Jacked Camry has the patience of a fucking Saint.
Anyway, back on topic: I see that numerous moderate labour leaders seem to endorse the prevailing view that Livingstone's comments were way out of order including sensible leaders like Burnham. I can see why Corbyn is dragging his heels on the issue - he and Ken go back decades. Either way it's hard not to agree with the prevailing view that just when Corbyn seems to be getting settled in his role, along comes another issue to make the party a bit of a laughing stock. It will be interesting to see how they do in this weeks local elections.
Anti-semitism in the British Labour Party
-
- Wun Gwo Pee
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 2484
- Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2014 8:07 am
-
- I live above an internet cafe
- Reactions: 0
- Posts: 182
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2016 12:13 pm
Corbyn released a detailed statement yesterday:
"Labour is an anti-racist party to its core and has a long and proud history of standing against racism, including anti-semitism. I have campaigned against racism all my life and the Jewish community has been at the heart of the Labour Party and progressive politics in Britain for more than a hundred years.
We have taken decisive action over allegations of anti-semitism since I became leader, suspending all those involved from membership, and have set up an inquiry under Baroness Royall into reports of anti-semitism in the Oxford University Labour club and elsewhere.
I am now proposing to Labour’s National Executive Committee that it adopts a code of conduct on anti-semitism and other forms of racism, and establishing an inquiry into tackling anti-semitism and other forms of racism under the former director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti.
There is no place for anti-semitism or any form of racism in the Labour Party, or anywhere in society, and we will make sure that our party is a welcoming home to members of all communities."
It seems to me to be more of a collusion between a right-wing press and disgruntled Blairites to falsely try and paint Corbyn as being tolerant of racism in the party.
"Labour is an anti-racist party to its core and has a long and proud history of standing against racism, including anti-semitism. I have campaigned against racism all my life and the Jewish community has been at the heart of the Labour Party and progressive politics in Britain for more than a hundred years.
We have taken decisive action over allegations of anti-semitism since I became leader, suspending all those involved from membership, and have set up an inquiry under Baroness Royall into reports of anti-semitism in the Oxford University Labour club and elsewhere.
I am now proposing to Labour’s National Executive Committee that it adopts a code of conduct on anti-semitism and other forms of racism, and establishing an inquiry into tackling anti-semitism and other forms of racism under the former director of Liberty Shami Chakrabarti.
There is no place for anti-semitism or any form of racism in the Labour Party, or anywhere in society, and we will make sure that our party is a welcoming home to members of all communities."
It seems to me to be more of a collusion between a right-wing press and disgruntled Blairites to falsely try and paint Corbyn as being tolerant of racism in the party.
- spitthedog
- Is the World Outside still there ?
- Reactions: 123
- Posts: 5716
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:19 pm
Nice balanced piece from a ''Holocaust refugee'' below.
Also, Goldman Sachs, by far the biggest investment bank in the world was actually formed because other firms refused to hire Jewish people.
But why drag in the well-known fact that Wall Street firms are staffed, especially in top positions, by a disproportionally high number of Jews? Most people interested in the history of Jews and capitalism have shied away from confronting or even citing Jewish involvement in Wall Street’s expanding and exploding role in America’s economic, political and social life, perhaps in recognition that the subject leads quickly to words like “stereotype,” “anti-Semitism,” and “blood libel,” and leads to the company of neo-fascists.
I write, however, as a Holocaust refugee — first from Vienna to Switzerland and then to America — to come to terms with my feelings of revulsion and shame that Inside Job and various books about Wall Street greed and indifference have evoked in me.''
For Jews, outsiders turned insiders, the essence of cultural Jewishness is expunged: the critical look at society and its establishment, the laughter at its foibles and absurdities, the urge to fight its atrocities and cruelties, the idealism to shape a society that is compassionate, merciful, just and decent. Jewish students who went from college campuses to civil rights marches in1964 or ’65, for example, did not all give up their pursuit of a career in medicine or law or theater; no vows of poverty were required to make those trips. Being Jewish meant, rather, that you can be comfortable off, but you should not be comfortable in your mind. There was an intensity, a prickliness, a combativeness in the Jewish community when the Jew was an outsider, an “other.” Jews could see and try to understand those in the darkness of otherness: the poor, the sick, the troubled, the persecuted.
