Simon Wiesenthal Center: Top 10 Anti-Semites, Israel-Haters for 2012

page: 13
95
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 



Yes, I aware that some of the content is post 1917, bu the maps sure aren't, excecpt the land theft map. Do you honestly the land of Palestine did not exist before 1917?


All of those maps are British or American. They referred to the area as "Palestine" because that is what it was called in Sunday School. What do the beliefs of Anglophone Christians have to do with the question of "Palestinian identity." Sure, the land was physically there, but there was no Palestine until the British created it. Ironically, it was intended to prevent conflict between Syria and Jordan!
edit on 25-1-2013 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


You are wrong, these maps are not what you claim them to be.

I will elaborate on Sunday when I have the mental capacity to do so.

These maps are from the 1700's and 1800's.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 



You are wrong, these maps are not what you claim them to be.

I will elaborate on Sunday when I have the mental capacity to do so.

These maps are from the 1700's and 1800's.


They are clearly written in English. They are intended for Sunday School use or Bible Tourism. What would be more germane to your point is a Turkish map of the province.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 



You are wrong, these maps are not what you claim them to be.

I will elaborate on Sunday when I have the mental capacity to do so.

These maps are from the 1700's and 1800's.


They are clearly written in English. They are intended for Sunday School use or Bible Tourism. What would be more germane to your point is a Turkish map of the province.


Care to translate this one for me?

edit on 1/25/2013 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by ThinkingHuman
 



Rather than stopping or reversing it, then-World power Great Britain aided the invasion in 1917, as did the United Nation in 1947. I was correct.

Actually, Great Britain tried to suppress the settlement of the area by Jews and tried to put down the Israeli secession by force of arms.

I will call this an inflammatory lie.

If there were any truth to this, in the context that we are talking about here, you would need to explain what you are referring to, not just make a one sentence blanket statement that contradicts what a simple web search will prove. "Great Britain tried to suppress the settlement of the area (Palestine) by Jews" is untrue.

Again and additionally, you are deceitful in your choice of words. Great Britain "tried", like when you accuse Palestinians of what they "want" and "attempt". Oh yes, Great Britain was not successful but they "tried".

For any reader who has not reviewed the "Balfour Declaration" lately, it was a letter sent to Baron Walter Rothschild for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland, stating "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object" (objective).

Show me the actions Great Britain undertook consistently, not just on very rare occasions, to "suppress" the Jews from settling the area (which you now refuse to call Palestine), showing that Mr. Balfour lied, or at least deceived the Zionist Federation of Great Britain.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
 



I need to add that I find it extremely deceitful when you try to play on words like this.


This is not a play on words, nor is it deceitful. Christian Europeans referred to the area as "Palestine" in order to tie it in with the Christian Bible. It did not exist as a nation or even unified province.


Before 1917 Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire. Of course, they did not give it an English name!

Your play on words is extremely deceitful. And to some extent successful in distracting from the issue.

You are acknowledging that "Christian Europeans" referred to it that way. If they referred to it as "Palestine" in and before and after 1917, then why tell me that it did not exist in 1917? If you have an issue with "Christian Europeans" referring to it like that, you should address THAT topic, in another thread.

I perfectly correct in referring to it the same way as was common for anglophones to refer to it, as Palestine.

Europe and Asia and "Middle East" do not exist as "nation or province". So we cannot use those words? You are making no sense whatsoever.

If I go by what you say, that Palestine was not "a unified province", then Zionists invaded MORE than just one province. What is your point? Zionists are evil because they invaded many provinces? Or, Zionists are NOT evil because what they invaded was not "unified"?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:45 AM
link   
The Zionists are basically Carpetbaggers and they are racists. They believe that Israel belongs to the Jews. This is a racist ideology. End of Story. And Simon Wiesenthal was given double rations by the Waffen SS for painting "We Love Hitler" signs at the concentration camp.

Niether the Zionists nor Simon Wiesenthal have anything credible to say because they are both representatives of racist extremism.
edit on 1/26/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: grammar



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
 



I have yet to see anybody disagree with my statement that Zionism CAUSES Anti-Semitism. If everybody is in agreement with me, then whose purpose does it serve to cause Anti-Semitism?


I disagree. This is like saying that the American Civil Rights Movement caused segregation.

Back on topic, I suggest you give me a decent argument why you disagree. Zionism is not analogous to the "American Civil Rights Movement". Nice try.

