorable behavior and zealous involvement in politics. You'll notice that that phrase goes right out with the trash as soon as the question of salvation enters the picture. They only concern themselves with Jews when it benefits them.

 

As pitchu said...

And my post asks, "Why here? Why, when Jews and Ex-C'ers share and have shared so much at the hands of a common oppressor?"

 

Snookums, your tactics and weak arguments are no different than any of the Christians on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Hans, yes, I understood what you were saying. I just wanted to emphasize that media does in fact represent an agenda. I'm not arguing that that agenda is Jewish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, got ya. We both agree the Media companies are way to big and way too much in control today. And we can also agree that too many of them have ideological agendas, maybe it be Jewish or Christian, in the end they form our knowledge about the world and also our identities as people and nations. Scary thing. He who controls the information, controls the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. One would think I'd called up a coupla members of my own now well-established permanent-floating private world-wide Jewish conspiracy and asked them to sign up as gangstaknitta and Crunk Bishop. I assure everyone participating in this thread that they are as new to me as to the rest of you, but I can say that I'm really, really glad they're at Ex-C.

 

Much of Jewish experience and Ex-C'ers experience has amazing commonality, and I truly hope we can share it with one another. Like... why not? :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. One would think I'd called up a coupla members of my own now well-established permanent-floating private world-wide Jewish conspiracy and asked them to sign up as gangstaknitta and Crunk Bishop. I assure everyone participating in this thread that they are as new to me as to the rest of you, but I can say that I'm really, really glad they're at Ex-C.

 

Much of Jewish experience and Ex-C'ers experience has amazing commonality, and I truly hope we can share it with one another. Like... why not? :shrug:

I have wanted to start threads dealing with the connection between Judaism and Christianity, comparing Jewish interpretation of the OT books with the Christian (one reason why I am going to buy a Tanakh, as I said in a different thread), Jewish identity as it relates to the religion and the culture (which or both?), and other ideas concerning the so-called Judeo-Christian ethic, but....I've been afraid to. I was afraid they would deteriorate quickly into "The Jews did this, they control that, they whine about...". I don't quite get it. I have plenty of criticism of Israel (just like I have complaints against what the US does), but I never felt that I needed to connect that criticism with the Jewish religion or race. When I posted the link on Greater Israel earlier in this thread, I pointed out that this idea was pushed by certain extreme Moslem groups and Christian fundamentalists, not Jewish groups. Perhaps much of our confusion and misunderstanding comes from false ideas about Judaism from the Christian beliefs that we were exposed to? :shrug:

 

I just ran across this article today, and I think this is the time and place to share it, though I'm sure some will lambast me for it.

 

The spiteful resurgence of anti-Semitism

 

One Edinburgh comic bragged he wanted to "kill that fucking Jew Richard Perle"

 

A sweet little granny was sitting next to me, knitting a scarf. She was listening to an elderly Professor as he delivered a speech about the Holocaust. Every now and then, at the most rousing moments, this tiny old woman would mutter her agreement. “Kikes,” she said absently as she nodded her head, “dirty fucking kikes.” Nobody objected; nobody even turned to look. This Nazi granny was amongst friends.

 

I was sitting in the bland Irvine Marriot Hotel in Orange County, California – one of those interchangeable global hotels that could be anywhere, or nowhere – at the 2003 conference of the ‘Institute for Historical Review’. It’s an outfit of maniacs who claim the Holocaust is at best exaggerated, at worst a fabrication. Robert Faurisson, a disgraced former Professor of Literature at the University of Lyons, represented the conference’s liberal wing: in his speech, he admitted that “the Jews were persecuted,” but quickly added “they were protected by Hitler too.” Some people grumbled – why was he so soft?

 

That conference has been coming back to me in Nam-style flash-backs over the past month. Once you have been in an immersion tank of pure Jew-hatred, it’s easier to spot its diluted flavour elsewhere. I hear it now mostly not from the Faurissons and Renoufs and Mel Gibsons but from people who consider themselves liberal and anti-racist.

 

While Israel was bombing Lebanon in its obscene, pointless war, the priority was to condemn it. Now the Lebanese war is finally stammering to an end – although the crimes against humanity in Gaza and the West Bank continue – we need to talk about the fact that streaks of raw Jew-hatred have re-entered our public discourse. On the 350th anniversary of the glorious return of Jews to England, we are celebrating with an upsurge of spite. It is those of us who are very critical of Israel who must guard most vehemently against this impostor.

 

Sometimes it emerges in small, unconscious ways. While I was having a haircut last week, my hairdresser got talking to me about the Middle East meltdown because he knows I have spent time out in the trashed, smashed refugee camps of Gaza. “Is it true that whenever George Bush makes decisions on the Middle East, it is because a group of rabbis have been called in and he does everything they say because he has to?” In his gabbled follow-up, he said “the Jews control Bush” more than once. His scissors were very close to my throat, so I asked where he had heard this. “From a mate,” he said.

 

I would have been astonished if he had made racist statements about black or Asian people; but the most surprising thing about this little encounter is that I wasn’t surprised at all. Comments like this are now circling the mainstream; I hear them at parties and on the tube. He really didn’t know the intellectual antecedents for the idea of a secret Jewish cabal pulling the strings of the powerful. (The idea is strangely elastic: the Jews have now been responsible for capitalism, Bolshevism, 9/11 and neoconservatism).

 

Sometimes it is more blatant. Here at the Edinburgh Festival – as Jamie Glassman, one of the writers for the Ali G show, has pointed out – there has been a fever of nakedly anti-Semitic jokes. The Australian comedian Steve Bruce declared on stage that he wanted to “kill that fucking Jew Richard Perle”, and suggested teaching kids to play Nazis and Jews rather than that other genocide-themed game, Cowboys and Indians. This prompted an audience member to hilariously yell out, “Throw them in the ovens,” to much laughter. Reginald D Hunter has bragged on stage that he wants to go to Austria and deny the Holocaust so he can be arrested – only to declare at his trial that he was denying the Rwandan holocaust, not the Jewish one. Ho ho.

 

Some people seem to think that because Jews are generally wealthier than other ethnic minorities, they are protected from the consequences of racist statements like this. Well, tell that to the 48 Jews attacked by racist thugs in Britain this April alone, or to the security guards that now need to search everyone as they enter a synagogue for weapons or, worse, suicide-packs. (Remember: 38 percent of British Muslims believe British Jews are “a legitimate target”).