Insiderness means giving most of that up. Jeff Faux explained how that worked in the 1990s: “In the fall of 1993 a corporate lobbyist, exasperated by my opposition to NAFTA, stopped me in the corridor of the Capitol. ‘Don’t you understand?’ she demanded. ‘We have to help (then-Mexican President Carlos) Salinas. He’s been to Harvard. He’s one of us.’” Faux continues:
Her reference to ‘us’ seemed odd. Neither she nor I was a Harvard graduate. So it took me a while to get her point. ‘We’ internationally mobile professionals had a shared interest in liberating similarly mobile global investors from regulations imposed by national governments on behalf of people who were, well, not like ‘us.’ Despite the considerable social distance between Salinas and both of us, she was appealing to class solidarity.”
Too many American Jews, in my view, have become people “like us.” They participate in the class war as generals or as foot soldiers who benefit from Wall Street’s long march of greed, which is continuing on the same path and remains still without substantial restraints from without or within.
Jewish communal and spiritual leaders could at least try to exercise some of that restraint with finger-pointing and prophetic words. If the PEW report on Jewish-Americans is to be believed, after all, the pursuit of social justice was a defining factor in what it means to be Jewish for than 60 percent of those questioned. Who, then, will ask the follow-up questions?
Jewish students who went from college campuses to civil rights marches in 1964 or ’65 did not all give up their pursuit of a career in medicine or law or theater; no vows of poverty were required to make those trips. Being Jewish used to mean that you can be comfortably off, but you should not be comfortable in your mind. Can Judaism, combined with a Jewish historical consciousness, bring that back? If not, what does it mean to be a light unto other nations? Being just like them is not the correct answer.
Very few Jewish theologians have addressed the issue — even when the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement opened doors for them to do so. Rabbi Arthur Waskow has described corporate powers as “the new Pharaohs” of our time, Rabbi David Novak has suggested a capitalism balanced by “the covenantal necessity of human mutuality before God,” and there are plenty of Jews within the movement against what Naomi Wolf calls “disaster capitalism.” Overall, however, there was far more said in the Jewish establishment about anti-Semitic signs that occasionally popped up at OWS encampments than was said about Lloyd Blankfein’s destruction of middle-class prosperity through his machinations as head of Goldman-Sachs; there is far more listed at Google about Jews fretting over the status of the Western Wall than of Wall Street; and, I fear, there will likely be more references to this article at anti-Semitic websites than at Jewish ones.
http://jewishcurrents.org/wall-street-j ... tity-28217
Also, Goldman Sachs, by far the biggest investment bank in the world was actually formed because other firms refused to hire Jewish people.
But why drag in the well-known fact that Wall Street firms are staffed, especially in top positions, by a disproportionally high number of Jews? Most people interested in the history of Jews and capitalism have shied away from confronting or even citing Jewish involvement in Wall Street’s expanding and exploding role in America’s economic, political and social life, perhaps in recognition that the subject leads quickly to words like “stereotype,” “anti-Semitism,” and “blood libel,” and leads to the company of neo-fascists.
I write, however, as a Holocaust refugee — first from Vienna to Switzerland and then to America — to come to terms with my feelings of revulsion and shame that Inside Job and various books about Wall Street greed and indifference have evoked in me.''
For Jews, outsiders turned insiders, the essence of cultural Jewishness is expunged: the critical look at society and its establishment, the laughter at its foibles and absurdities, the urge to fight its atrocities and cruelties, the idealism to shape a society that is compassionate, merciful, just and decent. Jewish students who went from college campuses to civil rights marches in1964 or ’65, for example, did not all give up their pursuit of a career in medicine or law or theater; no vows of poverty were required to make those trips. Being Jewish meant, rather, that you can be comfortable off, but you should not be comfortable in your mind. There was an intensity, a prickliness, a combativeness in the Jewish community when the Jew was an outsider, an “other.” Jews could see and try to understand those in the darkness of otherness: the poor, the sick, the troubled, the persecuted.
Insiderness means giving most of that up. Jeff Faux explained how that worked in the 1990s: “In the fall of 1993 a corporate lobbyist, exasperated by my opposition to NAFTA, stopped me in the corridor of the Capitol. ‘Don’t you understand?’ she demanded. ‘We have to help (then-Mexican President Carlos) Salinas. He’s been to Harvard. He’s one of us.’” Faux continues:
Her reference to ‘us’ seemed odd. Neither she nor I was a Harvard graduate. So it took me a while to get her point. ‘We’ internationally mobile professionals had a shared interest in liberating similarly mobile global investors from regulations imposed by national governments on behalf of people who were, well, not like ‘us.’ Despite the considerable social distance between Salinas and both of us, she was appealing to class solidarity.”