I pointed out, that Zionists (and with them the Jewish people who were manipulated or tricked into this scam) are, from a Palestinian perspective, INVADERS, who took over land and power.

From a Zionist perspective, as you described it, "People have things taken from them all the time which causes anger" but it is rare "that the anger lasts so long and obsessively that it ferments into hatred".

Your reaction is potent proof that my explanation of Zionism as a conspiracy is correct. The proof is that IT HAS FERMENTED into hatred. Thus, either the creators of Zionism made a miscalculation, not expecting the result that we all know occured, or, they calculated correctly, with hatred being the anticipated outcome. But since they were executing the will of God, they could not have been miscalculating.

The hatred by Palestinians WAS the anticipated outcome. Only, they did not tell the Jewish people that. Instead, they sold them (and you) on the idea that "anger is usually the first response" but that anger will evaporate. People forget, and they will get used to being captives behind barbed wires.

The Jewish people bought into it, believing that they should go to the homeland, as their leaders were telling them. They became the tool to ferment the hatred. The hate is naturally experienced primarily by those who are physically effected by the barbed wires. Secondarily, the hate will be experienced by those who fear they could become victims in the future. Thirdly, it is experienced by those who deeply sympathize with those who suffer.

Hate of Zionism can thereby be experienced anywhere in the world.

This gives Zionists the power to control the world because any expression of such hate can be punished or persecuted, and, even more importantly, politicians can be financially supported or prevented from getting into office - depending on how aggressively they advocate the persecution of Anti-Zionists. The more aggressive they are, the more readily they will describe criticism as Anti-Semitism.

This is how Zionists can rule the world - and to some extent they already do.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ThinkingHuman
 



Hate of Zionism can thereby be experienced anywhere in the world.


Which is why you do not consider the cold blooded murder of an Israeli citizen, born in Israel after 1947, to be a crime? Because hatred is okay? Why is hatred of Zionism okay, but not hatred of, say, Tibetans?
edit on 26-1-2013 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
 

... Tibetans?

You, my friend, have run out of things to say that give the impression of an ability to think. Anybody else, please jump in to help him out.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by ThinkingHuman
 



You, my friend, have run out of things to say that give the impression of an ability to think. Anybody else, please jump in to help him out.


Is that all you have? I just accused you of condoning murdering Jews, and you have nothing to say in your defense? I felt it only sporting to give you a chance to explain yourself before I laid into you. Ah well,


Back on topic, I suggest you give me a decent argument why you disagree. Zionism is not analogous to the "American Civil Rights Movement". Nice try.


Why not? Jews were discriminated against all over the world, just as Blacks were in the United States. Their lives were in constant peril. The idea of a Jewish Homeland, where they can practice their religion in peace. was a desirable one. Do you object to Jews being able to practice their religion in peace without fear of persecution?


From a Zionist perspective, as you described it, "People have things taken from them all the time which causes anger" but it is rare "that the anger lasts so long and obsessively that it ferments into hatred".


You disagree with this premise? If someone picks your pocket, you are bound to be angry when you discover your wallet missing. Naturally, the first thing you do is cancel all your credit cards, which is certainly a nuisance. Then you have to go to the DMV and get a copy of your driver's licence, which is certainly irritating. Once you have attended to these details, and the contents of the wallet have been replaced, you begin to focus on other things and the anger dissolves away. Right? By focusing on moving on, anger eventually goes away.

Now, would it strike you as normal if someone became so angry that they could not even take the steps to replace the contents of their wallet? They obsessed over recovering that particular wallet? Their anger grew into hatred of the criminal who picked their pocket? They abandoned their job, family and friends in order to single mindedly track down the perpetrator and, having spent an entire lifetime nurturing this hatred, finally killed the pickpocket in a fit of rage? Does this outcome seem inevitable, or even reasonable to you? Is "he picked my pocket thirty years ago" a good defense in a murder trial?


Your reaction is potent proof that my explanation of Zionism as a conspiracy is correct. The proof is that IT HAS FERMENTED into hatred. Thus, either the creators of Zionism made a miscalculation, not expecting the result that we all know occured, or, they calculated correctly, with hatred being the anticipated outcome. But since they were executing the will of God, they could not have been miscalculating.


