Betrayed by Europe
- Thread starter John Reynolds
- Start date
Pretty fanciful essay. I saw the national news report on synagogue bombings and other anti semitic attacks and various reports. I get French news on expressvu. Chirac denounced them as well. The author even uses the obvious anti muslim scarf ban as another anti semitic law. Give me a break...
Youd think she was describing 1930's nazi germany for shits sake... Anti semitic violence is virtually all coming from the muslim community due to the israeli palestinian conflict. Considering the huge muslim population there its not surprsing its happening. Imagine 20% of the US population being muslim...
BTW... I think this says it all:Nidra Poller is at work on a book, Notes from a Simple Citizen, chronicling events from 2000 through 2003;
Wow France is so far gone but a major national paper printed her article...
Youd think she was describing 1930's nazi germany for shits sake... Anti semitic violence is virtually all coming from the muslim community due to the israeli palestinian conflict. Considering the huge muslim population there its not surprsing its happening. Imagine 20% of the US population being muslim...
BTW... I think this says it all:Nidra Poller is at work on a book, Notes from a Simple Citizen, chronicling events from 2000 through 2003;
and in English at National Review Online. This is her first appearance in COMMENTARY
Wow France is so far gone but a major national paper printed her article...
pascal said:L233 said:
Good point L233,
Also the author try to mix two different things, the american situation and the jewish situation.
Also any disagrement with Israel is automatically disagrement with all jews and automatically again anti-semitc.
There is lot of blablabla
No it really is not a good defense. Here is why.
Let the terrorist blow up Jews. Any act of retaliation on behalf of Israel to protect it citizenry is unacceptable.
The PLO does not recognize the state of Israel as one with a right to exist.(They even explain this in their Charter.)
So what exactly is it that you disagree with regards to the government of Israel? For the most part them Jews support the governments actions to defend their lives you know. Which part of the Israeli governments actions are so deplorable that the UN hold a conference with the explicit intension of labeling Israel a racist state... On and on I could go. This bullshit about it being something more to do with the current government of Israel is only a partial truth. Anti-Semitism is pretty ripe amongst the left and Muslims outright hate Jews in general. I even heard a Lebanese man explain once that Hitler was his hero. The largest reason why the left rails against Israel so hard is because it has such a stanch ally in America. Most of the rhetoric that is critical of Israel is politically motivated and consequentially because the critique is so harsh (unwarranted for the most part) it comes off as anti Jew and therefore anti-Semite. In some cases it is anti Jew.
What should the government of Israel do to gain favor? Surrender to the PLO and disband its army, vanquish the state of Israel? Allow for an ethnic cleansing of sorts so that the terrorist organizations have better opportunity to slaughter Jews? Denounce America?
In short there are not allot of good reasons to disagree with the actions of the state of Israel. Unless you are a pacifist.
Willmeister
Newcomer
Like the building of the wall? Everyone I know has no problem with a wall being built, but as long as it was inside the Green Line it was hard to criticize. But once it started encroaching on Palestinian territory, well, that's crossing the line both literally and figuratively. If Israel had built it inside the Green Line, you think the criticism would be anywhere near it is right now? Heck, no. As a private citizen, you don't not have a right to unilaterally build a fence on another's property even if your neighbor is a total scumbag so why should nations?
This is so outrightly irresponsible, it's not even worthy of rebuttal.
No. It's also an ally of France, Germany and Britain in case you hadn't noticed.
1) Disband the JNF,
2) Dismantle settlements in the Occupied Territories, and
3) Return sovereignty of resources to the Palestinians in Palestinian territories.
Of course, the first two are designed to thwart the third. And any of these three is very unlikely (except #1, and which Likhud is actually in favour of). All wars are fought over things, not religon.
As for #2, we also have to notice that Sharon claims to be dismantling. But, with one hand he dismantles, and with the other, props them up.
What was the thread's topic again???
Sabastian said:
And Israel does not recognize the Palestinians' right to have a state of their own. Your point?
The illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza?
Occupation is defense?
Pointless. To you, Israel can do no evil. Israel is always right, so is the US. You're not capable of debate, you simply reiterate the same points over and over again without even acknowledging that there might be viable, differing points of views. To you, differing points of views are the result of irrational "hatred" and bigotry because you think your opinion is the objective, absolute truth. You polemise, exaggerate, dramatize just like the inflammatory moron commentators you so much enjoy reading. That shit has twisted your mind to the point at which you are incapable of enganging into reasonable debate. Equating criticism with anti-semitism/americanism, boldly announcing crap you've read in the rags you read as truth, make ridiculous assertions ("not allot of good reasons to disagree with the actions of the state of Israel. Unless you are a pacifist") and so on.