Too many American Jews, in my view, have become people “like us.” They participate in the class war as generals or as foot soldiers who benefit from Wall Street’s long march of greed, which is continuing on the same path and remains still without substantial restraints from without or within.
Jewish communal and spiritual leaders could at least try to exercise some of that restraint with finger-pointing and prophetic words. If the PEW report on Jewish-Americans is to be believed, after all, the pursuit of social justice was a defining factor in what it means to be Jewish for than 60 percent of those questioned. Who, then, will ask the follow-up questions?
Jewish students who went from college campuses to civil rights marches in 1964 or ’65 did not all give up their pursuit of a career in medicine or law or theater; no vows of poverty were required to make those trips. Being Jewish used to mean that you can be comfortably off, but you should not be comfortable in your mind. Can Judaism, combined with a Jewish historical consciousness, bring that back? If not, what does it mean to be a light unto other nations? Being just like them is not the correct answer.
Very few Jewish theologians have addressed the issue — even when the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement opened doors for them to do so. Rabbi Arthur Waskow has described corporate powers as “the new Pharaohs” of our time, Rabbi David Novak has suggested a capitalism balanced by “the covenantal necessity of human mutuality before God,” and there are plenty of Jews within the movement against what Naomi Wolf calls “disaster capitalism.” Overall, however, there was far more said in the Jewish establishment about anti-Semitic signs that occasionally popped up at OWS encampments than was said about Lloyd Blankfein’s destruction of middle-class prosperity through his machinations as head of Goldman-Sachs; there is far more listed at Google about Jews fretting over the status of the Western Wall than of Wall Street; and, I fear, there will likely be more references to this article at anti-Semitic websites than at Jewish ones.
http://jewishcurrents.org/wall-street-j ... tity-28217
"I don't care what the people are thinking, i ain't drunk i'm just drinking"
- Jacked Camry
- Is the World Outside still there ?
- Reactions: 2
- Posts: 5674
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:53 pm
Two points.vladimir wrote:Which is precisely why the Israelis of all people should never treat others like trash based on religion..but a few days ago we saw a rally in Israel, allowed by the govt, calling for the killing (murder) of all Arabs. Ring any bells? Hitler? The Jews? Yes.alanclarke72 wrote:As far as I'm aware the Israeli government - for all its crimes against Palestinians - have never deliberately set about a systematic program to exterminate an entire race, or gypsies or homosexuals or trade unionists or communists, not to protect their territory (rightly or wrongly obtained) but instead as part of formal government policy. As far as I'm aware the Israelis have never conducted the most gotesque medical experiments on those they decided to save from the gas ovens in some horrific tip of the hat to science. As far as im aware the Israelis have never created bureaucracies to make such atrocities more cost efficient.
That is why the comparison should never ever be made - especially to those who survived it - and it beggars belief why those making the comparison can't see why it is so so so fucking wrong.
Jesus, look what they went through! And some of them have no compunction in wanting another entire race/religion demonised like they were? No self-reflection? Duh.
alan, we saw it with Hitler, we saw it in South Africa, in Bosnia, in Sri Lanka, in numerous other countries at various times. It may not be happening YET, but without opposition...who can tell?
Behave like one, get called one. Simple. A soldier shooting a pregnant woman and laughing and boasting about it, people setting up a sofa to watch the white-phosphorous bombing of Gaza...without opposition, what will be next?
You find the word Nazi offensive, so do I. That's precisely why I reserve it for scum, be they AWB in SA or right-wing Israelis. Hell, many Muslims also fit the description.
1. The reason we reserve the use of the word "Nazi" to identify only the worst of the worst was because their oppression of Jews (and others) went so far beyond the pale and so far beyond anything that had otherwise happened. It is the very systematic nature of the killing and it's complete scope that we are referring to when we accuse some group or some government of being Nazis. What does this mean? It means that a vast infrastructure of identification, laws, transport, detention, torture, murder and body disposal was set up throughout every single place occupied by the Nazis and they then attempted (mostly successfully) to murder every single Jew they could find. The only people who should be referred to as "Nazis" are those who are taking significant steps towards this. The steps that were taken were listed in the Waffen SS thread here:
http://www.khmer440.com/chat_forum/view ... ne#p624656
As can be seen there, the following conditions were in place for the Jews in the 1930's during the five-year period from 1933 to 1938 (and, obviously, that it got a LOT worse after that):
1933: Opening of first official Nazi concentration camp...boycott of Jewish shops and businesses...laws barring Jews from civil service, university and state positions...laws excluding Jewish immigrants from German citizenship...