And you have it exactly backwards. Hatred of Jews existed long before Zionism. Zionism, as I pointed out above, is the reaction to this hatred. Trust me, people would still hate Jews even if there were no Zionist movement, even if there was no state of Israel.

As far as I can tell, based on the posts in this thread, "Anti-Zionism" is a philosophy that Jews do not have a right to self determination, do not have a right to seek refuge from persecution, do not have a right to be safe in their persons. It is based on the assumptions that inhuman "Zionists" are secretly manipulating the world to further an incomprehensible agenda. It is the product of gullible people believing the Anti-Semitic forgery "The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion."

Correct me if I'm wrong.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
 

Why not? Jews were discriminated against all over the world, just as Blacks were in the United States... Correct me if I'm wrong.

That's easy. Jews were not discriminated against in the United States. Since you know about Jewish history and the United States is a rather significant part of the world, this is not an error on your part, it is another misleading, inflammatory lie.

You are purposely misrepresenting that Jews have no alternative to escape mistreatment, other than invading a country, Palestine.

You have failed to show me why Jews should, and do, go to live in the former Palestine, where they are exposed to hate, and generate more hate by Palestinians, rather than living a peaceful, productive life in the US.

I mentioned before that my grandfather was Jewish. He was unable to marry his Christian girlfriend in 1920's Europe, not because of her parents, but because his Jewish tradition forbid him to.

Jews did not remain isolated because of discrimination by other people but by their own choice. Could it have been the Jews who discriminated against gentiles?

As I have shown in my "Long answer" on page 10, European Royalty cooperated with the goals of Zionism. Even President Wilson folded under its pressure. This makes me wonder if pogroms may have been instigated with the cooperation of the Royalty of that country also. "False flag attacks" happened eversince antiquity, but people's awareness about them dates back to very recent times. Expulsions of Jews were ordered by the same Royalty, and, according to my theory, would have served two political purposes. One, to justify hate between Jews and non-Jews, and two, the problems which the Kings were not able to deal with could then be blamed on a small minority.

I want to make clear that this is my theory, I do not claim that this is the case. However, if it were accurate it clearly would have passed beneath the radar of the News organizations of the time. Which again leads me to the reason why Zionism needed to be created in the 1880's. More readily available newspapers were becoming capable of disseminating news as they occurred.

DJW, I expect you will accuse me of Anti-Semitism but notice that I have not said anything negative about Jews. Nor do I hold a negative opinion about Jews. Again, I believe they were tricked into causing hate. Just like Americans were tricked into supporting wars against Afghanistan and Irak.

We have two disagreements: 1) You believe it would be wrong for Jews to be "deported" to "Florida", but you see nothing wrong with deporting Palestinians, and you justify it by stating that "people have things taken from them all the time". I do not believe that this makes it right.

2) You believe that Jews are victims of pogroms and expulsions - but you have never stated WHY you believe they would be victimized like that, not only in some cases but in ALL countries for thousands of years. (has God "chosen" the wrong people?) You have the right to believe that without reason. But the absence of a reason along with the universal presence of the mistreatment, makes me consider this belief to be irrational. Okay, you cannot comprehend the agenda, then "Zionists are secretly manipulating the world to further an incomprehensible agenda" is beyond your mental capacity.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ThinkingHuman
 



That's easy. Jews were not discriminated against in the United States. Since you know about Jewish history and the United States is a rather significant part of the world, this is not an error on your part, it is another misleading, inflammatory lie.


Was your grandfather able to join a country club? I doubt it. Here, do some reading:

en.wikipedia.org...


You are purposely misrepresenting that Jews have no alternative to escape mistreatment, other than invading a country, Palestine.


And you are closing your eyes to the powerlessness of poor working class Jews in old Europe. You are also misrepresenting the legal immigration of Jews who legally purchased their land prior to the Second World War as "invading."


You have failed to show me why Jews should, and do, go to live in the former Palestine, where they are exposed to hate, and generate more hate by Palestinians, rather than living a peaceful, productive life in the US.


Because for some, it is a religious ideal. Do you have a problem with the free exercise of religion?


I mentioned before that my grandfather was Jewish. He was unable to marry his Christian girlfriend in 1920's Europe, not because of her parents, but because his Jewish tradition forbid him to.


I'm sorry to hear that. Not all Jewish communities were that strict. In any event, if they had married and lived in Germany, the children would have been sent to a KZ.


