PROOF of the INTERNATIONAL JEWISH CONSPIRACY!

[Skeptic]

They finally got their web site up (http://www.internationaljewishconspiracy.com/home.html)

[Tony]

Community, Industry, Deli. :D

[Cleopatra]

Why can't I laugh anymore when I see things like that? Where has my sense of humor gone?

In our days even in Skeptics' forum antisemites dare to spew their hatred and when they are challenged to prove their racist claims they reply with flames and cussing.

A couple of years ago racist hatred was inhabiting virtual reality only, now it was become part of our everyday reality.

[Tmy]

HAHAHAHAH its all a joke..................at least thats what THEY WANT YOU TO BELIEVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[komencanto]

LOL, I hope that nobody takes that seriously =)

That is a beastly comspiricy, making cars bigger so that people think they are shrinking.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by komencanto
LOL, I hope that nobody takes that seriously =)

That is a beastly comspiricy, making cars bigger so that people think they are shrinking.

Have you ever heard of the Goebbels dogma?

" Repeat a lie as many times as possible because at the end a part of it will stay to people's memories"

[Aoidoi]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Why can't I laugh anymore when I see things like that? Where has my sense of humor gone?Being a skeptic, I must first request evidence that you ever had one...

In our days even in Skeptics' forum antisemites dare to spew their hatred and when they are challenged to prove their racist claims they reply with flames and cussing.So far as I can tell that's the standard response of anyone to prove anything in this forum. ;)

A couple of years ago racist hatred was inhabiting virtual reality only, now it was become part of our everyday reality. Indeed, just think back to the 40s when there was no anti-semi... er, wait. The 50s, where there was no institutionalized racism... er, wait. The 60s, where no prominent civil rights leaders were gunned down... er, wait. The 70s where there was free love and absolutely no blaxploitation films... er, wait. The 80s and 90s where there were absolutely no race riots or glass ceilings or... er, wait.

(sorry for the amerocentric nature of the joke, dunno enough about racism in Greece to pull it off. :))

and Goebbels? Sheesh, just cause a Nazi says it doesn't make it true. No matter how many times I hear it, I don't actually love McDonalds, and despite a thousand commercials in the playoffs Skin still tanked on Fox. Or was it Coupling? Damned, all those repetitions and I can't remember a damn thing about them beyond the name and their apparent crappiness. :D

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Aoidoi


Indeed, just think back to the 40s when there was no anti-semi... er, wait. The 50s, where there was no institutionalized racism... er, wait. The 60s, where no prominent civil rights leaders were gunned down... er, wait. The 70s where there was free love and absolutely no blaxploitation films... er, wait. The 80s and 90s where there were absolutely no race riots or glass ceilings or... er, wait.

(sorry for the amerocentric nature of the joke, dunno enough about racism in Greece to pull it off. :))


LOL Sorry of course I didn't mean that thanks for pointing it out though.

The site Skeptic posted is a parody but I don't find it a very good idea.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Skeptic
They finally got their web site up (http://www.internationaljewishconspiracy.com/home.html)

Ix nay on the c thing .....

Dammit, it's out

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
*snip*

A couple of years ago racist hatred was inhabiting virtual reality only, now it was become part of our everyday reality.

I think it is the other way round. Racist hatred has been - and still is - in many places in the real world, and now it is infesting the internet, too.

Here in Germany, we have just had another anti-semite - a member of parliament for our conservative party! - blaming the jews for communism and using that to say German are not to blame for the holocaust. At least, he got expelled from his party for that, but he is still MP, and it took the party 5 weeks to act.
What is worse, polls show the majority of party members seem to agree with him. They keep saying he got expelled for "telling the truth"!

Sometimes I get ashamed of the country I live in, or rather, the people I share it with. Also, I consider taking back my earlier statements that anti-semitism is not so widespread here.

[Igopogo]

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cleopatra
*snip*

A couple of years ago racist hatred was inhabiting virtual reality only, now it was become part of our everyday reality.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I noticed this too almost immediately after 9-11, that 'Muslim leaders' were interviewed a couple of times on network TV saying things along the lines of, *we condemn these attrocities,... but.... the Jews were asking for it.* And the interviewer would just sit there without comment.

Then Margret Thatcher came out and said something like, *I haven't heard Muslim leaders condemn these attrocities in strong enough terms yet.* (Something I concurr with totally), & the press jumped all over her. I figured this is what it must have been like in Germany in the thirties. (& in case you're wondering, I'm not Jewish).

& since it's been Jew bashing season.

[hammegk]

Wonder if similar websites "poking fun" at afro-americans are also out there? And if so would as many find them equally "humorous"?

[Skeptic]

& since it's been Jew bashing season.

<sacrcasm>

Can you name one time when it WASN'T Jew-Baiting season?