 

So where is the boundary between necessary criticism of Israel - or indeed the Jewish religion, which like all monotheisms is based on a ridiculous and often ugly pre-modern text - and racism? It’s easy to identify the extremes, the Bruces or Gibsons, but harder to see the shades of grey building towards them, partly because anti-Semitism is a concept that has been more abused than Tina Turner at the hands of Ike. From the right, the Israel-right-or-wrong brigade label every critic of Israel a Jew-hater. Melanie Phillips takes the widespread criticism of Israel’s carnage in Lebanon as evidence that Britain is now “like Weimar Germany.” From the left, some people refuse to see anti-Semitism even when it is pogromming in their face. The Socialist Workers Party, for example, has paraded Gilad Atzmon at their conferences, a man who says it is “irrelevant” whether the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are a forgery because “American Jews do control the world by proxy.”

 

But these Siamese delusions are no excuse for rational people to refuse to see the truth. The line between criticism and racism lies with one, unspoken idea: that there is an underlying Jewish essence that can be distilled and condemned. Anti-Semites invariably believe “the Jews” stand for one thing, whether it is communism or Christ-killing (step forward, Mel) or hyper-Zionism. This is absurd when applied to any ethnic group, but particularly foolish when applied to Jews, one of the most fissiparous groups ever to huddle together under one tribal label. After the fall of the Taliban, the two remaining Afghan Jews were found guarding a synagogue – and they were eager to tell bemused journalists why the other Jew was a traitor and a pig. It was a living illustration of the old quip that where you have two Jews you have three factions.

 

Does anybody really think a tribe that includes Ariel Sharon and Noam Chomsky, Leon Trotsky and the Rothschilds, Mel Brooks and Mel Phillips, has a shared essence? Of course it is reasonable to condemn the views of some Jews, some of the time. But at every stage you must point out that there are other Jews holding precisely the opposite opinions. Those who condemn “the Jews” for what they do or think are chasing a yellow-starred willo’ the wisp; there is nothing there except a quaint tribal identification that would probably have melted away long ago without the constant opposition of Jew-haters.

 

Anti-Semitism used to be called “the socialism of fools”. Today, it is the radicalism of morons.

 

http://www.johannhari.com/index.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I just ran across this article today, and I think this is the time and place to share it, though I'm sure some will lambast me for it.

 

Ex-Cog,

 

Though I understand why you would have such hesitancy, the fact that you felt the need to write this sentence prior to posting the article makes me sad.

 

 

Hey, buy that Tanakh and come share your thoughts -- whatever they are -- while reading it. (Please PM me when you've started your thread about it so I can join in.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

 

A fabricated document that gave a reason to hate. Like the Bible!

 

One day I am going to make an ethnic race and write a book about how they are messing things up for everyone and then publish everywhere and see how many people actually fall for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe in "land ownership" either. Either way, we get screwed, though.....

 

Because in the US, if you live in one of these shiny plastic new housing developments that spread suburbia like a cancer ever further into the shrinking natural landscape (like the shit suburbs I was brought up in), the builders and developers really fuck you over on your lot.

 

First of all, you don't "own" your land, at least not as much as you think you do. It's actually owned by the corporation (everybody's favorite American rapists). They will, however, charge you for the land anyway. Their first step is to totally peel off any good soil on the land. This, besides doing wonders for the enviroment, not only depletes the land's value but gives them thousands of bags of nice rich topsoil to sell to nurseries, who will then sell it to you when you move in and need it. For a markup, of course. Then you have to agree with contract that if you find any miraculous oil (Texas tea), gold, minerals, or other such valuable material on "your" land, it belongs to the corporation to exploit.

 

Howard Roark in The Fountainhead said "You are what you build" and this is very reflected in surburbia. Instead of individual houses designed for people its become a matter of cookie cutter developments, I don't like them either, but it reflects the culture and the artictetural perferences of the consumers and the builders. Take it up with them. My father is about to rent a home in one of these developments I, for one, hope to never do that.

 

It's a matter of marketplace and culture.

 

Corporations are hardly the rapists you crack them up to be. Usually the housing developments are owned by a local private real estate firm; which is different then a large public corporation. Given the fact that its more economical to produce these cookie cutter suburbian homes and that's what market demand is for so that is what is built. As far as a cancer on the land... that's very abritary and the land is there for people to use it.

 

The contracts are what people agree on, once again is not someone screwing you over it's more of people screwing themselves over by not negotiating the contract in the first place. Plus, it's the real estate firm and owners of the property who had to gather the investment capital to even make this place come to reality in the first place. Without them, there would be no house to buy or rent in the first place.

 

Once again, it's not land anymore if you mine it up and fill the quarry with a lake

 

So land ownership is just a pain in the ass. I don't believe "owning" land by either person or corporation should be supported.

 

I do, because you see if everyone or no one owns the land then who has the right to say what it is used for?

 

Not that I don't believe in privacy or pretty English gardens. I think if you build a fence so graffiti artists and Jehovah's Witnesses leave you alone, you're in the clear. I don't believe in digging up some farmer's carefully furrowed fields because you want to put a pool in. It's just that right now, we have air rights - air rights!! - which proves that this whole natural-resource-ownership thing is going just a teeny-weeny bit too far.

 

Okay... did the farmer sell you his fallow fields to put up your pool in? Land is not something you just take, you buy and sell it.

 

This reminds me of the oil feilds in the Middle East. Westerners discovered the oil feilds and began to extract oil and wealth from them. Then they were nationalized by the local people who claim that they were there first, even though they sold the land, and the oil was theres, even though they would of never been able to extract it or even knew about it in the first place.

 

The wealth goes to the ones who create it.

 

For that matter, I can't understand why I'm charged for using water. IMO, water should be free, since it is a resource no human can live without. My government, instead of providing itself with taxes to build weapons of mass destruction in order to intimidate other countries into not doing the same, should be spending them on providing free water for its citizens.

 

Just like someone builds the houses someone purifies the water and they too deserve to get paid for it. How is it going to provide free water exactly? Clean drinking water doesn't appear from magic you know :grin:

 

And you know what? How about free food, too. The government could take all the money it spends on the military and use it to give every American healthy, basic food, like bread, oranges, apples, broccoli, etc. If we want Cheetos or powdered donuts, that should come out of our own pockets. That would prove that the government does, in fact, feel that the health and well-being of its citizens is important, and further, make bad-for-you food more expensive, rather than the direct opposite, which is, quite obviously, what we have now.

 

Again where is the food going to come from and who gets it and how much does each person get and how and who decides this? Should the free food go to the people who make it first, or the government or takes its first? To the government officials friends or relatives?

