Well, that was a well thought out come-back. I have a lot of experience in retaliating against such comments, but I will refrain. It's clear by the flying pig statement that you interpret this board as some thing elementary.
A lot of things posted on here are elementary, and infantile, and I will treat them as such.
Defining Zionism as a form of racism is a subjective point, one open to debate. That the point I have been trying to make.
If this point is reality to you, fine. It is not everyone's reality.
Fair enough.
I suppose on that same token, it's acceptable to say that the KKK or the Nazi regime's attribution of racism is subjective aswell. All forms of prejudice are subjective.
We believe the Nazi regime to be racist based on our international courts. E.g. the Nürnberg Trials. Relatively speaking, the UN is our Nürnberg now.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I think you are giving too much credit to democracy and not enough to the republics. If you really think about it, the United States is a republic and tends to become upset over democratic elections in other sovereign states.
I can not truly begin to fathom what you mean? Not enough credit to the republics where the power to "vote" resides with say one, or a few dozen "royal" folks instead of all the citizens? Could you name a few shining examples of these UN republics for me?
But no, I think we become upset over _the results_ of those democratic elections. I would love for more republics and kingdoms to have elections, but no, I can't promise you I'll be happy with the results.
And I can't promise the people themselves will be happy with the results, half of my own nation is usually upset at the results....
I find it best in those moments to put on my birkenstocks and tie-dye and blend into the surrounding citizens, abandoning my uniform of coat and tie in the hopes I won't be recognized for what I am. And if I am recognized, then my hope would be that in lambasting me, those fellow birkenstock clad folks will also draw the ire of the lambaster causing a much larger conflagration!
I suppose on that same token, it's acceptable to say that the KKK or the Nazi regime's attribution of racism is subjective aswell. All forms of prejudice are subjective.
We believe the Nazi regime to be racist based on our international courts. E.g. the Nürnberg Trials. Relatively speaking, the UN is our Nürnberg now.
I don't know about you, but I see a difference between an ideology that explicitly argues that "inferior" beings be destroyed, and one that argues that a religious group needs its own homeland.
I can not truly begin to fathom what you mean? Not enough credit to the republics where the power to "vote" resides with say one, or a few dozen "royal" folks instead of all the citizens? Could you name a few shining examples of these UN republics for me?
But no, I think we become upset over _the results_ of those democratic elections. I would love for more republics and kingdoms to have elections, but no, I can't promise you I'll be happy with the results.
And I can't promise the people themselves will be happy with the results, half of my own nation is usually upset at the results....
Well that's rather hipocritical if you ask me. I am discontent with the results of Canada and the United States most recent elections. However, that doesn't grant me the right to take economic or military actions against them.
The reality of that whole perspective is that, it's not democracy that works in the mind. It's a specific rule set, or set of principles which compliment the general practice of western civilization. It has very little to do with democracy. A dictator of those same principles would not be a problem, in the eyes of facsists like Pres. Bush. In Bush's own words his bane is democracy, for if he were a dictator "..it would be much easier..".
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I don't know about you, but I see a difference between an ideology that explicitly argues that "inferior" beings be destroyed, and one that argues that a religious group needs its own homeland.
During my research into Judaism I found several passages in the Talmud that refers to non-Jews or Goyyim as the equivelant of beasts and called several times for their death.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I think you are giving too much credit to democracy and not enough to the republics. If you really think about it, the United States is a republic and tends to become upset over democratic elections in other sovereign states.
Seriously, Ahnimus. There is no real need for you to make this a personal issue. You guys are going to get this thread locked.
As for this post itself ... I usually do click on your links, and while some of them fit the bill of "credible source", that doesn't mean they contain the gospel truth on these issues.
That's true but for jsand or anyone else to say Ahnimus doesn't know what he talks about and can't backup his opinions is ludicrous.
During my research into Judaism I found several passages in the Talmud that refers to non-Jews or Goyyim as the equivelant of beasts and called several times for their death.
And rumour has it that in certain Islamic states, not adhering to said faith is often just cause for death. Yet you decry one faith and defend the other.
I will be the first person to admit that all three Western religions are full of bigots. I just choose not to paint everyone with the same brush. You can't see it, can you? You are all uptight about racism yet you use the same blanket judgments that racists do!