[Dancing David]

It can be dangerous to parody the worst aspects of common wisdom, they are beliefs like rumors they exist because everyone tells them over and over and over ... and then one day they become common wisdom.

They are never subject to scrutiny because of the moo herd mentality. So parody while entertaining can be misconstrued as support.

There was a show on cable called the Dave Shapelle show, a very funny black comic. His best was a skit where he played a blind black man who was a leader of the KKK, it was funny and safe becuse it couldn't be true.

I do wonder how many people who 'pass' for white go on to be racist.

Hatred is ad, I am afraid they existed before the internet too.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Dancing David
It can be dangerous to parody the worst aspects of common wisdom, they are beliefs like rumors they exist because everyone tells them over and over and over ... and then one day they become common wisdom.


While I understand your thinking on this, I disagree. I think making fun of anti-Semitism is an important part of making people realize how silly it really is. Being timid in talking about it only encourages the conspiracy buffs to think there is something to it.

Here is another site along a similar line:

The Jewish Conspiracy FAQ (http://www.netaxs.com/~balpert/jewfaq.html)

Personally, I laughed out loud in some places.

[Cleopatra]

Mycroft

Of course your approach is healthier but strictly speaking parody and satire must always stress to the maximum the subject they ridicule.

3/4 of the issues both sites parody are actually what the antisemities claim!!

Their claims are so extreme that you cannot make a parody of them!

Tell me. How to make a satire of this hatred? (http://www.middleeast.org/mernew.htm)

[JamesM]

Doppelschaden!

[Skeptic]

3/4 of the issues both sites parody are actually what the antisemities claim!!

(Puzzled look)...

Such as what? Jews designing cars larger to make Germans think they're shrinking?

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Chaos

Here in Germany, we have just had another anti-semite - a member of parliament for our conservative party! - blaming the jews for communism and using that to say German are not to blame for the holocaust. At least, he got expelled from his party for that, but he is still MP, and it took the party 5 weeks to act.

I was going to ask about this. As all the reports I've read are in English, it's hard to judge exactly what he said. He apparently said that there were Jews that were heads of Bolshevik death squads and therefore you could call Jews a perpetrator-race as much as Germans could be called a pepetrator-race for the Holocaust. But he then went onto say that neither Jews nor Germans were a perpetrator race.

This seems like a really ill-advised thing to say (especially as he used one of Henry Ford's books to "prove" his point), I'd have found a group of people who weren't Jews to make that point. It's easily as stupid as dressing up in blackface in a prisoner's costume, if, say, you were a judge, to pull an example out of nowhere. But has he not been the victim of the reputation of the CDU to some extent?

Or is there no real doubt in Germany about the attitude that he was expressing? It seems like a really dim thing to say, and deeply suspicious, but I'm wondering if there's some sort of linguistic reading between the lines that gets lost in translation. Or is this just that one must not even give the impression of being anti-semitic in German politics, and his comments betrayed a lack of judgement on his part?

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Chaos
Here in Germany, we have just had another anti-semite - a member of parliament for our conservative party! - blaming the jews for communism and using that to say German are not to blame for the holocaust. statements

Come-on Capel Dodger said that Weitzman and Zionism are to blame equally for the Holocaust and he is a very nice guy :)

[Chaos]

Hohmann´s reasoning went like this (the parts in ()´s are my comment) :

- lots of terrible things (which he didn´t elaborate) happened during the Nazi era
- these things were done by some Germans
- for this, Germans as a whole were called a nation of perpetrators
- lots of terrible things (some of which he did elaborate) also happened during the Bolshevik revolution
- a large part of the Bolshevik revolutionists were Jews
- therefore, Jews could rightly be called a nation of perpetrators
- however, I won´t call Jews a nation of perpetrators (the reasons why he wouldn´t are not clear to me, though)
- therefore, it is not fair to call Germans a nation of perpetrators, either
- if you take a closer look at Nazis and Bolsheviks, you will see that they were/are godless (then why did he insist many Bolsheviks were jews?)
- therefore, quote: "The godless ones with their godless ideologies are the real nation of perpetrators of the 20th century"

I have not read the whole speech, just several excerpts. But even in those parts, the logical fallacies and historical errors/lies are too numerous to even begin to count.

Cleopatra
Hohmann could be considered a nice guy, too; he is very popular with conservative party members. That does not make this BS he spews any more excusable.

[DanishDynamite]

It's amazing how the Jews can continue to be a subject of such fascination. In this country they are a non-issue. Just as the Native Americans or the Native Siberians or the Buddhists or the whatever is a non-issue.

However, Israel/Palestine is definitely an issue. When I say they are an issue, I mean that they are mentioned a lot in the news. Any mention of Jews in connection with the Israel/Palestine conflict is however just "in passing". The reason, of course, is that no one cares if someone is a Jew or not. What matters is the actions taken by each part in the conflict.