 

I don't need Big Brother telling me what to eat, which is already happening in the public school systems. Plus, like I said before, it reflects the culture on what we are eating. No one is forcing you to eat these foods. They are cheap to buy because they are cheap to make and that's what set the price, not someone in the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THANK YOU PITCHU!!!

 

I don't understand it either. Being against Israel politically is fine, but people often equate Israel with "the Jews" and then confuse the Jews with some "Old Testament" narrative that maybe only 10% of Jews actually still believe.

 

But I also get the feeling that many people in this forum have equated any form or kind of religion with fundamentalism or "legalism," so maybe it's not as "anti-Jewish" as it seems and is simply anti-religion or anti-tradition.

 

 

BTW

For those of you out there who doubt my "ex christian credibility" or have questions about my religious identity... read my testimony.

 

 

I'm against the Middle East politically...that means every single country that's in the Middle East.

 

I'm not against Jews, I don't think "Jews" exist anymore than "Blacks" exist. I just say racist shit because I think it's funny.

 

I'm an individualist, which disallows racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree with you Asimov about the Middle East. It's beyond fucked up over there. And the whole dividing into "racial" categories is so completely crazy too. Have anyone really established a special "jewish" gene?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree with you Asimov about the Middle East. It's beyond fucked up over there. And the whole dividing into "racial" categories is so completely crazy too. Have anyone really established a special "jewish" gene?

 

 

Aside from unusually big noses? No. There is less than a .01% difference between each human....what do you think is the difference between groups of people, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps much of our confusion and misunderstanding comes from false ideas about Judaism from the Christian beliefs that we were exposed to? :shrug:

 

I think so too, Ex-COG, it just seems that when anyone wants to point out anything, they get blasted for being "too sensitive." I just re-read this thread. Source demands were made, which I think is completely fair, as is the questioning of the validity of any sources on any topic. But then when I provided sources, people (okay, snookums, really) just moved on to other bullshit. I find it disheartening that so many people who claim to be in search of some sort of truth cannot even be bothered to pick up a basic book and educate themselves historically before railing against something. Judaism today is not what's in the "Old Testament" or "Hebrew Bible." There seems to be a stubborn refusal to see that here. I just read through the other threads on Judaism in this forum, and it saddened me to no end.

 

Once again, I have to beat the Judeo-Christian horse. I think, especially here where there seems to be a lot of people coming from an evangelical background, that Jews and Christians get lumped together in ways that don't really make sense if you study the history behind it. As for the claims that I've seen here and on other threads regarding the Jewish "hatred" for Gentiles, well...I can't say I haven't met a Jew who is not like that. And I myself spent many years spewing bile at gentiles. Perhaps it was because I came to school and there was a swastika painted on my locker. Perhaps it's because I spent so many hours listening to my poor, silly friends cry to me over my soul, as somehow I was less than human for not accepting christ (and I think many in here can relate to that, or is that too big of an assumption?). Maybe it was because I was called "big nose" for the bulk of my childhood--and I was a convert. But I got over it--now I spew more bile at their theology, which I think is the root of the problem. I think most people here could agree with me on that. But just as I can contextualize the reactions from people here and perhaps better understand them, why isn't the same courtesy extended to Jews? I don't know, perhaps a couple of thousand years of being kicked around like dogs by the majority of Jewish history has produced a little animosity. Is that so hard to understand? Especially here of all places, where I see the fumings of a group of people who feel that they too have been kicked around by Christianity??? I think their anger is incredibly justified. I just don't understand the disconnect.

 

 

I'm not against Jews, I don't think "Jews" exist anymore than "Blacks" exist. I just say racist shit because I think it's funny.

 

Ha ha, I had a feeling, Asimov. I see where you're coming from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to quote Ex Cog's link....

 

So where is the boundary between necessary criticism of Israel - or indeed the Jewish religion, which like all monotheisms is based on a ridiculous and often ugly pre-modern text - and racism? It’s easy to identify the extremes, the Bruces or Gibsons, but harder to see the shades of grey building towards them, partly because anti-Semitism is a concept that has been more abused than Tina Turner at the hands of Ike.

 

Yeah..its a problem and refects my much earlier question in a thread I started called...

Is It Possible To Criticize Israel Without Being Labeled Anti-semitic? ..., especially now ...try saying Israel " ATTACKS" Lebanon

 

My heckles rise when I'm feeling that my opinion is being controlled by a need to appear "PR"...or the shades of grey... I'm wondering who will dictate when they become 'black'...?

 

Racist comments sometimes upset me so I can understand Excogs reluctance ....but I'd like to say that I think "jews' can be just as 'racist' as the next guy. Its more or less all about judging someone by their appearance...or as I have been in this thread...by my 'atavar'....its crap!

 

But Humor is when someone else finds it funny.. ... it allows for a breakdown of sterotypes as well as allowing people to discuss stuff that is sometimes out- of- bounds. Personally I didn't take Shiva's comments as 'racist'... its subjective. Yeah...I like to say 'towelhead' ..its funny. Derr...

 

I also connect that emotionality of playing out the 'race' card....to be a manipulative tactic...in order to stop or control discussion. Most people wouldn't say anything in case it 'offended'....you have to brave it sometimes - risk it - ExCog.

 

I doubt there is anyone here ...who is not 'biased' in some way or the other...including me - I'm a tad touchy towards christianity - ...However...I see the big 3 Judism, christianity..and Islam as being equally violent and oppressive. etc. etc.&

its up to me...my choice if I want to compare...and lump them all together.

okay....so what?

 

 

Its commonsense to think that race is a human construct/cultural...its also backed up with science..&.to take the stance that..."There is less than a .01% difference between each human" is pretty darn spot on. Lets even put the chimpaze in there for a laugh.

 

I heard an TV interview with the Irain guy.....comment to a similar idea of 'land doesn't matter'....he said 'if it doesn't matter, why didn't the US offer American soil to the jew...instead of the arab soil?"

 

I think he has a point. It only 'doesn't matter'..if its not yours....that you are giving away.

 

As I said....I get pissed off with 'racism'......generally...I read of lot of anti Muslim sentiment that goes unchallenged.... but when it comes to the jew...more people tend to become 'precious' about it.

That to me...is 'racism'...the deadly take it for granted kind..that's happening all around the world since the 'war on terror' started against the 'muslim'...

 

I have no bones about it...It might appear that I've taken sides somewhat ...I don't think Hezbolla is a 'terrorist' group...and Lebanon is not a place for the Israelis to do what they want in. Its clear the Israelis have broken the 'rules' of war. .....SO what does that make them...? The lines are blurred for sure.