Jews did not remain isolated because of discrimination by other people but by their own choice. Could it have been the Jews who discriminated against gentiles?


Wherever there were laws of toleration, Jews generally integrated into the society. It was only when they were forced into Ghettos or banished to the Pale that Jews resented Christians.


As I have shown in my "Long answer" on page 10, European Royalty cooperated with the goals of Zionism. Even President Wilson folded under its pressure. This makes me wonder if pogroms may have been instigated with the cooperation of the Royalty of that country also. "False flag attacks" happened eversince antiquity, but people's awareness about them dates back to very recent times. Expulsions of Jews were ordered by the same Royalty, and, according to my theory, would have served two political purposes. One, to justify hate between Jews and non-Jews, and two, the problems which the Kings were not able to deal with could then be blamed on a small minority.


Doesn't it seem more logical to assume that the persecutions and pogroms were the result of xenophobia, stoked by inflammatory Anti-Semitic propaganda? And that Kings would scapegoat Jews without the Jews instigating it?


I want to make clear that this is my theory, I do not claim that this is the case.


A fine distinction. Perhaps if you researched facts rather than conspiracy theories, and exercised a bit of critical thinking, both your mind and your heart would open.


DJW, I expect you will accuse me of Anti-Semitism but notice that I have not said anything negative about Jews. Nor do I hold a negative opinion about Jews. Again, I believe they were tricked into causing hate. Just like Americans were tricked into supporting wars against Afghanistan and Irak.


But you have never said that it is wrong to kill an Israeli Jew for no reason.


We have two disagreements: 1) You believe it would be wrong for Jews to be "deported" to "Florida", but you see nothing wrong with deporting Palestinians, and you justify it by stating that "people have things taken from them all the time". I do not believe that this makes it right.


I have said that it would be wrong to deport Jews to Florida. I have not said it was not wrong to expel Arabs from the future state of Israel. They are equally wrong. I do not justify the action, only acknowledge the reality of the situation and criticize the Arabs' response to it.


2) You believe that Jews are victims of pogroms and expulsions - but you have never stated WHY you believe they would be victimized like that, not only in some cases but in ALL countries for thousands of years. (has God "chosen" the wrong people?) You have the right to believe that without reason. But the absence of a reason along with the universal presence of the mistreatment, makes me consider this belief to be irrational. Okay, you cannot comprehend the agenda, then "Zionists are secretly manipulating the world to further an incomprehensible agenda" is beyond your mental capacity.


Jews were and are the victims of pogroms and expulsions. It is due to xenophobia and superstition. Your attempt to blame the victims is contemptible.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
 

Because for some, it is a religious ideal. Do you have a problem with the free exercise of religion?

Kicking people out of their country - and killing them when they resist - you call free exercise of religion.

You are deranged, or, the propaganda for your religion that you bought into is deranged. Your religion says it is wrong to steal. Zionism is thereby in clear contradiction to your religion it pretends to support.


It was only when they were forced into Ghettos or banished to the Pale that Jews resented Christians.

"banished to the Pale"? Your hate of Christians is contemptible. How did you determined this is true for all Jews? You are expressing hate with no rational logic.


It is due to xenophobia and superstition.

"xenophobia and superstition"? Another vain attempt at demonizing people who have different believes. How did you determined this is true? Nothing again. You are accusing people, wholesale, you know NOTHING about of hate and ignorance. Again, expressing hate, without any support. Since you consider yourself not a victim of xenophobia and superstition, you rank yourself mentally and spiritually superior to them. Your hate may thus stem from your superiority complex.


Jews were and are the victims of pogroms and expulsions.

"and are"? My google search yielded no results for pogroms on Jews for more than half a century, and even longer than that for expulsions. However, according to Wikipedia, in the recent past, "Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has used the term "pogrom" twice in recent history to describe attacks against Palestinian Arab civilians perpetrated by Israeli settlers."
Again, using the terms "pogroms and expulsions" you are instigating hate, and you attempt to control what people may say, using something that happened mostly hundreds of years ago, in countries far away, for unknown reasons, as a pretext to pretend Israelis today are victims of hate".

Notice, "pogrom" is defined as "pogrom (Russian: погро́м) is a violent mob attack generally against Jews, and often condoned by the forces of law". Just like the Ghettos you mentioned must have been sanctioned and condoned by the government. I am telling you, Zionism is a product of propaganda instigated by the governments (of course the governments will not tell us their little secret), and people only reacted as naturally as did Americans to 9-11. Americans never hated for Muslims before, but they did after they had been attacked.