Hence, I have never understood Cleo's claim that Europe is generally anti-semitic. Of course, anything is possible in the uncivilized part of Europe, i.e. everything south of the Alps. :)

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Cleopatra

Of course your approach is healthier but strictly speaking parody and satire must always stress to the maximum the subject they ridicule.

Healthier, yes. I think one of the reasons Rabbi Kahane was so popular is that he gave Jews permission not to be so apologetic and timid. In that, he was right.

Originally posted by Cleopatra 3/4 of the issues both sites parody are actually what the antisemities claim!!

Only ¾? Yes, that’s what makes them so funny. If they just made the stuff up, there would be no joke.

Skeptic: I have never seen real white supremacist literature claim that Jews designed cars to make Europeans think they were smaller, but is that really any more absurd than, for example, a “secret Jewish tax” on food?

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite However, Israel/Palestine is definitely an issue. When I say they are an issue, I mean that they are mentioned a lot in the news. Any mention of Jews in connection with the Israel/Palestine conflict is however just "in passing". The reason, of course, is that no one cares if someone is a Jew or not. What matters is the actions taken by each part in the conflict.


And yet one has to wonder why this one conflict gets so much attention. Is it really more important than what's going on between Morocco and Western Saharah?

[hammegk]

Originally posted by Mycroft


And yet one has to wonder why this one conflict gets so much attention. Is it really more important than what's going on between Morocco and Western Saharah?

If your parents (& your society) were "basically" judeo-xian in moral code it would seem to be a given.

For other religions or Non-religious parental (& societal) moral codes -- irrelevant, huh?


Is Morocco/W.Sahara important to anyone not directly involved? Islam seems to want us all back in the 14th century though.

[Skeptic]

He apparently said that there were Jews that were heads of Bolshevik death squads and therefore you could call Jews a perpetrator-race as much as Germans could be called a pepetrator-race for the Holocaust. But he then went onto say that neither Jews nor Germans were a perpetrator race.

His argument seems to be, "we shouldn't blame all Germans for the fact that some of them bringing Hitler to power, just like we shouldn't blame all jews for the fact that some of them caused the communist revolution".

The problem with this is not that all the jews should be blamed for communism or all Germans for nazism, the problem is that it simply isn't true that the communist revolution was casued "by the jews", whether all of them or only some of them.

He might as well have said, "we shouldn't blame all Germans for nazism, just like we don't blame all the jews just because a few of them poison wells and drink gentile blood".

I always believed that "antisemites" should not be defined as someone who thinks all jews are bad, but as someone who thinks all bad things (e.g., the communist revolution) were caused by jews. He seems to fit the bill in that respect.

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Skeptic
He might as well have said, "we shouldn't blame all Germans for nazism, just like we don't blame all the jews just because a few of them poison wells and drink gentile blood".
Well, when you put it that way...

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Healthier, yes. I think one of the reasons Rabbi Kahane was so popular is that he gave Jews permission not to be so apologetic and timid. In that, he was right.



A friend of Kahane. Make sense.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


A friend of Kahane. Make sense.

Who is?

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Mycroft


Who is?

I think that he means you. I don't think that Rabbi Kahane was that popular, he was popular among some circles who applaud the extremes but he was not that popular among Jewish people in general.

[Mike B.]

Originally posted by Mycroft


And yet one has to wonder why this one conflict gets so much attention. Is it really more important than what's going on between Morocco and Western Saharah?

Thanks for raising this point.

I have wondered why the Israel/Palistinian conflict should be the attention of the world and the UN, etc.

There are much bloodier conflicts by a thousandfold. (i.e. Sudan, Congo, etc.)

These conflicts don't get so much as a ho hum from the international community.

People on this board have said the reason this is is because the Israel/Palestine conflict affects the whole world. But that does not answer the question of SHOULD it affect the whole world.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Mike B.


Thanks for raising this point.

I have wondered why the Israel/Palistinian conflict should be the attention of the world and the UN, etc.

There are much bloodier conflicts by a thousandfold. (i.e. Sudan, Congo, etc.)

These conflicts don't get so much as a ho hum from the international community.

People on this board have said the reason this is is because the Israel/Palestine conflict affects the whole world. But that does not answer the question of SHOULD it affect the whole world.


Yes Mike I remember your question. I believe that the reason why this conflict attracts so much interest is because it's convenient to show the deeds of the "bloodthirsty Jews". It serves the reproduction of a stereotype that in Europe prevails for centuries.

BTW Danish Dynamite I have heard that last night a jewish school in Luxemburg was attacked after the attack against the Synagogues in Instanbul. Don't you think that those attacks must be considered antisemitic violence?