 

Yep...I'm went off the topic....but I don't like to think that a "jew' is not the only authority on 'racism'...or 'religion'...of everything...

 

I also dispute that the 'jew' is the only 'victim' in this world...far from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judaism today is not what's in the "Old Testament" or "Hebrew Bible." There seems to be a stubborn refusal to see that here. I just read through the other threads on Judaism in this forum, and it saddened me to no end.

 

 

What?...

same can be said by a 'liberal' xian? Lets blame the 'old' testicle...that's an old line.

 

Perhaps it was because I came to school and there was a swastika painted on my locker. Perhaps it's because I spent so many hours listening to my poor, silly friends cry to me over my soul, as somehow I was less than human for not accepting christ

 

 

 

 

 

same can be said about the xian....sounds good ol' like persecution to me.....

I didn't fit in at school....I was a migrant - its a common kid thing to bully. I guess some religous people never get over doing that shit.

 

I don't know, perhaps a couple of thousand years of being kicked around like dogs by the majority of Jewish history has produced a little animosity. Is that so hard to understand?

 

Nope....I don't see it any different than what the xian dogma preaches about 'persecution'...the 'religous' seem to thrive on it. I don't buy it as an excuse thou'...I see it as a choice...

 

Like I said ...I don't think the 'jew' is the only 'victim' in this world now..and in the past...

Victimhood is a strange place to want to be....for the jew and the xian alike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

opps pressed the wrong button...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's bullying and then there's wiping out a whole village. There's denial of rights and then there's denial of the right to live. There's persecution and then there's wholesale slaughter.

 

I treat the two differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's bullying and then there's wiping out a whole village. There's denial of rights and then there's denial of the right to live. There's persecution and then there's wholesale slaughter.

 

I treat the two differently.

 

Yes exactly.....I also have a close relative who has survived the nazi 'work camp'....

but I don't see that as being 'relative' to my abuse/ bullying at school on racial grounds or because I ate different food.

The 'slaughter' didn't happen to me...nor did the kids at school take part in the slaughter...

I don't think 'you' can blame people or kids like that...or make excuses...

to me that is 'persecution' for the sake of it.

 

 

I'm also aware that the list of racial cleansing throughout history is not exclusive to mean 'jews'..there are many many accounts (unfortunately)

 

I'm not 'alone' in this view...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history

have a look its horrible...to see how much of it has occured throughout history. The 'jew' is by no means 'special'...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pitchu, I've been thinking...do you think perhaps the reaction that you (well, we) perceive to be anti-Jewish is a result of the exposure that many X-C'ers have had to the religion? There seem to be a lot more ex-fundies and evangelicals than people who were nominally Methodist (for example) on here. I know that they way that Jews are discussed in those circles can be rather...one-sided? At least not representative, for sure. And then I wonder how many people who's experience has consisted of dealing with Messianic Jews, which I think may be the one issue that Jews do unite on, now that I think about it. :lmao:

 

Moving on...

I think Snookums replies here are a perfect example of what Pitchu has been talking about on this thread.

 

I have never claimed that Jews are the only persecuted group in the world. Stalin killed far more people than Hitler, and if you take into consideration the population levels at the time, Genghis Khan did his fair share of genocide as well. And the horribly brutal north Atlantic slave trade which created racial problems that we still can't get past today in America. Seriously, one of the big reasons why the Jews "made it" in America is because everyone hated blacks more and that is a legacy that American Jews and African-Americans are still struggling with today amongst themselves. And there have been countless other bloody episodes in more recent history (Bosnia, Sudan etc.)--all of which break my heart. Perhaps more so since I am alive to witness them and it seems no one learns the difficult lessons of genocide. They just keep doing it over and over and over again.

 

Jews have chosen not to forget their genocide. Why is it our responsibility to do "PR" (as it has been called) on other world genocides? I have never been one to downplay the significance of other events of ethinic/religious "cleansing." Again, snookums makes assumptions on how I feel and would react. THIS is the bullshit Pitchu was talking about.

 

I think it's incredibly myopic to compare the Christian "suffering" with Jewish suffering. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with anyone over who's suffered more as it is irrelevant and somewhat disgusting. Nobody should be persecuted anywhere. Period.

 

The thing is about people like Snookums is that you can have whatever opinions that you want, but when you're basing them on bad information and emotional assumptions, how informative and productive are these opinions? I brought sources to the table, which haven't been refuted and in turn all I get is more bullshit and ridiculous claims that are very clearly based upon assumptions of what I, as a Jew, believe and hold dear. Why are people so intent on denigrating the Jews and their history? Is it fun? Does it help you sleep better at night? Does it make you a better person? And to throw out things like "jews aren't not racist"--who claimed that? The very fact that you feel the need to bring that up underscores the fact that you are just as biased with an agenda as you claim me to be. My grandmother, who is a jew, has said some of the most digusting thinly-veiled-behind-intellectual-elitism racist AND homophobic shit I've ever heard. And I call her on it. And I call her on all her anti-Arab bullshit. The world seems to think that all this hollerin' about the holocaust is for everyone else's benefit...it also serves us well to remind ourselves, lest we turn into oppressors ourselves, which people have claimed has happened with the Palestinians. I do not believe that such a statement is devoid of truth at all.

 

And since Snookums seems to be in the business of conjecture...I guess some more background is in order:

I am a Jew that studies Islam. Many have called me an "Islamophile" and even an apologist at times. I do not tolerate anti-Semitism (and yes I include BOTH Arabs and jews in that term, although not many do) from anyone anywhere. I think that Muslims, right now in America, have taken the place of the "whipping boy." You're right, a lot of anti-Muslim crap gets ignored--does that make it okay? No. In fact, just as you seem to be self-righteously exasperated at my constant defense of my tradition, others weary of my defense of Islam as well, both Jews and otherwise.

 

I'm not "blaming the OT", all I want people to do is get their fucking facts straight, and the only real facts that I have discussed here are as follows:

 

1. Judaism today is not how it is practiced in the OT/HB. I never made a claim that the OT/HB does not influence Judaism today. Such a claim would be absurd to the extreme.

2. Jews are not united under one umbrella of belief and practice. Ever heard of a Venn Diagram?

 

...which Snookums keeps arguing with me over, and when s/he cannot bring any other points up, s/he flings the word "racist" around. Nice. I refer back to my blame-shifting fool comment.