Israel Today: No concentration camps...no boycott of Palestinian/Arab/Muslim (hereafter referred to as Israeli Arabs for convenience) shops and businesses...no laws barring Israeli Arabs from civil service, university and state positions...no laws barring non-Jews from Israeli citizenship.
1935: Jews barred from serving in the German armed forces..."Nuremberg Laws": first anti-Jewish racial laws enacted...Jews no longer considered German citizens...Jews could not marry Aryans...nor could they fly the German flag.
Israel Today: No laws barring Israeli Arabs from serving in the armed forces...no anti-Israeli Arab racial laws enacted...Israeli Arabs are Israeli citizens...Israeli Arabs are allowed to marry Jews and vice-versa...Israeli Arabs can fly the Israeli flag.
1936: Jewish doctors barred from practicing medicine in German institutions. Sachsenhausen concentration camp opens.
Israel Today: Israeli Arab professionals including doctors allowed to practice in Israel...still no concentration camps.
1937: Buchenwald concentration camp opens.
Israel Today: Still no concentration camps.
1938: All Anti-Semitic decrees immediately applied in Austria...Mandatory registration of all property held by Jews inside the Reich...Mauthausen concentration camp opens in Austria...Following request by Swiss authorities, Germans mark all Jewish passports with a large letter "J" to restrict Jews from immigrating to Switzerland...Kristallnacht (Night of Broken Glass): anti-Jewish pogrom in Germany, Austria, and the Sudetenland; 200 synagogues destroyed; 7,500 Jewish shops looted; 30,000 male Jews sent to concentration camps (Dachau, Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen)...Decree forcing all Jews to transfer retail businesses to Aryan hands...All Jewish pupils expelled from German schools...
Israel Today: No explicit Anti-Israeli Arab decrees...no mandatory registration of Israeli Arab property...still no concentration camps...no explicit marking of Israeli Arab passports...no requests from governments or Jews inside or outside of Israel to mark Israeli Arab passports...no countrywide pogroms carried out by large swaths of the population against Israeli Arabs...no widespread destruction of Israeli Arab mosques...no looting of thousands of Israeli Arab shops...still no concentration camps...no transferring of all Israeli Arab businesses to Jewish hands...no expelling of all Israeli Arab children from schools...
Is it possible to find individual cases where injustice has occurred, or some laws which provide advantage to Israeli Jews over Arabs, or a general feeling of disenfranchisement or any number of other unpleasant things that affect Israeli Arabs? Sure. It's a sharply divided state in a war zone within a country where these people lost the war and whose compatriots and allies outside of Israel have vowed to destroy and attempted to do so several times. But the applicability of these laws and the confiscation of all rights of EVERY SINGLE JEW, not some, all, no exceptions is what distinguishes the Nazi regime from all others. You can find the usual sources (check Rain Dog's posts if you are lazy) who will attempt to parse subtle aspects of Israeli law to equate them with what the Nazis did - this is simply disingenuous. The Nazi laws require no parsing. Jew = no job, no possessions, no citizenship, no protection, no life. If you're contorting yourself to fit Israel into this legal framework, by definition you're outside of that legal framework.
This is the entire point of calling a regime a bunch of Nazis. If they are not doing this, then they are in no way like the Nazis. And if you believe that parsing this and that to show a general trend constitutes parallel, then you are cheapening the label of "Nazi" to the point of being meaningless. This is probably something that doesn't bother people so much, but it is something that bothers Jews very much, having been the primary victims of this systematic genocide, the likes of which has only been approximated in a few terrible instances (Rwanda, Armenia...) and in those cases, never in such a cold-blooded, careful and machine-like fashion.
2. You claim to throw the Nazi term at any and all deserving parties. A review of your posts shows about four instances where the Nazi label was used at non-Jews/Israelis. These are Australians for their treatment of refugees (as if this is similar to what the Nazis are doing when these people are not even citizens of their country, and are not being singled out because of religion or race), Tony Abbott, and some Zulu guy. Tony Abbott is a fucking idiot but what benefit is provided by calling him a Nazi? He most demonstrably is not even if he is an asshole. You say you call out Muslims for example when they act like Nazis. Okay. Where? Not one single instance. But Israel? EVERY FUCKING DISCUSSION. And any discussion about Jews somehow ends up in Israel and Nazis. But sure Vlad, you're very objective and even-handed in your use of Nazi. And I'm sure that this has nothing to do with Jew-baiting. So you've posted thousands of times about various scum in various forms. Yet the only scum you seem to consistently equate with Nazis are Israeli Jews.