[JamesM]

Europe consists of nominally Christian countries. It is not surprising that they should maintain an interest in a conflict that takes place around the country that contains the most holy sites of their religion.

[DanishDynamite]

Mike B.:

Thanks for raising this point.

I have wondered why the Israel/Palistinian conflict should be the attention of the world and the UN, etc.

There are much bloodier conflicts by a thousandfold. (i.e. Sudan, Congo, etc.)

These conflicts don't get so much as a ho hum from the international community.

People on this board have said the reason this is is because the Israel/Palestine conflict affects the whole world. But that does not answer the question of SHOULD it affect the whole world. It affects the whole world because Muslim fanatics use this conflict as background for attacking Western interests and because most of the world's oil is located in this hotspot.

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:Yes Mike I remember your question. I believe that the reason why this conflict attracts so much interest is because it's convenient to show the deeds of the "bloodthirsty Jews". It serves the reproduction of a stereotype that in Europe prevails for centuries.Utter nonsense. Sorry, but that is what it is.

Seriously, Cleo, could you please provide evidence that most of Europe is anti-semitic?
BTW Danish Dynamite I have heard that last night a jewish school in Luxemburg was attacked after the attack against the Synagogues in Instanbul. Don't you think that those attacks must be considered antisemitic violence? Yes, I would think so. What does this have to do with your claim that most of Europe is anti-semitic?

[DanishDynamite]

Originally posted by JamesM
Europe consists of nominally Christian countries. It is not surprising that they should maintain an interest in a conflict that takes place around the country that contains the most holy sites of their religion. Sorry, James, but the key word here is "nominally". I don't care two hoots for some religious holy sites in Israel, and I don't know anyone who does. I doubt this is much of an issue even in Catholic countries in southern Europe.

[JamesM]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
I don't care two hoots for some religious holy sites in Israel, and I don't know anyone who does. I doubt this is much of an issue even in Catholic countries in southern Europe.
Nonetheless, there was something of a fuss about the lack of a mention of Christianity in the European constitution, as mentioned here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/11/14/weur14.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/11/14/ixworld.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=23176), which suggests Europe as a political entity is not as free from the influence of religion as your acquaintances are. Also, remember the fuss about the gunmen in the Church of the Nativity last year? It is perhaps disingenuous to discount the cultural and historical links between Europe and the Middle East as a reason for European interest in the region.

However, your reasons to do with terrorism and oil are more convincing, and I'm happy to concede the point.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Seriously, Cleo, could you please provide evidence that most of Europe is anti-semitic?

Evidence? The increasing antisemitic violence is enough evidence in my opinion. In the antisemitic violence I do not include statements of politicians or famous idiots like Theodorakis.

Yes, I would think so. What does this have to do with your claim that most of Europe is anti-semitic?

So, how do you interpret those incidents?

Oil is not the reason that why the MA conflict attracts the interest of Europe. Israel and the Occupied Territories do not have oil.If Europe is interested in terrorism then it shouldn't support Arafat and it should stop talking about the so-called political wing of Hamas.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Mike B.


Thanks for raising this point.

I have wondered why the Israel/Palistinian conflict should be the attention of the world and the UN, etc.

There are much bloodier conflicts by a thousandfold. (i.e. Sudan, Congo, etc.)

These conflicts don't get so much as a ho hum from the international community.

People on this board have said the reason this is is because the Israel/Palestine conflict affects the whole world. But that does not answer the question of SHOULD it affect the whole world.

Speaking on a personal level, my own interest in the region began with studying white supremicist literature. I come from a part of the U.S.A. where these groups were making the news from time to time, and I decided to find out who they were and what they were all about. It was through researching their claims that I formed most of my opinions on the region. Had it not been for that, I wouldn't know any more about the region than the average person knows about Taiwan.

While I'm sure my own experiance is uncommon, it might help explain it anyway. If a tiny portion of the population (racists) keep saying Israel, Israel, Israel... that's enough to generate enough interest in the larger population to focus the media and political establishments on the region, and while the anti-Semitic interests don't directly translate their ideas to the larger population, the nature of their interests do help frame the context of the interests of the larger population.

[DanishDynamite]

JamesM:Nonetheless, there was something of a fuss about the lack of a mention of Christianity in the European constitution, as mentioned here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/11/14/weur14.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/11/14/ixworld.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=23176), which suggests Europe as a political entity is not as free from the influence of religion as your acquaintances are. I disagree. I find the fact that Christianity was not mentioned in the proposed constitution to be very telling. The fact that some old people, statesmen or otherwise, felt the need to oppose this, is of little consequence.
Also, remember the fuss about the gunmen in the Church of the Nativity last year? It is perhaps disingenuous to discount the cultural and historical links between Europe and the Middle East as a reason for European interest in the region.What fuss might that be? Did a majority of Europeans have something on their minds in that regard?
However, your reasons to do with terrorism and oil are more convincing, and I'm happy to concede the point. Thanks. :)

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:Evidence? The increasing antisemitic violence is enough evidence in my opinion. In the antisemitic violence I do not include statements of politicians or famous idiots like Theodorakis.That is the extent of your evidence? Occasional attacks against jewish schools or graveyards?