Snookums has yet to answer the hard questions. You don't have to take me as a authority on Judiasm. In fact, DON'T, I BEG OF YOU. READ A FUCKING BOOK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS AND THEN YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION FOR YOURSELF. You seem to accept yourself as an authority on Judaism...again I ask: Upon what do you base this authority? Why are you more of an authority than anyone else, considering that your research seems to have consisted of googling statistics? I do not think you have to be a Jew to be an "authority" on Judaism, by the way, just so we're clear on that point.

 

So where are all my self-righteous claims that Jews are better, have suffered more, and wholly deserve Israel and fuck everyone else? Because people respond as though I have made these claims.

 

I repeat: lumping all the Jews together and talking about them the way they've been discussed on this thread, as well as others on this forum, is no different than the Xians who come here and think they know why all you guys left Xianity, that you're all just hateful and bitter because either you don't really "understand" Jesus' "sacrifice" or you had a bad run-in with a few pastors. Do you appreciate it when they do that? Well, neither do I.

 

But it seems that people aren't interested in learning more, and only look for proof that allows them to remain comfortable on their "high horse." Hope you don't start chafing, sugar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but I don't like to think that a "jew' is not the only authority on 'racism'...or 'religion'...of everything...

 

You don't?

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mmmm....I enjoy reading but I choose my own 'sources'....

I think this is a great little summary - food for thought. There seems to be a general shift in attitutes...people are thinking and luckily have the net to express those ideas and thoughts... ...thanks to Mike

 

I am not an anti-Semite. Jews are as deserving of equality as any other race. Israel, however, is not a race. It is a nation, albeit a racist one. It has total military dominance over the area thanks to American aid, and it grants just enough human rights to keep this aid flowing. The widespread tendency to equate "anti-Israel" to "anti-Semite" is nothing more than a contemptible and fallacious attempt to dismiss criticism by attacking the critics' character.

 

The Definition of Israel

Before we begin, let me remind you of the definition of Israel. Israel considers itself to be a Jewish state (formally codified in its 1948 Declaration of Independence), which means that its entire purpose is to provide what is commonly referred to as a "Jewish homeland". Why a race or religion must have a singular nation-state forcibly created for it is something of a mystery; my sons are white/Asian interracial, so they have no "racial homeland"; should this be considered a crisis? The natives of the Americas have no distinct "homeland" either; should families be displaced from their homes in order to create one for them?

 

You have probably been conditioned by the media and perhaps by religious upbringing to blindly accept that a Jewish race-state is a reasonable idea, but consider the idea of a nation explicitly defining itself as an "Aryan state", and you will see the problem. The whole idea of a race-state is obviously and intrinsically racist: how can you have a "racial homeland" unless you enforce demographic controls to retain a majority race, and how can you control the demographics of race unless you enact racist policies?

 

It has long been known that Israel is headed for a crisis of identity because of demographic pressures. In the late 1940s, most of their Arabs (>80%) in Palestine were driven into what is now known as "The Occupied Territories" by fear of terrorism such as the massacre at Deir Yassin (either that, or they voluntarily left their family homes to live in squalid refugee camps in order to happily make way for the peaceful Jewish takeover, if you're gullible enough to believe that story). However, the small proportion (<20%) brave enough to stay behind despite the "ethnic cleansing" have been reproducing more quickly than the Jews for decades now, and will eventually become a racial majority. This forces Israelis to ask themselves the question: is Israel a western nation which recognizes human rights, or is Israel a primitive tribal society, based on race and religion?

 

They cannot have their cake and eat it too: if they claim to be a democracy and recognize human rights, then they must face the fact that current trends will eventually erase the Jewish racial majority and give the Arabs real power within the system (ie- without resorting to terrorism), and Israel would no longer be a "Jewish state"; it would be a Western democracy. Conversely, if they take measures to suppress growing Arab demographics or marginalize Arab voters, it will become almost impossible to continue insisting that they are not a racist state.

 

To discriminate or not to discriminate? Could there be any doubt which course they would take? For a long time now, the Israeli government has been holding up requests for unification of families formed by the marriage of a Palestinian and an Israeli citizen (ie- not letting them live together in Israel). In July 2003, they went the next step and formally signed a law preventing such unifications. In the same vein, Israel has no laws guaranteeing racial or religious equality. We take such laws for granted in modern western nations, but Israel is, at heart, an anachronistic throwback to an era of primitive racial and religious tribalism.

 

Click here for some interesting quotes about the motivations of famous Israelis prior to its creation.

 

Human Rights and Israel

Israel has faced scrutiny on its lack of respect for human rights before, but the US has consistently shielded it. In 2001, the UN's Durban Conference on international human rights and racism was effectively marginalized when Israel and the US stormed out because Israel was not being excluded from criticism. The US was also the only nation out of more than 50 to vote against a resolution condemning the Israeli apartheid policies in the Occupied Territories (Jews there can vote but Arabs can't, among many other discriminatory rules) earlier that year, and in fact, the US has a history of repeatedly and vehemently using its veto power to quash any and all UN resolutions against Israel.

 

For their part, Israel and its so-called "amen chorus" in the US complain that Israel is singled out for criticism even though there are other, much worse human-rights violators in the world. This is a valid point; many Arab and Islamic nations throw stones from a glass house when they condemn a Jewish nation for racial and religious discrimination. There are, of course, several equally valid counterpoints:

 

A criticism can be true or false regardless of who makes it. If a human-rights violator condemns another nation for human-rights violations, there is something rather surreal about that, but if the criticism is valid, this only means that the critic should face subsequent scrutiny himself, not that the target is somehow exonerated.

 

The Western world bears special responsibility for Israel. Simply put, Israel would not exist if Britain had not promised the land (liberated from the Turks with the help of the Palestinians in return for their independence) to the Jews (who contributed nothing to this liberation but stood ready to swoop in with a three thousand year old land claim). Israel was eventually formed by UN decree at the behest of the western powers, and since they created and protected it, Israel should answer to their values, which it does not.

 

The ethics of a problem and the urgency of a response depend not only on its absolute principle but also on the magnitude of its effects, ie- "how many people are currently suffering because of it?" Anti-Jewish discrimination in Jordan, for example, is unquestionably bad but since there isn't exactly a large Jewish population in Jordan, it does not cause widespread suffering. Anti-Arab discrimination in Israel, on the other hand, continues to affect millions.

 

Should Israel be left alone, like the region's so-called "Arab states"? Perhaps, but "left alone" is hardly an appropriate term for Israel's current status as a recipient of billions of dollars in foreign aid every year. Given the magnitude and nature of that aid (much of which is military), Israel should carry much higher expectations in terms of human rights than its neighbours. It is quite simply ridiculous to pour vast amounts of money into someone's pocket while not expecting him to make any more concessions to your value system than anyone else.