That's true but for jsand or anyone else to say Ahnimus doesn't know what he talks about and can't backup his opinions is ludicrous.
The guy backs up his opinions, sure. For the record, I don't think he is unintelligent. His interpretations of the various issues leave a lot of room for disagreement, though, just as mine almost certainly do.
And rumour has it that in certain Islamic states, not adhering to said faith is often just cause for death. Yet you decry one faith and defend the other.
I will be the first person to admit that all three Western religions are full of bigots. I just choose not to paint everyone with the same brush. You can't see it, can you? You are all uptight about racism yet you use the same blanket judgments that racists do!
Not at all. I am not using a blanket judgement against Jews, which I would consider racist. My judgement is that of self-proclaimed Zionists and the Zionist doctrine. It's like saying the KKK is racist, not like saying White People are racist.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I don't know about you, but I see a difference between an ideology that explicitly argues that "inferior" beings be destroyed, and one that argues that a religious group needs its own homeland.
zionism does have an indirectly rasist motif - it prefers Jewish people over other people, in the term of citizenship: Jews has the right for an automatic Israeli citizenship. This is basically the whole story, other than that Israeli arabs or any other nationalities have the same rights as every other Israeli jew.
*edit: Israeli arab have also one extra right: they are not obligated to serve in the IDF, Israeli jews are.
Sure, this is pretty much what the nazi regime stands for - giving extra rights to the Aryans. I guess this is another way of looking at history, ha?
Not at all. I am not using a blanket judgement against Jews, which I would consider racist. My judgement is that of self-proclaimed Zionists and the Zionist doctrine. It's like saying the KKK is racist, not like saying White People are racist.
Alright, maybe I read you wrong. I will say that your post about Jewish scripture was what lead me down the wrong path, though. You seemed to argue that the Talmud was the problem, which would mean that, logically, anyone who adheres to the Jewish faith is racist.
zionism does have an indirectly rasist motif - it prefers Jewish people over other people, in the term of citizenship: Jews has the right for an automatic Israeli citizenship. This is basically the whole story, other than that Israeli arabs or any other nationalities have the same rights as every other Israeli jew.
True enough. But by that same logic, Chinese people choosing to form their own exclusive communities in North America (so-called "Chinatowns") also has an indirect racist motif.
Too broad a definition ... All cultural groups have a certain preference for what is familiar to them, and that includes their own people. Is this full-on racism, or human nature? I guess Zionism is much stronger than a basic preference, granted.
I don't know about you, but I see a difference between an ideology that explicitly argues that "inferior" beings be destroyed, and one that argues that a religious group needs its own homeland.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa... Do the Jews not believe to be superior? Are they not God's chosen people?
Exactly what the administration wants you to believe. It's not their religion that causes their hostility towards the west, it's the U.S. foreign policy. I'm pretty tired of hearing the terms "muslim extremist" or "islamic fascist" because those terms really are ignorantly overused. Sure there may be some, but I don't believe they even exist on a large scale, and certainly not as large as the bush administration would like for us to believe. I'm disappointed time and time again by the number of people who fall right into their little trap of turning us against "them".
This has nothing to do with what the "administration" says. People have recognized the threat posed by fundamentalist radical Islam for years before the current administration came into office. I only view it as us verse them because "they" view it as such and have violently forced that situation onto "us." It is nice to think that it is our foreign policy that inspires these people because it gives us the feeling that there is any easy solution to our problems. We just need to change our policy. I just don't think this is true. What was the policy that inspired the first bombing of the WTC in 93'? And for that matter why is it that in 2000 the USS Cole was bombed just months after the US had saved the lives of thousands of Muslims in Kosovo? I just don't think it is that simple.
Alright, maybe I read you wrong. I will say that your post about Jewish scripture was what lead me down the wrong path, though. You seemed to argue that the Talmud was the problem, which would mean that, logically, anyone who adheres to the Jewish faith is racist.
