American Jewish Majority Now Backs Attacks on Iran, page 8

privacy

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 08:48 AM by mattpryor

reply to post by xEphon

I'm not missing any point.

You clearly stated that everything was fine before the creation of Israel, and that the creation of Israel is the cause of instability in the region.

This is a typical narrow-minded world view of the Middle East, and it is 100% wrong. In fact it is the opposite of right.

Look past the headlines and the agenda driven bullsh*t, and research the region independently. It's immensely unstable and has been for centuries. It's characterized by tribal feuds and power by arms. What's changed is that in the 20th century some of those feuding tribes were weaponized and given enormous power because of their oil reserves and tactical importance. Not by Israel, but by the West, the Nazis, and Russia.

Syria is on the verge of collapse as a state with chronic poverty, water shortage, a corrupt Ba'athist elite, torture and suppression of dissent are rife. Lebanon is a complete mess with no government and terrorist organisations vying for control, and Syria has its eyes firmly on Lebanon. Iraq - you saw what a mess Iraq was once you remove the strong-arm dictatorship. Yemen is in civil war. Minorities are oppressed by force of arms, kidnapping, torture in every single country in the Middle East.

Except one.

The truth of the matter is that Israel is the only stabilizing force.

It is Israel that has prevented the Ba'athists in Syria from invading Lebanon.

It is Israel that has prevented Iraq and Syria from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Arab governments point the finger at Israel to their own populations in order to hide their own immense and catastrophic failings (like trying to invade Israel three times, and suffering humiliating defeats). Even their own populations don't buy it any more and are demanding change and reform.

We should be helping those people, not supporting their dictators' propaganda.

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 09:00 AM by Unknown Perpetrator

Some points about Jewish/Israeli people and Americans acceptance of the distorted facts/history/current affairs.

The plans for a Jewsh State were in place long before the 20th Century, check out

Napoleans Jewish State Proclamation
Balfour_declaration

Interestingly, it's around the time of major conflict in Europe that these Paletsine claims arise ( Jewish banking influences surrounding war loans ??)

The blueprint for Zoinism was written in 1896 by Theodor Herzl called Der Judenstaat (German, "The State of the Jews"). In it is the suggestion of a Palestine based Jewish State or a Jewish state in Argentina. I'm sure everybody here, Jews and Zionists included, accept and respect Argentinian sovereignty today but if history had taken a different turn ???

Isreal as a nation was established through terrorist attrocities (British and Muslim people blown up by Zionist terrorists.

en.wikipedia.org...

I will not go on about other aspects of Israeli actions like Invasions of Lebanon, recent events in Gaza, attacks on the USS Liberty but the facts are there, buried, ignored by the mainstream press and not taught in classrooms.

Check out the real Balkanization of Palestine around 1948: 1.1 million Arabs displaced in 2 years.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...&_Culture/israel_palestine_pop.html

Americans need to learn the truth, the facts are out there, they've been buried by the powers that be!

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 09:26 AM by mattpryor

reply to post by Unknown Perpetrator

It is no secret that the Zionist movement was established in the 19th century. Organised immigration began with the first wave from Russia and Yemen in 1882. The Zionist movement originally tried to purchase the land from the Ottoman Empire, in exchange for paying off the Ottomans' national debt. The Ottomans were receptive to that, but then WWI happened and Turkey lost its empire.

To state that Israel was created from terrorism is far-fetched to say the least. Paramilitary groups were by no means mainstream and did not enjoy political or public support. And this aspect of Israel's history is no secret and is covered in any textbook or historical book about the region. To suggest that this is whitewashed or covered up is nonsensical.

The Stern Gang were opposed to the UN Partition Plan, for instance, whereas the Yishuv (precursor to the Knesset before there was a state) were in favour of it. Members of such organisations were frequently arrested and prosecuted for their attacks.

And violence in the 1940s does not justify violence in the 21st century.

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 11:41 AM by useless eaters

For all of you who want to attack Iran. Go right ahead. My problem is, you want war without the consequences of war, you want someone else to fight your war.

I think I have just defined what a coward is.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 11:58 AM by Rigel Kent

To any non jewish citizens of the US who support an israeli strike on Irans nuclear power facilities, I quote you these loving words from The Talmud.........

“Just the Jews are humans, the non- Jews are no humans but cattle”
Kerithuth 6b, page 78, Jebhammoth 61

“The non- Jews have been created to serve the Jews as slaves”
Midrasch Talpioth 225

“Sexual intercourse with non- Jews is like sexual intercourse with animals”
Kethuboth 3b

“The non- Jews have to be avoided, even more than sick pigs”
Orach Chaiim 57,6a

“The birth rate of none Jews has to be suppressed massively”
Zohar II, 4b

As you replace lost cows and donkeys, so you shall replace non-Jews
Lore Dea 377,1

Jews always have to try to deceive Non-Jews (Zohar I, 168a)

seems like an extract from the NWO agenda, but then who is behind the NWO? ....... oh yes...