 

The Life of a Palestinian

So what's it like to be a Palestinian in the so-called "Occupied Territories"? For starters, Jews can vote, but you can't. You must go through military checkpoints on a daily basis where soldiers can harass you or destroy your property with no compensation or even reprimand (reporters have witnessed Israeli soldiers casually destroying farmers' crops while laughing at them). Your life is literally worth less than that of a Jew; the Israeli military likes to fire indiscriminate heavy weapons such as rockets or shells at Arab neighbourhoods if they think a terrorist might live there, and they casually dismiss dozens of innocent casualties or even deaths as unfortunate but necessary. Of course, it goes without saying that they would never do such a thing in a predominantly Jewish neighbourhood, no matter who they suspect of being there.

 

However, if you're killed, whether it be at a checkpoint by a trigger-happy soldier or as "collateral damage" due to the indiscriminate use of powerful area-effect weapons, you can take comfort in knowing that somebody in Israel will promise an investigation ... that quietly goes away without ever penalizing anyone. It's even worse if someone in your family or extended family joins a terrorist organization; the Israelis believe in a primitive tribal justice, which means that you will be punished if one of your relatives does something. If your children are shot dead by Israeli soldiers, you can look forward to beating your head against a brick wall in search of justice which will never come. Luckily, since you are impoverished, you probably won't be able to access the Internet and read Usenet and bulletin-board posts from Americans who casually dismiss it with lines like "yeah, well, the kid probably provoked it. You know how those Palestinians are".

 

But what if you're lucky enough not to have any relatives in a terrorist organization and you manage to avoid becoming "collateral damage" in one of Israel's countless indiscriminate uses of heavy weapons? Well, then you can look forward to a life of uncertainty, as no Palestinian can look forward to a secure future. The Israelis dismantled the public education system in the Occupied Territories years ago, so your children have no real future except as unskilled labourers. You could try saving money, but there are no jobs for Arabs that pay well enough to do anything but pay the bills, if that. Even a house is hardly a guarantee of security, since you could spend 15 years scratching out a living to pay for one, only to see the Israeli army casually destroy it and kick your family out into the street with no compensation.

 

But take heart; as you lay weeping in the street with your family while the soldiers destroy your house and your belongings, you can take heart in knowing that your sacrifice made way for proud Jewish settlers (you know, those people who can vote in Israeli elections even though this territory is supposedly not part of Israel). These settlers will, of course, consume far more natural resources than you, since you must live on strict daily quotas of drinking water and marginal electricity supplies while Jewish settlers run lawn sprinklers, water fountains, and Internet access. Hard work is almost pointless in light of the way your family can be thrown out on the street with no warning at any time, but you don't have much choice; after all, it's not as if anyone else is going to feed your children.

 

Love is restricted too: you shouldn't marry anyone who lives in "Israel proper" (the popular code-word for the part of Israel outside the "Occupied Territories" where the Israelis are forced to recognize a modicum of human rights in order to keep the international aid flowing), because you won't be allowed to go live with that person.

 

But hey, why take my word for any of this? Look at Amnesty International's page on the subject, or perhaps Human Rights Watch. Of course, anything they say will be dismissed (sight unseen) by Israel's "amen chorus" in the US because they're all "a bunch of left-wing tree-hugging hippies". It's almost pointless to link to any articles written by an Arab source since the "amen chorus" will simply ignore it all as lies and propaganda, so why not check out Israeli organizations such as Rabbis for Human Rights or Gush Shalom or Yesh Gvul? There's also the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, but perhaps all of those groups can be ignored as well; it is difficult to say just how far the "amen chorus" is willing to go in its dismissal of criticism.

 

Nice life, eh? Maybe even enough to utter a Moses-like "let my people go", followed by a Moses-like round of terrorism? Unfortunately, you're not allowed to hate the Israelis despite all of this, otherwise you will be blamed for making them do this to you.

 

The Life of an "Arab Israeli"

OK, so the life of a Palestinian is pretty bad. How about the life of an Israeli Arab? That's much better, right? You know, the descendants of the small minority of Arabs who stayed in their land rather than run from the ethnic cleansing of the late 1940s? Life is pretty good for them, right? They can vote and everything?

 

Well, sort of. The Israelis know they can't openly treat the Arabs as vermin outside the Occupied Territories where they have a flimsy excuse for doing so (the excuse being that it's not really part of Israel even though they control the territory and Jews there can vote in Israeli elections), but that doesn't stop them from having different rules for Jews and Arabs; the differences simply aren't as stark as they are in the Occupied Territories.

 

First and foremost, Arabs within "Israel proper" are largely segregated. They live in separate communities, with separate schools. This fact alone provides an opportunity for enormous discrimination in terms of government services, with the result that the Arab infant mortality rate is twice as high as the Jewish infant mortality rate. Poverty rates are also vastly different. They have inferior sanitation, water, electricity, access to resources, education, etc.

 

The citizenship rules are a model of racism: any Jew and his or her entire extended family is automatically granted Israeli citizenship no matter where they come from, while an Arab's spouse is treated as an illegal alien. There are also special organizations in Israel such as the World Zionist Organization or the Jewish National Fund whose sole purpose is to advance Jewish interests. This might not be that surprising except for the fact that these groups are paid for with government funds and have direct power, as quasi-governmental organizations with authority over housing, land permits, etc.

 

Israel also has a "Starship Troopers"-style scheme of granting special rights to those who have served in the military. Since most Jews serve in the military (whose job often usually involves suppressing Palestinians) while few Arabs do (for obvious reasons), this has been decried as an excuse to discriminate against Arabs. While one could make arguments for both sides of this, it turns out that Jewish Yeshiva students (who do not serve) get these special benefits anyway, thus demolishing any claim that system is not discriminatory (see Human Rights Watch for more info).

 

It almost goes without saying that there is no freedom of religion. Israel may have secularists living in it, but it is adamantly not a secular state. It is a religious state, and unapologetically uses the power of the government to uphold the religion of the majority.

 

Until Arabs in Israel reach a demographic majority and gain the power to effect real change, they will remain very much like blacks in Jim Crow's America. They may be marginalized and weighed down by institution that reaches up into government, but they have the right to vote on paper, which proves that they do not suffer any discrimination at all. Or at least, that's what Israel's "amen chorus" is telling us, anyway.

 

Military History and Popular Myths

This section was moved onto a separate page.