Declare violent anti-semitic outbursts among a fringe group of frustrated young Arabs (no, not "Muslims" per se, I have yet to see a Turk torch a synagogue) to be "European anti-semitism", extend that supposed "European" anti-semitism to include the left and the "liberal media" and generally anyone who dares to critizise Israel, pull some bogus arguments to equate anti-americanism with anti-semitism and thus transfer the same line of argumentation to apply to people critical towards US foreign policy.
So we're back at the beginning of this thread where I already charged you with trying to paint critics as irrational haters by employing fallacious arguments, absurd allegations and insulting innuendos.
You see an argument you don't like? Declare the person who makes it an anti-american or anti-semite and thus denounce the argument without even adressing it. If someone objects to that, rephrase your point by construeing some bogus connection or by giving an example which you subsequently generalize or by building preposterous strawmen ("What should the government of Israel do to gain favor? Surrender to the PLO and disband its army, vanquish the state of Israel?").
Rinse, repeat. Ad nauseam.
"Discussing" with you is a most tiring, frustrating and pointless exercize in masochism and that's why I am done with answering your postings.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Why is there 4 pages on this?
I mean, who gives a flying f*ck about Europe, and France in particular?
I mean, who gives a flying f*ck about Europe, and France in particular?
we have 33+ pages on an Inq rumour. We can have 4 on France and Europe. Well, 4 on Europe and a few posts on France is all i can stand.Joe DeFuria said:Why is there 4 pages on this?
I mean, who gives a flying f*ck about Europe, and France in particular?
later,
epic
L233, the only reason I take the stance I do is because the stance against Israel is unbalanced. While Israel is expected to be an upright outstanding nation Palestine is not. There is not enough critique directed towards the Palestinian leadership or its people. They share a large degree of the culpability in the whole affair. As it is the Israeli government can do no right and the same goes for the American government. So lets hear about all the great things that the Israeli and US governments have done in recent times? ... Whats that? I can't hear you.
Probably because you have nothing good to say but that is because you can't get past your own bias. All you can do is point your finger and hyperventilate all over the place about how poor a job these governments are doing without being more critical of your own perspective. Israel does not recognize Palestine because Palestine makes it a charter priority not to legitimize Israel even claims Israel is Palestine. I don't give a dam how great a neighbor you are if you have it in law that it is your premier policy to not recognize my place in the world don't expect me to hand you the means to enact that.
Oh yeah, the Israeli and US governments can do no right…add nausea.
Probably because you have nothing good to say but that is because you can't get past your own bias. All you can do is point your finger and hyperventilate all over the place about how poor a job these governments are doing without being more critical of your own perspective. Israel does not recognize Palestine because Palestine makes it a charter priority not to legitimize Israel even claims Israel is Palestine. I don't give a dam how great a neighbor you are if you have it in law that it is your premier policy to not recognize my place in the world don't expect me to hand you the means to enact that.
Oh yeah, the Israeli and US governments can do no right…add nausea.
IMHO you are out of context here Sabastian. I was talking how any disagrement is automatically generalized, labelled and escalleted, anti-this and anti-that. My post I criticized the use of this mechanisms by the Author. The author go far to the point to call France the enemySabastian said:pascal said:L233 said:
Good point L233,
Also the author try to mix two different things, the american situation and the jewish situation.
Also any disagrement with Israel is automatically disagrement with all jews and automatically again anti-semitc.
There is lot of blablabla
No it really is not a good defense. Here is why.
Let the terrorist blow up Jews. Any act of retaliation on behalf of Israel to protect it citizenry is unacceptable.
The PLO does not recognize the state of Israel as one with a right to exist.(They even explain this in their Charter.)
So what exactly is it that you disagree with regards to the government of Israel? For the most part them Jews support the governments actions to defend their lives you know. Which part of the Israeli governments actions are so deplorable that the UN hold a conference with the explicit intension of labeling Israel a racist state... On and on I could go. This bullshit about it being something more to do with the current government of Israel is only a partial truth. Anti-Semitism is pretty ripe amongst the left and Muslims outright hate Jews in general. I even heard a Lebanese man explain once that Hitler was his hero. The largest reason why the left rails against Israel so hard is because it has such a stanch ally in America. Most of the rhetoric that is critical of Israel is politically motivated and consequentially because the critique is so harsh (unwarranted for the most part) it comes off as anti Jew and therefore anti-Semite. In some cases it is anti Jew.
What should the government of Israel do to gain favor? Surrender to the PLO and disband its army, vanquish the state of Israel? Allow for an ethnic cleansing of sorts so that the terrorist organizations have better opportunity to slaughter Jews? Denounce America?
In short there are not allot of good reasons to disagree with the actions of the state of Israel. Unless you are a pacifist.
Also disagre with the current Israel government line of action is not agree with PLO. Just dont put everything in the same basket. The bad side is when we go to the extremes and generalizations, giving power to the extremists in both sides.