PEACE,
RK

[edit on 7-10-2009 by Rigel Kent]

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 12:02 PM by dooper

Well, the survey said . . .

Some complain about Jews being the head of major corporate or banking organizations, which leads to many of the erroneous postings here.

I'm a blue-eyed, blonde-haired Gentile who to my knowledge, have only known two Jews. Fred was a complete jerk, and Jean was an angel. I can't recall with certainty where Fred was educated, but Jean had her MBA from MIT, and was working on her doctorate.

Both were absolutely brilliant.

I find it curious that folks think it's a conspiracy that Jews are into finance, banking, jewelry, international trade, high-end electronics, the professions, and are leading scientists.

They are a very driven, very intelligent group, and stress the importance of higher education.

I find it no mystery how many of these people of Jewish origin leading many industries, when they are among the most brilliant and intelligent on this earth, who went to the trouble to get advanced education, and who have a work ethic not to be matched.

Most of this sounds like jealousy, that is generations old, and being passed down.

Just like some countries have a hatred of certain groups going back generations, and yet no one knows why they feel like they do, how it got started, or when, but they just KNOW that they're supposed to hate this group because it's tradition.

The OP stated clearly that the American Jewish majority now backs attacks on Iran.

Many non-Jewish Americans agree.

So why, exactly did we have this thread?

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 01:03 PM by Lolliek

reply to post by Rigel Kent

The Talmud is the oral law, not the Torah, which is what is commonly referred to as the Old Testament. The oral laws were developed over a thousand years, and from many different rabbis and their interpretations. I haven't a clue which version/book/edition, etc. you are referencing - and as in any translated book, the translations are at the mercy of the translator. One of your references points to a Kabbalah interpretation which historically was not taught to anyone under 40 due to the issue of misunderstanding of the basic premises. (And Kabbalah is a completely different issue in itself concerning mainstream Judaism).

My point is this - most American Jews know the difference between what is real life and what a 15th century Rabbi interpreted. Do your own research, and do not believe everything you read on the internet (even if it's quoted on ATS :lol

Judaism 101

reply posted on 7-10-2009 @ 04:26 PM by All Seeing Eye

reply to post by Lolliek

My point is this - most American Jews know the difference between what is real life and what a 15th century Rabbi interpreted. Do your own research, and do not believe everything you read on the internet (even if it's quoted on ATS :lol

Here is a family that didn't get your message about being "real life".

YouTube Link

Does this ring any bells?

“Sexual intercourse with non- Jews is like sexual intercourse with animals”
Kethuboth 3b

Oh, but of course, this family is the exception, right? Honey, guess who's coming to dinner, a goy............

I dont believe "everything" on the internet, only what is logical............

[edit on 7-10-2009 by All Seeing Eye]

reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 08:07 AM by Recouper

Originally posted by StinkyFeet
reply to post by intrepid

I agree with you that it is incredibly sad when innocent people are killed in war. The sad truth is that if we appease Iran and let them develop nukes then we are just setting up a different group of innocent civilians that will be killed.

But all evidence so far has pointed to the fact that Iran is not developing nukes...

Why do people keep saying "OMG, we've got to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons!"? Iran is under a microscope by their own acquiescence, it's a known fact that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons and if they ever intend to start, the first thing they'll do is turn the lights off.

There's no argument from me that they should be watched very closely, but please can people stop going on about Iran developing nuclear weapons as that is simply not true.

reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 08:56 AM by Recouper

Originally posted by stevegmu
reply to post by Drexl

Given that this is an internet forum, not a doctoral dissertation, anti-Semite will do. Most understand it is used to describe those who are bigoted and racist toward Jews.

[edit on 6-10-2009 by stevegmu]

I'm not at all sure about this; the problem seems to be that it alters history, not so much "on the books" as records are still intact, but in the general knowledge. It's like a wilful attempt to bulldoze history away. The fact that the people who live in Israel are not Semites is quite an important fact that shouldn't simply be discarded when considering history.

I want to know the truth, not to judge, but because knowing the truth is an integral part of being free.

As an added note: I here and now encourage looking to both Israel and Iran for what is good, for exploring the connection all people share and for general expressions of peace and love. Then seek to bring it all together. Do that and you'll be more of a force towards neutralising threat for now and the future than any military strike bringing death, destruction and hate could ever be.

reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 09:06 AM by mattpryor

reply to post by Recouper

Wholly support your final paragraph. Humanity needs to look for common good and things we agree on.