 

Israel's Enemies

As mentioned previously, the most common tactic of Israel's "amen chorus" when faced with criticism of Israel is to attack Jordan, Syria, or Egypt. This plays to the common belief that all Arabs are a single monolithic group, so the Palestinians are somehow responsible for the actions of Egypt or Jordan.

 

These nations are legitimately bad players. They are totalitarian religious theocracies, ruled with an iron grip by various dictators. Despite the vast oil riches of their lands, their populations live in poverty because virtually all of the wealth is held in the hands of literally 5 or 6 families. Their societies function on medieval values, and their contributions to world science and technology are virtually nonexistent. They oppose modernity in all its forms, and they appear intent on restoring the Islamic civilization that ruled much of Europe 800 years ago.

 

For all of their public rhetoric over the Palestinians, they have done nothing to mitigate the humanitarian problems they speak of. Hell, even Arafat's Palestinian Authority has a history of corruption, greed, and abuse of power, hence widespread Palestinian disgust with it (not to mention the fact that Hamas is regarded by many Palestinians as more of a legitimate government than the PA).

 

However, the conduct of Jordan, Egypt, etc. is not relevant to the question of whether Israel has violated human-rights laws in its treatment of the Palestinians. The harsh reality of the situation is that the Palestinians have been victimized by both Israel and its enemies. They are the proverbial pawn in the chess game, and they lose no matter who wins. There are no good guys here; just a group of violent, immoral states with a similar tendency towards racial and religious discrimination. One of them obviously has superior military skill and has ruthlessly pushed that advantage to the hilt, but the fact remains that its enemies are no angels either.

 

Peace Efforts

According to Israel's "amen chorus", Israel has made repeated efforts to forge peace with the Palestinians, only to have the Palestinians rise up and bite them in the ass. However, when you examine the text of various peace accords such as the Oslo accords, you will quickly see that its supposedly generous offer is nothing of the sort.

 

You've probably heard the line: "we offered them self-government and 90% of the disputed territories and they rejected it! They will settle for nothing less than the total annihilation of Israel!!" This is an oft-repeated line, but it carries about as much historical accuracy as a documentary made by Michael Bay.

 

At no time has the Israeli government ever offered the Palestinians anything resembling a viable or independent state. The number "90%" sounds impressive, but offering the Palestinians 90% of the territory they presently occupy is not exactly a concession. And self-government sounds impressive until you discover that this supposedly self-governing body would have no military whatsoever, no say on its own border policies, no control over its own airspace, no right to prevent arbitrary border incursions by the Israeli military, and not even control of its own water supply! Worse yet, the territory they "controlled" under the Oslo Accords would have been sliced into pieces which were separated by access roads that were controlled by ... you guessed it, the Israeli military, with the ever-present daily checkpoints.

 

In short, the Oslo Accords basically offered them the existence they have now. And so it has historically been with all peace offers; they offer nothing. The end result of any peace plan is invariably to have Israel controlling everything and Palestine being "independent" only insofar as it has latitude to carry out Israel's wishes. Naturally, when Palestinians reject such plans, these rejections are packaged along with fiery rhetoric from certain Arab leaders in order to "prove" that Palestinians are totally unreasonable and unwilling to cut deals.

 

Anybody Got a Solution?

The various people involved tend to envision one of three scenarios:

 

Status Quo: Let the Israelis keep all of the fruits of their past military aggression. Keep the Palestinian people in a perpetual state of house arrest in order to curb what are supposedly inherent violent tendencies. Continue killing hundreds of Palestinians every year in the idiotic hope that this will deter retaliatory violence rather than inciting it. Contionue to aggressively settle the occupied territories in the hopes of someday forming Greater Israel.

 

Jihad: Destroy Israel through terrorism and/or military conquest. Replace it with a glorious Islamic state called Palestine. This is the vision of most Islamic fundamentalists in the region, who clearly have no capacity for rational thought.

 

Wishful Thinking: Restore Palestinian independence. Ask Israelis to voluntarily withdraw from the occupied territories. Declare Jerusalem an international territory. Expect Israel to give up its long-term vision of restoring its Old Testament borders, and expect Palestine to give up its long-term vision of restoring its pre-1947 existence. Expect the two nations to live happily ever after, in peace and harmony. Hey, why don't we just ask them all to gather round a really big fucking campfire and sing kumbaya?

 

None of these options would ever work. The status quo merely guarantees continued violence, Arab victory would only guarantee that the Jews are persecuted and driven out, and wishful thinking is just that.

 

One Radical Solution

In my opinion, the only solution that would actually work is a radical one that would probably never happen: declare that Israel is no longer a "Jewish state", but rather, a secular democracy, and write an Israeli Constitution upholding human rights (it does not presently have one). Its stated goals of being a Jewish state and a western democracy are mutually contradictory. One cannot uphold western values of religious and racial equality while simultaneously stating that you intend to promote the welfare of one people over another.

 

If Israel dropped this "Jewish state" nonsense and adopted modern values throughout its entire territory (yes, that includes the so-called "Occupied Territories"), it might be able to put itself on the long road to recovery. A tremendous amount of damage has been done, and lasting hatreds created, but there is no solution to be found in simply continuing to treat Palestinians as "the enemy" and suppress them. The language of Israel vs Palestine has traditionally been the language of military thinking, and while military thinking is great for winning wars, it is not so good at winning the peace.

 

Of course, I doubt that any of this will happen. Neither side appears willing to unilaterally alter its approach, since both sides point the finger at the other guy and insist that he start first. Israel has superior power and wealth, and is in a far better position to unilaterally move for positive change than whatever passes for a central authority in Palestine (hint: there really isn't one), so the onus is really on Israel to move first, despite its protestations. Nevertheless, I can't imagine that any of this will happen, or that the US is willing to put the kind of pressure on Israel that would be necessary to bring it to the table (strongly worded statements don't mean much when you continue to dutifully send billions of dollars per year in military and economic aid). And so, both sides will continue fighting, while we play both sides against the middle, because we need Arab oil and we need Israel as a bulwark against Islamic extremism in the region.

 

You know, just talking about this subject is tiring and frustrating. It reminds me that despite all our pretensions at civilization, humans are still amoral savages at heart. I need a beer, goddamn it.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

1. The Birth of Israel, Simha Flapan (note that the quote obviously refers to "ethnic cleansing" rather than gas-chamber extermination, so his "final solution" is not the same as Hitler's "final solution". The choice of words is still fascinating, however).

 

 

"I do not see partition as the final solution of the Palestine question ... after the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the [Jewish] state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine"- David Ben-Gurion, first Prime Minister of Israel1 (emphasis added).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are big differences between liberal Judaism and liberal Christianity!