I will advise you that if you express hate for non-Jews again I will call you "Anti-Gentile". "Anti-Gentilism" is not, but it must be, suppressed, punished and exterminated as vigorously and to the same extent as Anti-Semitism. I will continue to advocate for ALL hate speech to be treated equally.


But you have never said that it is wrong to kill an Israeli Jew for no reason.

I certainly have. But I have no problem repeating it either. Killing anybody, including Jews and including Israeli citizens, is wrong. But killing an Israeli is not MORE wrong than killing anybody else. Maybe you believe this is not true because of Israelis or Jews or Zionists really being superior by having overcome xenophobia and superstition.

edit on 28-1-2013 by ThinkingHuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Benjamin freedman, the defector 43 minutes long worth a watch,

www.youtube.com...
edit on 28-1-2013 by lukeUK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ThinkingHuman
 



Kicking people out of their country - and killing them when they resist - you call free exercise of religion.


No; the first Jewish settlers purchased their land legally. It was only after the Arabs started attacking and killing these legal immigrants that things turned ugly.


You are deranged, or, the propaganda for your religion that you bought into is deranged. Your religion says it is wrong to steal. Zionism is thereby in clear contradiction to your religion it pretends to support.


I am an atheist, but I believe theft to be wrong. Theft is not a tenet of Zionism:

en.wikipedia.org...



It was only when they were forced into Ghettos or banished to the Pale that Jews resented Christians.


"banished to the Pale"? Your hate of Christians is contemptible. How did you determined this is true for all Jews? You are expressing hate with no rational logic.


Where do I express hatred for Christians? Christians, too, are killed indiscriminately by Hamas. That is also wrong. As for the history of Jews in Europe, it is what it is. The smallest amount of research on your part will confirm what I have stated.



It is due to xenophobia and superstition.


"xenophobia and superstition"? Another vain attempt at demonizing people who have different believes. How did you determined this is true? Nothing again. You are accusing people, wholesale, you know NOTHING about of hate and ignorance. Again, expressing hate, without any support. Since you consider yourself not a victim of xenophobia and superstition, you rank yourself mentally and spiritually superior to them. Your hate may thus stem from your superiority complex.


Have you seen the Judensau statues that can still be found in certain towns in Germany? I have. Have you read the broadsides found in nearly every European language that claim that Jesus cursed the Jews for denying him? Are you familiar with the stories about blood libel, the assertions that Jews steal Christian babies to use in their rituals, accusations that Jews poison wells? These sound like xenophobia and superstition to me. Are you claiming they are true? In any event, an objective reader can see which posts are the most hateful here.



Jews were and are the victims of pogroms and expulsions.


"and are"? My google search yielded no results for pogroms on Jews for more than half a century, and even longer than that for expulsions. However, according to Wikipedia, in the recent past, "Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has used the term "pogrom" twice in recent history to describe attacks against Palestinian Arab civilians perpetrated by Israeli settlers."
Again, using the terms "pogroms and expulsions" you are instigating hate, and you attempt to control what people may say, using something that happened mostly hundreds of years ago, in countries far away, for unknown reasons, as a pretext to pretend Israelis today are victims of hate".


You need to follow the real world news more:

www.huffingtonpost.com...

That sure sounds like a pogrom to me. Let's not forget the recent attacks of a gunman in France. (There, at least, the authorities moved swiftly to end the one man pogrom. It wasn't always so keen.) As you can see, it was not something that happened hundreds of years ago for unknown reasons. It is something that happens all over the world today.

On the other hand, you make a valid point. Some of the actions directed against the Palestinians, such as razing entire neighborhoods, are indeed anti-Arab pogroms. I thought I had made it clear that I find these just as reprehensible as anti-Jewish pogroms.


I will advise you that if you express hate for non-Jews again I will call you "Anti-Gentile". "Anti-Gentilism" is not, but it must be, suppressed, punished and exterminated as vigorously and to the same extent as Anti-Semitism. I will continue to advocate for ALL hate speech to be treated equally.