I asked for evidence that Europe in general was anti-semitic.
So, how do you interpret those incidents?As the work of fringe d*ckheads.
Oil is not the reason that why the MA conflict attracts the interest of Europe. Israel and the Occupied Territories do not have oil.If Europe is interested in terrorism then it shouldn't support Arafat and it should stop talking about the so-called political wing of Hamas. Israel doesn't have oil, that is true. And I never claimed they did. I said that Muslem fanatics everywhere feed on the Israel/Palestine conflict and that most of the world's oil is located in that area, i.e. in the Middle East and under the control of Muslims.

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Evidence? The increasing antisemitic violence is enough evidence in my opinion. In the antisemitic violence I do not include statements of politicians or famous idiots like Theodorakis.


Up to a few days ago I would have vehemently opposed this statement, but the Hohmann affair gave me reason to think about it.

I would have said that this violence comes only form a tiny fraction of the population, and that the rest of us have nothing to do with that. Now I am no longer sure.

In the early nineties there have been several incidents in Germany of Neo-Nazis or similar radical extreme right elements (we usually call them "skinheads") torching asylum seekers´ homes and the houses of Turkish families or of attacking foreign-looking (mostly African) people and in some cases chasing them halfway through the city.
In many cases there were lots of eyewitnesses, but no-one helped; hardly anyone even called the police. There is one infamous video of such skinheads hurling molotov cocktails into an asylum seekers´ home, with hundreds of locals loudly cheering them!

I fear that racism and xenophobia, as well as anti-semitism, runs deeper than obvious in Europe - not only Germany. Most of these bigots just keep quiet about it.


So, how do you interpret those incidents?

Oil is not the reason that why the MA conflict attracts the interest of Europe. Israel and the Occupied Territories do not have oil.If Europe is interested in terrorism then it shouldn't support Arafat and it should stop talking about the so-called political wing of Hamas.

The Middle East conflict (indirectly) pits Israel and the "western world" against most muslim countries; these muslim countries have the oil.

[DanishDynamite]

Chaos:Up to a few days ago I would have vehemently opposed this statement, but the Hohmann affair gave me reason to think about it.

I would have said that this violence comes only form a tiny fraction of the population, and that the rest of us have nothing to do with that. Now I am no longer sure.

In the early nineties there have been several incidents in Germany of Neo-Nazis or similar radical extreme right elements (we usually call them "skinheads") torching asylum seekers´ homes and the houses of Turkish families or of attacking foreign-looking (mostly African) people and in some cases chasing them halfway through the city.
In many cases there were lots of eyewitnesses, but no-one helped; hardly anyone even called the police. There is one infamous video of such skinheads hurling molotov cocktails into an asylum seekers´ home, with hundreds of locals loudly cheering them!What you are referring to is animosity towards asylum seekers, which I have no doubt is somewhat widespread.

That, however, has nothing to do with anti-semitism.
I fear that racism and xenophobia, as well as anti-semitism, runs deeper than obvious in Europe - not only Germany. Most of these bigots just keep quiet about it.Xenophobia, yes. Anti-semitism, no.

[Chaos]

"Xenophobia" is "fear of what is different/strange" (correct me if I am wrong, Cleopatra). And jews are (at least perceived to be) different from christians.

What I recalled is a strong indication that the extreme right is rather strong, and the extreme right is, practically by definition, xenophobic, racist and anti-semitic. I doubt that you will find anyone would hates foreigners but does also not hate jews.

[Cleopatra]

Danish Dynamite

You have to believe that everytime I make this discussion with some people here, you are included, I start the discussion from a zero-basis. I want to be persuaded that I am wrong. :)

Now. How many burning Synagogues are enough to persuade you that there is a problem.
When people blame the antisemitic hatred on Sharon what they really do is that they blame the victim for what has happened!!!

This is called prejudice and in our case this is prejudice against the Jews!

I think that you are in denial.

Also xenophobia and antisemitism have the same roots. At least in Europe this is how things are. Jews were considered foreigners, people that they were undermining the countries they were living in.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Chaos
I doubt that you will find anyone would hates foreigners but does also not hate jews.

Yes I couldn't agree more. It seems that for the extremes those two go together.