Well, certainly someone that adheres in whole to any faith could be considered racist. Christianity and Islam have no shortages of prejudice teachings. Judaism however trumps them in that respect. All of the teachings of the Talmud are based on the Pharisees that were hipocritical, nearly everything they preached about was contrary to their actions. Jesus Christ made that point to the Jews of Palestine and they had him killed for it, calling him a blasphemer. The Pharisees were granted holy status simply because they claimed to have heard the word of god, contrary to the belief that no man could hear the word of god, and god's word was spoken through Moses at Mt. Sinai, that is exactly the same time the Pharisees claim to have spoken directly with god. It would seem all the Pharisees did was use the blind faith of Jews against them, to deliver their own beliefs unto a vulnerable population. I have problems with Christianity and Islam aswell, but that's for a different thread.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Dayan is in Israel - he knows a lot more than you whether these Islamic fascists (I bet that touched a nerve) exist on a large scale.
I'm actually not in Israel at the moment. I am in New York right now, and I'm going to be in the States for awhile, but hopefully I'll get back to Israel as soon as I can.
This has nothing to do with what the "administration" says. People have recognized the threat posed by fundamentalist radical Islam for years before the current administration came into office. I only view it as us verse them because "they" view it as such and have violently forced that situation onto "us." It is nice to think that it is our foreign policy that inspires these people because it gives us the feeling that there is any easy solution to our problems. We just need to change our policy. I just don't think this is true. What was the policy that inspired the first bombing of the WTC in 93'? And for that matter why is it that in 2000 the USS Cole was bombed just months after the US had saved the lives of thousands of Muslims in Kosovo? I just don't think it is that simple.
The United States involvement in the destruction of two holy towers in Lebanon. That is why the WTC bombing attempt was carried out in '93 and it's also where UML got the idea for 9/11.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I should also note that denoting oneself as "special" in some way does not translate into the conclusion that all other people are therefore inferior.
I like to remind myself that I am, indeed, special.
The amount of times I heard that everyone is special growing up made me want to glue my ears shut. I'm not special, I'm mostly carbon just like everything else.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
So Israel, being America's bitch, isn't being spoon fed the same garbage about terrorists and muslim extremists and islamic fascists? I submit that they are.
And I would submit that when one lives with suicide bombings on an almost daily basis, as Israelis did in 2002, one gets a pretty good idea of what one is dealing with. Also, Israelis by and large pay very little attention to the news media that is broadcast here in America, and follow Israeli media much more closely. And by the way, Israeli media covers the full spectrum of opinions from left to right, and simply is not pushing a single government line.
If that's a fact then good on 'em, but I'm suspiscious that they may be hoodwinked like a good share of Americans have been.
One of Chomsky's sources is Ha'aretz newspaper. It's the third popular newspaper in Israel, and considered to be pro-Palestinian. This is not the only example, btw. As you can see, this is a fact, so there's no reason to be suspiscious - our freedom of speach is much wider than the US one.
One of Chomsky's sources is Ha'aretz newspaper. It's the third popular newspaper in Israel, and considered to be pro-Palestinian. This is not the only example, btw. As you can see, this is a fact, so there's no reason to be suspiscious - our freedom of speach is much wider than the US one.
Not exactly if you consider a news outlet to be pro-Palestine. Then you probably don't believe 90% of what they report. I doubt you even watch it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Well that's rather hipocritical if you ask me. I am discontent with the results of Canada and the United States most recent elections. However, that doesn't grant me the right to take economic or military actions against them.
The reality of that whole perspective is that, it's not democracy that works in the mind. It's a specific rule set, or set of principles which compliment the general practice of western civilization. It has very little to do with democracy. A dictator of those same principles would not be a problem, in the eyes of facsists like Pres. Bush. In Bush's own words his bane is democracy, for if he were a dictator "..it would be much easier..".
Unfortunately your argument breaks down as you come upon those principles of western civilization -- one of them I believe to be democratically elected representatives. So no dictators allowed, sorry. But you're right though, it is a battle of values raging in the world, of ideals and principles. Some prefer to fight in uniform, some don't. Some prefer women to vote, others prefer nobody vote.
I'm really trying hard to grok the difference between democracy and republic and all I can come up with is that in the later it's not necessarily implied that EVERYONE gets to vote? I'm not for that -- supreme power rests in all citizens entitled to vote. Hmmm, that doesn't sound as good as democracy.
As for your observed hypocrisy, again, voting good, bad people bad. Bad people do good things for you so you vote for them, wonderful! Bad people want to mess with my western civilization principles, well observe said principles in action! We talk, haggle, try to work it out, then we stop talking. There is a point where you just have to stop talking....
Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men.
- John F. Kennedy
Any guesses what will happen when Hezbollah refuses to disarm? They are currently under a UN mandate to disarm, but it is quite obvious that they have no intentions of doing so. Armies don't disband after they win a war... duh!
So in essence, Israel will theoretically have the support of the UN if they decide to try and disarm Hezbollah themselves. Furthermore, if the UN proves that it cannot fullfill its own mandate, I doubt Israel will care either way if the UN supports them or condems them.
Plus, throw in the fact that Netanyahoo will likely take office by the end of the year - and the probablility for another war is very likely.
What do you guys think?
The liberals in Israel are clueless. They think if they give up land, things will get better. They are oblivious to the fact that 99% of the Middle East wants to wipe the Jews off the face of the Earth.
"If you want peace, be prepared for war."
George Washington
Comments
A lot of things posted on here are elementary, and infantile, and I will treat them as such.
See...I'm right.
Fair enough.
I suppose on that same token, it's acceptable to say that the KKK or the Nazi regime's attribution of racism is subjective aswell. All forms of prejudice are subjective.
We believe the Nazi regime to be racist based on our international courts. E.g. the Nürnberg Trials. Relatively speaking, the UN is our Nürnberg now.
I can not truly begin to fathom what you mean? Not enough credit to the republics where the power to "vote" resides with say one, or a few dozen "royal" folks instead of all the citizens? Could you name a few shining examples of these UN republics for me?
But no, I think we become upset over _the results_ of those democratic elections. I would love for more republics and kingdoms to have elections, but no, I can't promise you I'll be happy with the results.
And I can't promise the people themselves will be happy with the results, half of my own nation is usually upset at the results....
I find it best in those moments to put on my birkenstocks and tie-dye and blend into the surrounding citizens, abandoning my uniform of coat and tie in the hopes I won't be recognized for what I am. And if I am recognized, then my hope would be that in lambasting me, those fellow birkenstock clad folks will also draw the ire of the lambaster causing a much larger conflagration!
I don't know about you, but I see a difference between an ideology that explicitly argues that "inferior" beings be destroyed, and one that argues that a religious group needs its own homeland.
Well that's rather hipocritical if you ask me. I am discontent with the results of Canada and the United States most recent elections. However, that doesn't grant me the right to take economic or military actions against them.
The reality of that whole perspective is that, it's not democracy that works in the mind. It's a specific rule set, or set of principles which compliment the general practice of western civilization. It has very little to do with democracy. A dictator of those same principles would not be a problem, in the eyes of facsists like Pres. Bush. In Bush's own words his bane is democracy, for if he were a dictator "..it would be much easier..".
During my research into Judaism I found several passages in the Talmud that refers to non-Jews or Goyyim as the equivelant of beasts and called several times for their death.
And rumour has it that in certain Islamic states, not adhering to said faith is often just cause for death. Yet you decry one faith and defend the other.
I will be the first person to admit that all three Western religions are full of bigots. I just choose not to paint everyone with the same brush. You can't see it, can you? You are all uptight about racism yet you use the same blanket judgments that racists do!
The guy backs up his opinions, sure. For the record, I don't think he is unintelligent. His interpretations of the various issues leave a lot of room for disagreement, though, just as mine almost certainly do.
Not at all. I am not using a blanket judgement against Jews, which I would consider racist. My judgement is that of self-proclaimed Zionists and the Zionist doctrine. It's like saying the KKK is racist, not like saying White People are racist.
zionism does have an indirectly rasist motif - it prefers Jewish people over other people, in the term of citizenship: Jews has the right for an automatic Israeli citizenship. This is basically the whole story, other than that Israeli arabs or any other nationalities have the same rights as every other Israeli jew.
*edit: Israeli arab have also one extra right: they are not obligated to serve in the IDF, Israeli jews are.
Sure, this is pretty much what the nazi regime stands for - giving extra rights to the Aryans. I guess this is another way of looking at history, ha?
Alright, maybe I read you wrong. I will say that your post about Jewish scripture was what lead me down the wrong path, though. You seemed to argue that the Talmud was the problem, which would mean that, logically, anyone who adheres to the Jewish faith is racist.