On your other point however, the term anti-Semitism originates in the 1880s and explicitly means prejudice against Jews. The debate about who is or isn't a racial Semite is academic and irrelevant when discussing anti-Semitism.

reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 09:58 AM by Recouper

Originally posted by mattpryor
reply to post by Recouper

the term anti-Semitism originates in the 1880s and explicitly means prejudice against Jews. The debate about who is or isn't a racial Semite is academic and irrelevant when discussing anti-Semitism.

Does it not encourage an incomplete view of history among non-academics?

I understand what you are saying, and I'm feeling inclined to agree. It's a term that is functional in context. I also feel that the details regarding racial Semites are not acknowledged enough to give a clear view of history to the casual observer.

What do you think about that?

(I know it seems a bit off topic, but I feel it relates as the belief by a selection of American Jews that Iran should be subjected to a military strike might possibly be influenced by raciest views which might be disarmed by improvement in general awareness of historic details. It's a possibility which I think should allow this branch of conversation.)

reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 10:22 AM by mattpryor

reply to post by Recouper

I think it is erroneous to suggest that American Jews hold their opinions in isolation to the rest of society. Having not seen any opinion polls on American attitudes towards a military strike against Iran I cannot say whether Jewish opinion is merely a microcosm of mainstream opinion or whether it bucks the trend.

It would seem logical to suppose that the average American Jew feels more sympathy towards Israel than the average non-Jew, which may influence their opinion. On the other hand I don't think military action against Iran is particularly popular even in Israel, although I could be wrong on that too.

As for racist attitudes driving opinion, I'm not sure if there is any evidence for this assumption. I don't think Jews are any more or less racist than any other demographic group.

The BBC has been trying the tactic you suggest in the UK by showing numerous documentaries about Iranian culture. All nice and good, and probably has the desired effect of reducing the average person's appetite for war. But it does not address the fact that while the BBC mollifies us against war, the Iranian leadership is whipping up hatred against Israel, the US and the UK on a nearly weekly basis.

So yes it is possible to "disarm" the public through education and awareness. But when the other side is doing the exact opposite this seems to be a perverse method of conflict resolution

reply posted on 13-10-2009 @ 12:11 PM by Recouper

reply to post by mattpryor

I have to log off now, so I can't really give you as well thought out a reply as you deserve.
I'll get back to you, but it may be in about 16 to 18 hours from now.
Thanks for your articulate replies. I look forward to continuing this conversation if you would be so inclined.

reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 05:39 AM by Recouper

Originally posted by mattpryor
reply to post by Recouper

I think it is erroneous to suggest that American Jews hold their opinions in isolation to the rest of society. Having not seen any opinion polls on American attitudes towards a military strike against Iran I cannot say whether Jewish opinion is merely a microcosm of mainstream opinion or whether it bucks the trend.

Fair enough, I wasn't really meaning that I believe otherwise, just that it's a possibility. I probably seem a little insensitive. To plead my innocence I was just making an excuse to converse seemingly a little off topic.

Originally posted by mattpryor
As for racist attitudes driving opinion, I'm not sure if there is any evidence for this assumption. I don't think Jews are any more or less racist than any other demographic group.

Like I said, it's not actually my assumption. I think you are right on this point.
I would like to explore my opinion that the term anti-Semitism possibly gives an incorrect perception to general majorities and this may at least need (theoretically - I'll clarify shortly) further clarification through popular media and early learning institutions.

Originally posted by mattpryor
The BBC has been trying the tactic you suggest in the UK by showing numerous documentaries about Iranian culture. All nice and good, and probably has the desired effect of reducing the average person's appetite for war. But it does not address the fact that while the BBC mollifies us against war, the Iranian leadership is whipping up hatred against Israel, the US and the UK on a nearly weekly basis.

This is where I'm cautious. Like many on this forum, I have become aware that there is something big and sinister going on. Do you understand what your straw man is? The corporate entity that binds you through contract to the laws of commerce?
I also not only have a mistrust of mainstream media (and a lot of non-mainstream media), I outright believe they are wilfully attempting to mislead (on a number of topics).

Originally posted by mattpryor
So yes it is possible to "disarm" the public through education and awareness. But when the other side is doing the exact opposite this seems to be a perverse method of conflict resolution

Real education and awareness is always the better road. We want truth and transparency right. But I can't help see a correlation here between what you are saying is coming from the BBC and reaction to training, like an orchestra reacting to the conductor as they are trained to do.
(BBC playing the part of conductor, reading from the scores in front of them of course).

[edit on 14/10/2009 by Recouper]

reply posted on 20-10-2009 @ 12:24 AM by Caveat Lector