[Nikk]

Originally posted by JamesM

Nonetheless, there was something of a fuss about the lack of a mention of Christianity in the European constitution, as mentioned here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/11/14/weur14.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/11/14/ixworld.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=23176), which suggests Europe as a political entity is not as free from the influence of religion as your acquaintances are. Also, remember the fuss about the gunmen in the Church of the Nativity last year? It is perhaps disingenuous to discount the cultural and historical links between Europe and the Middle East as a reason for European interest in the region.

However, your reasons to do with terrorism and oil are more convincing, and I'm happy to concede the point.

I read the original article in Le Monde and a part of its central argument is that European social consciousness is a product of christianity and humanism. Accordingly it follows that the constitution should recognise and make some reference to this.

In reading the article I remembered that Giscard d'Estaigne who is heading the constitutional project had made his opposition to Turkey's membership clear. It is possible (**danger conspiracy theory ahead** ) that this article is an element of this particular, very silent, battle.

[DanishDynamite]

Chaos:"Xenophobia" is "fear of what is different/strange" (correct me if I am wrong, Cleopatra). And jews are (at least perceived to be) different from christians.My undrstanding was that xenophobia was a fear of foreigners.
What I recalled is a strong indication that the extreme right is rather strong, and the extreme right is, practically by definition, xenophobic, racist and anti-semitic. I doubt that you will find anyone would hates foreigners but does also not hate jews. I'm one, in a manner of speaking. I'm opposed to open borders and in favor of tightening immigration rules. However, I'm not anti-semitic.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
I'm one, in a manner of speaking. I'm opposed to open borders and in favor of tightening immigration rules. However, I'm not anti-semitic.

:(

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:You have to believe that everytime I make this discussion with some people here, you are included, I start the discussion from a zero-basis. I want to be persuaded that I am wrong. :)I'll do my best.
Now. How many burning Synagogues are enough to persuade you that there is a problem.You tell me. How many bank robbings does it take before one may say that Europe in genral is composed of bankrobbers?
When people blame the antisemitic hatred on Sharon what they really do is that they blame the victim for what has happened!!! Who is blaming Sharon for anti-semitic hatred?
This is called prejudice and in our case this is prejudice against the Jews!In which case?
I think that you are in denial.LOL! Au contraire, my queen, you are paranoid. :)
Also xenophobia and antisemitism have the same roots. At least in Europe this is how things are. Jews were considered foreigners, people that they were undermining the countries they were living in. And? How does this relate to whether a majority of Europeans are antisemitic?

[DanishDynamite]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


:( Why the sad face?

[Cleopatra]

Forget it Danish Dynamite.

When you bring such arguements:

You tell me. How many bank robbings does it take before one may say that Europe in genral is composed of bankrobbers?


then all I have to say is that it doesn't matter.

[DanishDynamite]

Cleo:Forget it Danish Dynamite.

When you bring such arguements:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You tell me. How many bank robbings does it take before one may say that Europe in genral is composed of bankrobbers?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

then all I have to say is that it doesn't matter.I'm disappointed. You who are so full of vigour and fighting-spirit, you want to give up?

If you give up, I will let my crocodiles loose. ;)

[Cleopatra]

I am tired and disappointed.

There is always an effective way to rationalize everything people do even the worse crime.

I know that from personal experience when I read the news from Israel and when I watch Al Jazeera. They show the attrocities of the Israeli army and my instictive reaction is to find an excuse. I need to try really hard to control myself but I have the duty to my ideas and to my humanistic secular education at least to try.

If you succumb to your insticts then there is no way out. People that have fought for the Human Rights in their countries, those who have tried to defend the minorities are common people, it's not that they don't have fears or easy excuses, on the contrary, they are people who are afraid and they get mad BUT at least they give a fight with their lowest self.

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Chaos
"Xenophobia" is "fear of what is different/strange" (correct me if I am wrong, Cleopatra). And jews are (at least perceived to be) different from christians.

What I recalled is a strong indication that the extreme right is rather strong, and the extreme right is, practically by definition, xenophobic, racist and anti-semitic. I doubt that you will find anyone would hates foreigners but does also not hate jews.


So many foreigners, so little time. It must surely be difficult for any individual to hate too many racial/religious groups at once. As far as I can see jews have dropped off the xenophobics "to do" list in western europe, possibly permanently. If you believe otherwise you need to provide some fairly substantial evidence.

I have read what you have said about the "Hohman Affair" and I don't see that as anti semitism, more as an ill phrased attempt to draw a line under the past. On the other hand I haven't read the german media and there could be more to it than I realise.

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:I am tired and disappointed.No you are not. You just think you are. Remember, you are a Queen and rightly so. And you are fighting for what you believe is right. There can be no one stronger.