- springrain
- I'm on 3000; na na, na na na
- Reactions: 48
- Posts: 3023
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:25 pm
A very quick point:
I was disgusted by vlad's calling for the 'roasting' of the alleged abductor of the poor child in the 'Homeless child kidnapped' thread. I thought it was a comment in line with the very regimes that he claims to hate. I don't want to criticise anyone, but such exhortations to 'roast' someone are simply a contradiction of someone who claims to despise a right-wing regime. Sorry, vlad, but I thought that comment was OTT, even if feelings run high over that alleged abduction - said abduction which is far from proven. Liberal intellectuals simply do not go round demanding roastings - only KKK.
I also agree that the term 'N*zi' itself is offensive to victims of that regime, so better to use the term fascist. Then, all emotive associations are removed, but the gist remains. I'll resort to the Dictionary.com definition, as it will suffice for our discussion:
noun
1. A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
I can't apply this to the Israeli government. But I can apply this, precisely, to the shadow men & women that rule the Israeli, the British, the US, ISIL, Saudi Arabia, N.Korea, S. Korea, China, Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, the Catholic Church, the Jesuits, white-supremacist-protestants, black-supremacist-protestants ... do you (everyone) get the gist?
The very folk who call themselves 'Liberal, Humanist & Believers in Education' often demonstrate 'Fascist' tendencies themselves.
I was disgusted by vlad's calling for the 'roasting' of the alleged abductor of the poor child in the 'Homeless child kidnapped' thread. I thought it was a comment in line with the very regimes that he claims to hate. I don't want to criticise anyone, but such exhortations to 'roast' someone are simply a contradiction of someone who claims to despise a right-wing regime. Sorry, vlad, but I thought that comment was OTT, even if feelings run high over that alleged abduction - said abduction which is far from proven. Liberal intellectuals simply do not go round demanding roastings - only KKK.
I also agree that the term 'N*zi' itself is offensive to victims of that regime, so better to use the term fascist. Then, all emotive associations are removed, but the gist remains. I'll resort to the Dictionary.com definition, as it will suffice for our discussion:
noun
1. A governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
I can't apply this to the Israeli government. But I can apply this, precisely, to the shadow men & women that rule the Israeli, the British, the US, ISIL, Saudi Arabia, N.Korea, S. Korea, China, Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, the Catholic Church, the Jesuits, white-supremacist-protestants, black-supremacist-protestants ... do you (everyone) get the gist?
The very folk who call themselves 'Liberal, Humanist & Believers in Education' often demonstrate 'Fascist' tendencies themselves.
'History is a set of lies agreed upon.'
Attributed to Napoleon
Attributed to Napoleon
- Jacked Camry
- Is the World Outside still there ?
- Reactions: 2
- Posts: 5674
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:53 pm
Religion as dogma is just charming historical fiction and of interest in many ways, but as a hardcore Atheist it means nothing to me in terms of its applicability to life. However, the Nazis never asked the Jews about whether they believed in the Torah, they just identified whether there were Jews in the family line. Period. It was never about religion. It was about race.spitthedog wrote:JC,
Yes, i guess i was partly being a naughty boy in a way plus religion doesn't really mean much at all to me. Based in Shitsville, so i'm more into crystal meth, hookers, and casinos than religion.
It's just you come across as being very competitive on here sometimes which always seemed somewhat contradictory to the subject matter at hand.
Sure, I'm competitive. And why does one waste so much time on fora anyway? Well, for me, sometimes, it's a way to clarify and sharpen my own thoughts and positions on things to a level of detail one seldom gets into with people whom one seldom has an opportunity to discuss things with. And as it's writing, you have to be a lot more careful so need to think about things in a different way than you do in just talking to people. Believe it or not, I don't spend a lot of time thinking about the Nazis, but when I am confronted by what I, as a Jew, can easily identify as Anti-Semitism, then it provides me an opportunity for self-reflection and analysis about those issues and a place where I can engage others in this discussion. And if I walk away, I'm basically leaving the field for the Anti-Semites to pontificate and spread their lies and these lies, as we can easily see within these threads, are often absorbed without reflection as truths especially as they correspond to tropes that most people have heard throughout their lives. Hence the spread of the lies is so widespread and people continue to lack the critical faculties to distinguish them.