Where have I expressed hatred for non-Jews? On the contrary, I have expressed nothing but compassion for the plight of the Palestinians who are being discriminated against by their fellow Arabs and held hostage by a radical militant faction supported by Shiite Iran. I completely disagree with your views on censorship. Hate speech should not be suppressed or punished. It must be exposed. When hateful speech is exposed for what it is, the hateful will be shamed, and voluntarily cease to make fools of themselves in public. This thread is a perfect example of this.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by lukeUK
 



Benjamin freedman, the defector 43 minutes long worth a watch,


Defector? Just for general background:

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by lukeUK
 
Thanks for the link.



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Damn hes anti Semitic better ignore him!

Can't be any truth at all in the things he said because he's been labelled an anti semetic self hating jew!



edit on 28-1-2013 by lukeUK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
 

No; the first Jewish settlers purchased their land legally. It was only after the Arabs started attacking and killing these legal immigrants that things turned ugly.
No; the first Jewish settlers purchased their land legally.
No; the first Jewish settlers purchased their land legally.
No; the first Jewish settlers purchased their land legally.
It was only after the Arabs started attacking and killing these legal immigrants that things turned ugly.
It was only after the Arabs started attacking and killing these legal immigrants that things turned ugly.
It was only after the Arabs started attacking and killing these legal immigrants that things turned ugly.

I am helping you here. Repeating the same lie often enough you believe will make the lie become truth. However, the truth is, you CANNOT possibly know a blanket statement about "Jewish settlers" like how all of them purchased their land. That makes it untrue. But you are doing it intentionally, with the intention to mislead. That makes it a lie.

And you want the reader to believe that "Arabs" killed peaceful Jews for paying a fair value for their land. That does not even make sense. Without any supporting evidence I say this is also not true. You are using the words "killing these legal immigrants", clearly inciting hate - without a shimmer of evidence. I call this being hateful. And a lie.


Where do I express hatred for Christians?
In the quotes of your statements I provided.


The smallest amount of research on your part will confirm what I have stated.
No, it will confirm what governments (in the case of wars the victor-governments) want you to BELIEVE. But for somebody as gullible as you seem to be, that may be good enough.



Again, using the terms "pogroms and expulsions" you are instigating hate, and you attempt to control what people may say, using something that happened mostly hundreds of years ago, in countries far away, for unknown reasons, as a pretext to pretend Israelis today are victims of hate".

You need to follow the real world news more: That sure sounds like a pogrom to me.

You are proving MY point:
1) Your buddies in Jerusalem blame Chavez (the government) for creating "an atmosphere of hate". Exactly as I had suggested earlier.
2) Prosecuters are considering that the vandalism may have been an attempt to distract from the real motive, money.
3) This was shortly after Chavez had cut diplomatic relations with Israel (not mentioned in the Israeli article), which would encourage revenge from pro-Israelis rather than from Anti-Israelis.
4) It proves that YOU, DJW, use the term "pogrom" out of proportion and out of context. Pogrom implies a city-wide attack on Jews, not an isolated burglary/vandalism at one location with nobody attacked.
5) Even in an event as recent as this, with technology available, we only know one thing for sure - that we do not know what was behind this burglary/vandalism. We know NOTHING. History books and Media will show what the respective governments want the people to BELIEVE.


Where have I expressed hatred for non-Jews? On the contrary, I have expressed nothing but compassion for the plight of the Palestinians who are being discriminated against by their fellow Arabs and held hostage by a radical militant faction supported by Shiite Iran.
... but not for their "plight" caused by Jewish Israelites - until you said this:


On the other hand, you make a valid point. Some of the actions directed against the Palestinians, such as razing entire neighborhoods, are indeed anti-Arab pogroms. I thought I had made it clear that I find these just as reprehensible as anti-Jewish pogroms.
So what are you doing about them?


I completely disagree with your views on censorship. Hate speech should not be suppressed or punished. It must be exposed. When hateful speech is exposed for what it is, the hateful will be shamed, and voluntarily cease to make fools of themselves in public.
I do not have a settled opinion on how to treat hate speech. However, it must be treated consistently for all hate speech (and IT IS illegal to simply say something Anti-Semitic in some places). It must be the same, whether Anti-Semitic or Anti-Gentilic. That is why I am happy to expose you hatefully ("Arabs started attacking and killing these legal immigrants"), shamefully and incompassionately ("People have things taken from them all the time which causes anger" and that "it is rare that the anger lasts so long and obsessively that it ferments into hatred") distorting the truth.





new topics
top topics
 
95
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join