So, go ahead. Let me have it.
There is always an effective way to rationalize everything people do even the worse crime.Perhaps. I have, however, not done so.
I know that from personal experience when I read the news from Israel and when I watch Al Jazeera. They show the attrocities of the Israeli army and my instictive reaction is to find an excuse. I need to try really hard to control myself but I have the duty to my ideas and to my humanistic secular education at least to try. And so you should. I'm not blaming you for defending your country (or ex-country).
If you succumb to your insticts then there is no way out. People that have fought for the Human Rights in their countries, those who have tried to defend the minorities are common people, it's not that they don't have fears or easy excuses, on the contrary, they are people who are afraid and they get mad BUT at least they give a fight with their lowest self. I'm not sure what you mean, here. I'm a staunch defender of human rights. And I don't care whether I'm politically in agreement with the one whose rights have been abridged or not. Perhaps this is the problem?

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Nikk



So many foreigners, so little time. It must surely be difficult for any individual to hate too many racial/religious groups at once. As far as I can see jews have dropped off the xenophobics "to do" list in western europe, possibly permanently. If you believe otherwise you need to provide some fairly substantial evidence.


Up to about the 1950´s, there were - to my knowledge - no significant numbers of foreigners in Germany, as there are today. Until then, jews have been the only target at hand for xenophobia.

Perhaps European anti-semitism is so "refined" (for example, "founded" on so intricate conspiracy theories) because Europeans have had such a long time with only jews as targets for their xenophobia.
To my knowledge, the major influx of Muslims (mainly Turks in Germany, Pakistanis in England and Algerians in France) started after WW2; now, after fifty years, I notice the first signs of anti-Muslim conspiracy theories - like "the Muslims are going to out-breed christian Europeans to make Europe a muslim theocracy" (didn´t someone in this forum float that theory?).
To me, this seems to show that anti-semitism, as well as anti-muslim sentiment, is general xenophobia that has been allowed to fester.


I have read what you have said about the "Hohman Affair" and I don't see that as anti semitism, more as an ill phrased attempt to draw a line under the past. On the other hand I haven't read the german media and there could be more to it than I realise.

It is both, really. He tried to draw a line, and he did so by blaming the jews. That is the classical method. draw-a-line rethorics always revolve around something "the jews did".

[Cleopatra]

First of all, there is no such a thing as an ex-country Danish Dynamite

Israel is the country I was born, it's my country I love Israel as much I love Greece.:)

What Israel does has nothing to do with Jews all over the world. Jews all over the world cannot be blamed for what happens in Israel.

If people want to protest they can plug bombs in the Israeli Embassies around the world and not in Synagogues, Schools and Cemetaries. This is called racial hatred and when the society in which such events occur try to justify it with various ways this makes this society an accomplice.

From the Middle Ages until 1945, the Jews were the foreigners, the people that they were plotting against the European societies and back then when Ariel Sharon didn't exist to be blamed about anything , it was their malevolent character,their race and their religion to blame for their sufferings.

Think about it. There is always an enemy who must pay for his actions and become a victim and this victim is always to blame for what happens to him.


Allow me to remark a last thing.As you know, Human Rights do not have colour or Nationality, so you cannot be "xenophobic" ( note that I put the word in the quotations marks) and claim that you are a fighter of Human Rights.

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:First of all, there is no such a thing as an ex-country Danish Dynamite

Israel is the country I was born, it's my country I love Israel as much I love Greece.:)Got it. :)
What Israel does has nothing to do with Jews all over the world. Jews all over the world cannot be blamed for what happens in Israel.I agree completely.
If people want to protest they can plug bombs in the Israeli Embassies around the world and not in Synagogues, Schools and Cemetaries. This is called racial hatred and when the society in which such events occur try to justify it with various ways this makes this society an accomplice.Not sure I understand. Are you saying that if some group sets off a bomb somewhere in Denmark and the Danish police manage to find out why they set off that bomb, Denmark is an accomplice to the crime?
From the Middle Ages until 1945, the Jews were the foreigners, the people that they were plotting against the European societies and back then when Ariel Sharon didn't exist to be blamed about anything , it was their malevolent character,their race and their religion to blame for their sufferings.In some countries, yes, the Jews were blamed for everything under the sun. This, however, is history.
Think about it. There is always an enemy who must pay for his actions and become a victim and this victim is always to blame for what happens to him. You lost, me, my Queen.
Allow me to remark a last thing.As you know, Human Rights do not have colour or Nationality, so you cannot be "xenophobic" ( note that I put the word in the quotations marks) and claim that you are a fighter of Human Rights. Of course I can. I see no reason that people should emmigrate to my country. They should be happy to live in their own country. And my support of human rights everywhere is intended to make this possible.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite You tell me. How many bank robbings does it take before one may say that Europe in genral is composed of bankrobbers?

If more banks are robbed this year than last year, it's fair to consider that something is going on that encourages the robbing of banks. You don't need a society full of bank robbers before you consider the idea that maybe not enough is being done to stop bank robberies and wonder that maybe there isn't something to the culture that makes these robberies more acceptable than other crimes.