I would like to think that I am reasonably reasonable in the discussions. If you look at Waffen SS, for example, I make several concessions to Rain Dog including that he knows far more about Israel, the Middle East and Islam than I do. I repeatedly agree with him that Netanyahu and the Israeli Right are assholes. If you can find a single concession or agreement that Rain Dog makes towards me that doesn't include a sly addendum, I'd like to hear about it because I sure didn't see it. But yes, when provoked, and it is quite clear that you will provoke me by referring to Israeli Jews as Nazis, I will get angry and attack. Hence our discussion. As you've admitted that you were doing it purely for the fun of aggravating me and don't really believe in the parallel, then I don't really have any major issues with you. I would though appreciate it if you would stop doing that because it is really offensive to me personally for obvious reasons.
I chose it because it made an easy parallel. Finance is widely perceived on this forum (including by me) as being a largely destructive and damaging industry where people regularly compromise principles for personal benefit. Defense is pretty similar. So my point remains - why do people make this parallel between Jews/Finance/Damage but not Christian/Defense/Damage? It's pretty much the same situation, a lot of Christian people, for whatever reason, end up in the Defense industry and they dominate it at its management and lower levels. Yet nobody dreams that this is some sort of exclusive religious- or culture-based group of co-conspirators who are doing this. Why not? Because there's no underlying narrative with its insidious roots that has been propagated through the centuries such that it's embedded within people's sub-consciousnesses.spitthedog wrote:Why did you choose the defense industry by the way?? I thought we were talking about the finance industry? Did you check Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bros, and the history of The Rothschild family and then thought fug that i'll go for defense companies instead?
I don't really get your outrage at the remote possibility of a largely Jewish controlled Finance industry either.
I'm sure it's easy for you to consider the possibility that a million people died in the Great famine in Ireland partly because of the British "ascendancy class" who owned all the land at the time, but the thought of some group controlling the finance industry in this day and age!!!
As to the second question, I go back to my oft-repeated statement about conspiracy theories. If it involves more than about 20 people, it will NEVER remain secret and will inevitably be exposed. And if it only involves that number of people, then it can't affect such a large sector. Lastly, there remains this idea of "control", as if there is some shadowy entity coordinating this beyond individual corporations whose membership is religion- or culture-or race-based. There has NEVER been any evidence presented that makes this remotely believable. Hell, we even have numerous excellent examples of exactly this sort of financial market manipulation. Let's look at one, the LIBOR scandal. This was a textbook definition of financial institutions conspiring together to fix rates to steal billions of dollars. Surely this must have been the mysterious cabal of Jews in charge. Let's see whodunnit...
Barclay's Bank, UBS, Deutsche Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland, HSBC, JP Morgan, Citibank..are these Jewish institutions? Sure, there are lots of Jewish people in these banks since they're over-represented in the Financial Sector, but is it exclusively Jews? Let's see who individually were identified as part of it or who had to resign or who were indicted...Bob Diamond (Jewish), Marcus Agius (Catholic), Thomas Hayes (Christian), Roger Darin (dunno), Tan Chi Min (Singaporean), Jezri Mohideen (Singaporean)...do you see a cabal of Jews here?
So do financial market manipulations occur? Obviously, and I've been probably the most vocal poster ranting about it on these fora despite being a Jew. Do Jews participate in these manipulations? Sure, they do, as do others from pretty much any religion or background. They have just one common characteristic - they're traders in the financial markets or executives in financial institutions. So why does this trope remain? It's pretty fucking obvious, isn't it?
- Jacked Camry
- Is the World Outside still there ?
- Reactions: 2
- Posts: 5674
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:53 pm
If you're not RD, you've studied his techniques and are trying to replicate them. I've learned a few things from his sophistry though, and won't take the bait this time. As with he, rather than directly responding to points made such as the clear identification and debunking of parallels between Israel and Nazi Germany made on the Waffen SS thread, you instead reframe the debate in your own terms and make points that seem to contradict what was originally written but actually do not. If you wish to respond to that post, do so. I've made it easier for you by repeating the main points in the response to vlad so perhaps carry on there if you wish.NO JOKE DAVE wrote:I am not suggesting the Economist is a fly-by-night nor half-assed rag; I have subscribed to it for many years. Nor have I said the present Bagehot columnist's opinion is irrelevant, so please stop with the ridiculous bluster. The Economist is not, however, the Holy Grail and regularly promotes views I do not necessarily agree with - supporting the TTIP, for instance. The fact is that the Bagehot column is an opinion piece and the content is subjective. I hold a different opinion, c'est la vie. And I stand by the opinion that articles written about Israel by Jewish people are, consciously or subconsciously, likely to be somewhat partial, as your numerous comments on the Waffen SS thread will attest to.Jacked Camry wrote: Yes, that fly-by-night publication the Economist allows the writer of the Bagehot column to spew whatever he likes over their august pages without editorial oversight or substantial agreement from the rest of that half-assed rag. And being a Jew, his opinion is irrelevant anyway since he's biased. We can only consider non-Jewish opinion about Jews to be truly objective and fair.