Remenber there a great Jews and Israelits like Rabin who was killed during the peace process.
Sabastian said:
After reading this, I have to say it's pretty ironic that you should accuse people of 'hate mongering'.
Anyway, the article is based on a rather flawed premise. Yes, intolerance and negative sentiments are indeed growing among many Europeans. The mistake here is that it would be aimed towards Jews, when it is in fact all about the young generation of muslim heritage. And the misguided hate towards Jewish people that can be found among many of them is in fact one of the reasons for those negative sentiments.
akira888 said:
Oh boy, are trying to turn this into yet another rant on how Constantinople should be freed from the grasp of the fiendish infidels?
100% off-topic but since we were talking about synogogues:
http://www.mchschool.org/~malbert/sephardim.htm
Another little fact: the Ottoman jews suffered worst under persecution at the hands of the Catholic Armenians in the mid-19th century.
As opposed to another "rant" about Israel or another "rant" about GW Bush or another "rant" about Kyoto or another "rant" about Iraq? We've had about ~200 threads on those yet one thread on the aforementioned topic; I find that just a little unfair for you to say that.
And I love how you dismiss Indigenous People's Rights with the throwaway line about "fiendish infidels." Should I answer your pro-Palestinian sympathies with a remark about your ill-feelings towards the "sniveling Hebrews?"
EDIT: That's hiding the fact that the Jews were the slave-trading agents for the Turks - this is where the stereotype of "Jew as slave trader" originated. You really can't fault an indigenous people for attacking, even killing collaborators (and their families) of a colonial oppressor - that's always perfectly fair game.
And what's this about "Catholics?" I assume you meant Orthodox.
And I love how you dismiss Indigenous People's Rights with the throwaway line about "fiendish infidels." Should I answer your pro-Palestinian sympathies with a remark about your ill-feelings towards the "sniveling Hebrews?"
EDIT: That's hiding the fact that the Jews were the slave-trading agents for the Turks - this is where the stereotype of "Jew as slave trader" originated. You really can't fault an indigenous people for attacking, even killing collaborators (and their families) of a colonial oppressor - that's always perfectly fair game.
And what's this about "Catholics?" I assume you meant Orthodox.
You know, the grotesque thing about your take on the Ottomans and the Turks is that they were a whole hell of a lot better than basically anyone else at that time. They weren't perfect, they weren't angels but compared to the rest of the world, they were damn progressive.
http://www.globaled.org/nyworld/materials/ottoman/turkish.html
"The practicality of Ottoman toleration was also remarkable. The system of the millets was pragmatic and useful, as well as moral. Yet it was exceptional that any government of the time would so set aside its prejudices to benefit the country. No Western government would have accepted the millet system and left so many ordinary functions of government out of its own control. Imagine a Western government in, for example, the fifteenth century that allowed non-Christians to run their own schools, to leave money to their children according to their own laws (not those of the state), to collect taxes to support welfare for its own group, to organize and police its own neighborhoods, to punish transgressors according to its own laws in its own courts. In fact, imagine a European government that allowed non-Christians to live in peace at all"
The Turks/Ottoman make a pretty crappy target and hijacking threads won't free Constantinople from the Muslim devils.
http://www.globaled.org/nyworld/materials/ottoman/turkish.html
"The practicality of Ottoman toleration was also remarkable. The system of the millets was pragmatic and useful, as well as moral. Yet it was exceptional that any government of the time would so set aside its prejudices to benefit the country. No Western government would have accepted the millet system and left so many ordinary functions of government out of its own control. Imagine a Western government in, for example, the fifteenth century that allowed non-Christians to run their own schools, to leave money to their children according to their own laws (not those of the state), to collect taxes to support welfare for its own group, to organize and police its own neighborhoods, to punish transgressors according to its own laws in its own courts. In fact, imagine a European government that allowed non-Christians to live in peace at all"
The Turks/Ottoman make a pretty crappy target and hijacking threads won't free Constantinople from the Muslim devils.
Of course the Ottomans were "tolerant," they were in charge of an empire in which most of whose subjects were non-Muslims. When Europeans developed empires in Africa and Asia, they were "tolerant" as well, just as the Israelis are "tolerant" of Islam in the West Bank and America is also quite "tolerant" in Iraq. "Tolerant" is not a great claim to rest one's hat on - especially for an imperialist.
It's also good to see that the Ankara regime is getting some value for the billions it spends every year in propaganda efforts. Notice how they left out that all these people became "minorites" through imperialistic conquest - a critical difference from the European cases.
It's also good to see that the Ankara regime is getting some value for the billions it spends every year in propaganda efforts. Notice how they left out that all these people became "minorites" through imperialistic conquest - a critical difference from the European cases.