True enough. But by that same logic, Chinese people choosing to form their own exclusive communities in North America (so-called "Chinatowns") also has an indirect racist motif.
Too broad a definition ... All cultural groups have a certain preference for what is familiar to them, and that includes their own people. Is this full-on racism, or human nature? I guess Zionism is much stronger than a basic preference, granted.
This has nothing to do with what the "administration" says. People have recognized the threat posed by fundamentalist radical Islam for years before the current administration came into office. I only view it as us verse them because "they" view it as such and have violently forced that situation onto "us." It is nice to think that it is our foreign policy that inspires these people because it gives us the feeling that there is any easy solution to our problems. We just need to change our policy. I just don't think this is true. What was the policy that inspired the first bombing of the WTC in 93'? And for that matter why is it that in 2000 the USS Cole was bombed just months after the US had saved the lives of thousands of Muslims in Kosovo? I just don't think it is that simple.
And do not both Christians and Muslims alike believe that their faith is "right" or true, thus also making them special or "chosen"?
Well, certainly someone that adheres in whole to any faith could be considered racist. Christianity and Islam have no shortages of prejudice teachings. Judaism however trumps them in that respect. All of the teachings of the Talmud are based on the Pharisees that were hipocritical, nearly everything they preached about was contrary to their actions. Jesus Christ made that point to the Jews of Palestine and they had him killed for it, calling him a blasphemer. The Pharisees were granted holy status simply because they claimed to have heard the word of god, contrary to the belief that no man could hear the word of god, and god's word was spoken through Moses at Mt. Sinai, that is exactly the same time the Pharisees claim to have spoken directly with god. It would seem all the Pharisees did was use the blind faith of Jews against them, to deliver their own beliefs unto a vulnerable population. I have problems with Christianity and Islam aswell, but that's for a different thread.
No, these are biblical irrelevant stuff who would make an Israeli civilian laugh when used as an argumentation.
I'm actually not in Israel at the moment. I am in New York right now, and I'm going to be in the States for awhile, but hopefully I'll get back to Israel as soon as I can.
The United States involvement in the destruction of two holy towers in Lebanon. That is why the WTC bombing attempt was carried out in '93 and it's also where UML got the idea for 9/11.
I like to remind myself that I am, indeed, special.
The amount of times I heard that everyone is special growing up made me want to glue my ears shut. I'm not special, I'm mostly carbon just like everything else.
And I would submit that when one lives with suicide bombings on an almost daily basis, as Israelis did in 2002, one gets a pretty good idea of what one is dealing with. Also, Israelis by and large pay very little attention to the news media that is broadcast here in America, and follow Israeli media much more closely. And by the way, Israeli media covers the full spectrum of opinions from left to right, and simply is not pushing a single government line.
One of Chomsky's sources is Ha'aretz newspaper. It's the third popular newspaper in Israel, and considered to be pro-Palestinian. This is not the only example, btw. As you can see, this is a fact, so there's no reason to be suspiscious - our freedom of speach is much wider than the US one.
Not exactly if you consider a news outlet to be pro-Palestine. Then you probably don't believe 90% of what they report. I doubt you even watch it.
Unfortunately your argument breaks down as you come upon those principles of western civilization -- one of them I believe to be democratically elected representatives. So no dictators allowed, sorry. But you're right though, it is a battle of values raging in the world, of ideals and principles. Some prefer to fight in uniform, some don't. Some prefer women to vote, others prefer nobody vote.
I'm really trying hard to grok the difference between democracy and republic and all I can come up with is that in the later it's not necessarily implied that EVERYONE gets to vote? I'm not for that -- supreme power rests in all citizens entitled to vote. Hmmm, that doesn't sound as good as democracy.
As for your observed hypocrisy, again, voting good, bad people bad. Bad people do good things for you so you vote for them, wonderful! Bad people want to mess with my western civilization principles, well observe said principles in action! We talk, haggle, try to work it out, then we stop talking. There is a point where you just have to stop talking....
Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men.
- John F. Kennedy
The liberals in Israel are clueless. They think if they give up land, things will get better. They are oblivious to the fact that 99% of the Middle East wants to wipe the Jews off the face of the Earth.
George Washington