As to why it's important that I can point to a widely-respected, vetted and read magazine like the Economist that supports this position and publishes it whereas you can't, it's because for something to be more than an extreme position, it will be published in a similar type magazine that has mainstream credibility. So where is the position you advocate published in anything other than a partisan publication? It would provide evidence that your position is not an extreme one. Can you?
- Jacked Camry
- Is the World Outside still there ?
- Reactions: 2
- Posts: 5674
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:53 pm
Interesting article. I have no issues with, and agree with most of it. However it does in no way support the view that there is some sort of Jewish-based conspiracy or coordination or other type of control. Just for the record.spitthedog wrote:Nice balanced piece from a ''Holocaust refugee'' below.
Also, Goldman Sachs, by far the biggest investment bank in the world was actually formed because other firms refused to hire Jewish people.
- Jacked Camry
- Is the World Outside still there ?
- Reactions: 2
- Posts: 5674
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:53 pm
I have explicitly pointed out several instances where you have conflated Jews and Israel. You can't change what you've written, I'm afraid. Instead, what you keep doing is saying "I have never conflated Jews and Israel" and "I am not Anti-Semitic", but then you write posts where you conflate Jews and Israel and posts that continuously reference anti-semitic tropes.vladimir wrote:I for one, do NOT conflate Jews and the actions of the present Israeli govt (some of the past one were quite shitty too, btw). I have stated that publicly, and oftentimes, yet you have refused to accept it. I'm pretty sure if you search the forum you will find instances of me defending Jews...one re entertainment, iirc.Jacked Camry wrote:I have only ever requested two things in regard to the discussion - stop conflating Jews and the actions of the present Israeli government and stop comparing Israel to the Nazi regime when this is highly offensive and spurious. There's lots that can be discussed and written about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without having to muddy the waters and ramp up the emotions through bringing up the old prejudices and invoking Godwin's Law.
Not surprisingly, that point went completely over your head. Refer to my response to spitthedog to understand it.vladimir wrote:I totally agree with the list you provided of the people who call themselves Christians involving themselves in arms manufacture, they too are trash and deserve criticism and legal action. I've stated my position on them clearly, usually I just get a groan from Starving Pelican because he thinks my complaint is because the head of Lockheed makes more money than I do.
I've also often had ago at Wall St and major international bankers, oil companies etc, but I have never suggested that it's only the Jewish bankers/whatevers to blame.
My point is that I target people based on behaviour, not on religion, but it seems you haven't noticed that.
I refer you to our discussion here where this was clearly explained to you, along with my observation that your broad condemnation of a large group of people simply for the accident of their birth or their political viewpoint is astonishing coming from a South African who would qualify for said condemnation by definition.vladimir wrote:The comparison with Israeli goons and Nazis remains, and that is made ONLY to Jews who support the present regime. I have no idea why it offends you so much; there are many parallels, some of which have been listed here. The best way to stop it is to make sure the goons stop doing what it is that enables the comparison, and perhaps you and other objectors to the comparison should direct your energies to that end.
I'm sure most critics who are labelled anti-Semites see right through the tactic, and, if anything, it only helps to reinforce any conspiracy theorists.
http://www.khmer440.com/chat_forum/view ... an#p770961
Well, this is a concession you hadn't made before. I'm pleased to see you've moved towards at least one reasonable position finally. Hopefully we won't have to rehash that aspect any longer.vladimir wrote:I fully support the right of the State of Israel to defending itself, one cannot expect them to pack up and go home, but try treating the Palestinians fairly first. One cannot drive people off the land, build settlements, deprive them of potable water and electricity, decent education, medical facilities etc.and then feign surprise when they turn against one. I'm surprised that I have to explain this given our location.
Wow! Two in a row! Are we reaching some sort of a consensus...?vladimir wrote:People on both sides who kill innocents are murderers, plain and simple.
...and apartheid was a less extreme system than the current regime in Israel! Ah well, we'll always have those two points.vladimir wrote:If you treat people like dirt, they will try negotiation/peaceful means...when that fails or is sabotaged deliberately, history has proved that they will adopt violence. And I have lengthy personal experience of a very similar but less extreme system, apartheid, I'm not just theorising.