 

"liberal" Jews across the modern Jewish "denominations" don't really even believe in God or an afterlife anymore... and about half of the world's Jews fall in this category.

 

In Judaism, a cultural movement in opposition to Orthodoxy and Hasidism called the "Haskalah"

started in Eastern Europe around the late 1700's. In Jewish circles, this movement was akin to the "Philosophical Enlightenment" that was sweeping Western Europe while the rest of Eastern Europe was slower to catch on. This movement evolved into "Reform Judaism" which moved to Britain and the USA during the mid 1800's.

 

"Reform Judaism" is not an oppressive monotheism and is not Marxist like liberal Christianity.

 

"Reform Jews" don't believe that you have to do any of the laws of the OT or the Talmud. Alot of Reform Jews don't believe in God, but if they do they don't deny anybody's right to question for themselves. They don't have to attend synagogue out of guilt or expectation and they teach that a "temple" is anywhere you make it. They love the arts and sciences and pretty much share a sensationalist, atheistic and materialist view with the rest of the industrial world. The idea of the "chosen people" was discarded, along with theological attachment to the land of Israel (now the attachment is historical/cultural/political). They believe in the autonomy of the individual.

 

A little more than half of the Jews in USA, Canada and Britain are Reform...around 4 million total. That's almost a third of the 13 million Jews left in the world, and about 60% of Israel's 5 million are not religious... meaning that the majority of Jews (7 million) in the world do not subscribe to some meta-historical/biblical myth.

 

85% of America's Jews who voted chose Kerry in the last American election, so only 15% max of America's Jews are neo-conservatives.

 

The only major so-called groups of "Fundamentalist Jews" who are fighting for "Eretz Israel" are the Gush Enumin and the Haredim who number together at most 500,000 or just at 10% of the total Israeli population. The have very little political pull in Israel, most of the other Jews in Israel roll their eyes at those guys and make fun of them in the newspapers, like the Jerusalem Post and Haaretz (each of which link up daily to the Drudge Report. Only 1000 of them actually agree to fight for the IDF, and even then they insist on having their own separate battalion. (look)

 

of the remaining 6 million Jews, 4 million are Orthodox/Hasidic in the diaspora and 2 million are orthodox in Israel. but this means that they hearken back to Yiddish times... medieval Poland and Spain... and to the Sages for doctrines and practices. They don't take the Torah literally and interpret it with multiple meanings. They think that the modern Israeli state is not truly Messianic, but have become more sympathetic with Israel since the Six Day and Yom Kippur Wars. They don't believe in "Greater Israel." Most of them in Israel have an ultra-defensive mentality not unlike America's. So-called Zionists who founded Israel were actually a secular group who bought land (Baron Rothschild) and fought (Menacham Begin and David Ben-Gurion) for the territory they grabbed, whom the greater majority of "orthodox" Jews opposed until very recently.

 

the recent conflict in Lebanon is not religiously motivated the same way Zionism wasn't religiously motivated. "Fundie Jews" and religion weren't even factors, I'd call it "national security" instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To throw another twist to the original question of this thread "Anyone know what the fundamentalist Jew is up to...?": what is meant by "fundamentalist Jew"? Someone who is orthodox and/or conservative? I ran across a Wikipedia article on a Haradi (Ultra-Orthodox) group called the Neturei Karta. Looking at their distinctive dress, and being theologically conservative, you'd think that would mark them as being fundamentalist in following strict rules and codes, one of which could be assumed to be supporting Zionism (as implied by some in this thread). After all, conservative fundamentalist Jews have to support Israel, right? Wrong. The Neturei Karta believe that Israel can only be established by the Messiah, meaning that they oppose the present day State of Israel. They, and a few other groups, are both fundamentalist and anti-Zionist. Sure, they are a small group, but that does dampen the argument that all Jews applaud whatever Israel does. Don't know if that throws a wrench in the works or not, but it is an interesting fact I didn't know about previously. Neturei Karta website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pitchu, I've been thinking...do you think perhaps the reaction that you (well, we) perceive to be anti-Jewish is a result of the exposure that many X-C'ers have had to the religion? There seem to be a lot more ex-fundies and evangelicals than people who were nominally Methodist (for example) on here. I know that they way that Jews are discussed in those circles can be rather...one-sided? At least not representative, for sure. And then I wonder how many people who's experience has consisted of dealing with Messianic Jews, which I think may be the one issue that Jews do unite on, now that I think about it. :lmao:

 

I do not know, GK. I wonder a lot about it, and speculate, and even brood. Once I cried. Because I'm in love with this site, and I see this crazed preoccupation with matters Jewish in much the same way as one would try to comprehend, in a lover, an inexplicable recurrent mania over the use of condiments. :shrug:

 

**********************

 

Ex-Cog, you're doing some great research. Thanks for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I do not know, GK. I wonder a lot about it, and speculate, and even brood. Once I cried. Because I'm in love with this site, and I see this crazed preoccupation with matters Jewish in much the same way as one would try to comprehend, in a lover, an inexplicable recurrent mania over the use of condiments. :shrug:

 

**********************

 

 

I don't know about the rest of the stuff on this site....But for me....I disagree that a 'crazed precoccupation with matters Jewish'...is incomprehencable.!

To me it makes perfect sense....its a relevant issue - news worthy and very current. The War between Israel and Hezbolla warrents an uptodate...and an ongoing discussion. Its happening as we speak.....Lebonese people have lost their homes, their lives...which will never be the same again. (byw...I don't mention the Israelis as I think their are enough people doing that already)

For me...its got nothing to do with the denomination ........I'd say that all xians are 'taught' various and very creative ways to 'judge' other's.

I thought this site was the 'right' place for this kind of open discussion.

 

but yeah...the world is much larger...than this site...I personally don't have experience with all the threads here....I don't know.

 

I think if people are worried about 'racism' in general..then the same concern need to be offered to the MUSLIM bashing that often goes on...without a whisper. The US government is a major perpertrator of that shit.

 

as per this link

Quotes..."the greatest source of discrimination against Arabs and Muslims in the US today is the US government, mostly the Department of Justice and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). According to a Council on American-Islamic Relations report released in April, more than 60,000 individuals have been affected by government actions of discrimination, interrogation, raids, arrests, detentions and institutional closures. Secrecy, due process violations, arbitrariness, unlawfulness and abuse of power are among the terms used to describe the Bush administration's post-September 11 activities by, among others, Human Rights Watch, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press and the US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.(5)"

 

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer224/224_cainkar.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.