And no, I'm not interested in debating with you about Israel versus South Africa since I've no experience of either, although you may enjoy that. But I'm sure that regardless of whatever insight you may well be able to bring to that discussion, you will not be able to resist a bit of irrelevant comparison of Israel to the Nazis. Actually, you can kill two birds with one stone and up your stats on the Nazi-comparisons by adding your own country to the mix. Win-win.
I always enjoy alternative viewpoints and have a wide social circle. However I will not be enjoying drinks with you any time soon.vladimir wrote:Good to see you and springrain can at least sit down and talk.
- vladimir
- Feminist Watch List
- Reactions: 4
- Posts: 34235
- Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:43 am
- Location: mod edit
Most likely never, sob . I'm glad you understand that, at least.Jacked Camry wrote:I always enjoy alternative viewpoints and have a wide social circle. However I will not be enjoying drinks with you any time soon.
re SA vs Israel, you do know of course that the pariah state was israel's biggest buddy, right? Birds of a feather...but I wonder who gave whom lessons?
I also hope someone will come up with stats to show you how insignificant the numbers of state murders (he slipped on the soap in the show/ he fell out of the window) by SA are, compared to what Israel has done.
Damn, compared to Israel, apartheid SA govts were a bunch of amateurs!
ירי ילדים והפצצת אזרחים דורש אומץ, כמו גם הטרדה מינית של עובדי ההוראה.
People here seem to overestimate how knowledgeable Rain Dog really is about the Middle East. Rain Dog once tried to challenge my credentials by asking if I had heard the Q'uran recited in its original form or if I had rather merely read an English translation. Of course, not being a specialist of Arab studies, I have had to settle for an English translation of the Q'uran and the hadiths. However, Rain Dog himself failed to demonstrate a knowledge of Arabic to me in a few private messages. I remain convinced that my own elementary grasp of colloquial Arabic and liturgical Arabic is superior to his own. He also made post after post representing Islam from the viewpoint of the heretical Ahmadiyya Movement even though it is common knowledge that the majority of Muslims, Sunni or Shia, reject this movement as heretical.
But what was more disappointing than Rain Dog's dishonest attacks on my credentials rather than my arguments was his criteria for determining the authority and accuracy of a source. In Rain Dog's view, translations of the Q'uran and the hadiths made by qualified scholars working for institutions like UC Berkeley can be questioned and rejected if a hate site somewhere on the internet cited those translations. On the other hand, the ridiculous interpretations of Islam provided by writers of the Ahmadiyya Movement are sound and accurate in his view, even though more than 99% of people who identify as Muslim reject the Ahmadiyya Movement.
Even more outrageous was his attempt to compare ethnocentrism in the Babylonian Talmud to the type of genocidal ethnocentrism practiced by the Nazis. Although the Talmud clearly does contain ethnocentric and racist material, nowhere in history did the Jews exterminate another ethnic group in part or in whole because of their understanding and practice of Judaism and the Talmud.
But what was more disappointing than Rain Dog's dishonest attacks on my credentials rather than my arguments was his criteria for determining the authority and accuracy of a source. In Rain Dog's view, translations of the Q'uran and the hadiths made by qualified scholars working for institutions like UC Berkeley can be questioned and rejected if a hate site somewhere on the internet cited those translations. On the other hand, the ridiculous interpretations of Islam provided by writers of the Ahmadiyya Movement are sound and accurate in his view, even though more than 99% of people who identify as Muslim reject the Ahmadiyya Movement.
Even more outrageous was his attempt to compare ethnocentrism in the Babylonian Talmud to the type of genocidal ethnocentrism practiced by the Nazis. Although the Talmud clearly does contain ethnocentric and racist material, nowhere in history did the Jews exterminate another ethnic group in part or in whole because of their understanding and practice of Judaism and the Talmud.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
Minor Political Party Boss Upset With British Diplomat's Sitting
by Bong Burgundy » Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:39 am » in Cambodia News - 11 Replies
- 2042 Views
-
Last post by spitthedog
Sat Feb 13, 2021 6:26 pm
-
-
- 20 Replies
- 4191 Views
-
Last post by Fuzzhead22
Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:23 pm
-
-
Where to buy Anti Fog Safety Goggles?
by thepostman2020 » Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:57 pm » in Questions and Answers - 1 Replies
- 757 Views
-
Last post by Beaker
Wed Aug 19, 2020 3:43 pm
-
-
- 10 Replies
- 1711 Views
-
Last post by techietraveller84
Thu Jan 14, 2021 7:52 am
-
- 3 Replies
- 1987 Views
-
Last post by Harold
Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:19 am