Originally posted by DanishDynamite And? How does this relate to whether a majority of Europeans are antisemitic?

Saying that Europe is becomming anti-Semitic isn't the same as saying the majority of Europeans are anti-Semites. It doesn't take a majority to make problems. All it takes is a vocal and active minority, and a complacent majority.

[Chaos]

Originally posted by Mycroft

It doesn't take a majority to make problems. All it takes is a vocal and active minority, and a complacent majority.

This sums it up quite well.

The actual situation, however, is a bit more complicated.

- a tiny minority (hundreds or thousands of people) who are willing to use violence
- a somewhat larger minority who support them (rhetorically, at least)
- a significant minority who silently agree
- another large minority who doesn´t care
- a smaller minority whop silently disagree
- a still smaller minority who disagree openly (this is where I see myself)
- a really tiny minority who are prepared to use violence against the other violent minority

[DanishDynamite]

Mycroft:If more banks are robbed this year than last year, it's fair to consider that something is going on that encourages the robbing of banks. I agree, if the number of bank robbings is significantly higher than average
You don't need a society full of bank robbers before you consider the idea that maybe not enough is being done to stop bank robberies and wonder that maybe there isn't something to the culture that makes these robberies more acceptable than other crimes."More acceptable"? You think there might be some component of a culture which encourages bank robbing? Can you provide an example?
Saying that Europe is becomming anti-Semitic isn't the same as saying the majority of Europeans are anti-Semites. Yes it is. How else should one interpret "Europe is anti-semitic"?
It doesn't take a majority to make problems. All it takes is a vocal and active minority, and a complacent majority. I agree. However, such is not the case in Europe as far as anti-semitism goes. And, as I said before, if a minority is anti-semitic, one can't say that Europe is anti-semitic.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
And, as I said before, if a minority is anti-semitic, one can't say that Europe is anti-semitic.

Yes but when the majority always finds ways to justify or rationalize the actions of the minority then it becomes an accomplice.

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:Yes but when the majority always finds ways to justify or rationalize the actions of the minority then it becomes an accomplice. Cleo, my lovely, what are you talking about? In what sense are crimes committed against Jewish schools or churches or graveyards or whatever, "justified" by the society in which they occur? Could you give an example? I would especially like a case where the perpetrators of the crime weren't sought or investigated "because society justified" the crime.

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Chaos


Up to about the 1950´s, there were - to my knowledge - no significant numbers of foreigners in Germany, as there are today. Until then, jews have been the only target at hand for xenophobia.

Perhaps European anti-semitism is so "refined" (for example, "founded" on so intricate conspiracy theories) because Europeans have had such a long time with only jews as targets for their xenophobia.
To my knowledge, the major influx of Muslims (mainly Turks in Germany, Pakistanis in England and Algerians in France) started after WW2; now, after fifty years, I notice the first signs of anti-Muslim conspiracy theories - like "the Muslims are going to out-breed christian Europeans to make Europe a muslim theocracy" (didn´t someone in this forum float that theory?).
To me, this seems to show that anti-semitism, as well as anti-muslim sentiment, is general xenophobia that has been allowed to fester.


Xenophobia is no more than a fancy and over specific greek word for the universal human ( and animal) tendency to be suspicious of that which is different. A suspicion which can easily turn to hatred. For 99% of human existence this attitude served us well, or at least it led to the survival of the most ruthless groups. Today the advantages are less obvious.

It's certainly true that christians disliked jews, but they disliked moslems even more and an especial hatred was reserved for other christians with whom they had theological differences. For example when a german army, inspired by that noted jew hater Luther, attacked renaissance Rome in 1527 they murdered 13,000 civilians in 5 days as well as terminating an extremely promising and productive blend of christian and classical humanistic culture. To argue that germans in particular and europeans in general had no target other than jews for their xenophobia over tha last few centuries is, I submit, not tenable.



It is both, really. He tried to draw a line, and he did so by blaming the jews. That is the classical method. draw-a-line rethorics always revolve around something "the jews did".

It seems to me that he was using the soviet example to say that just as one is wrong to stigmatise all jews because some jews are sh#ts so the same approach should be applied to the germans.

I appreciate that my view may be simplistic because of my lack of knowledge of german politics.

[JamesM]

Originally posted by Nikk
It seems to me that he was using the soviet example to say that just as one is wrong to stigmatise all jews because some jews are sh#ts so the same approach should be applied to the germans.
I totally agree, but if you were an MP for the CDU, a party that I believe have a bit of an image problem when it comes to their relationship with the war and such like, would you not find another group to illustrate your point with, other than the Jews? Would you use the books of Henry Ford as evidence? With the best will in the world, that was naive at best. He must have known what the impact of his words were likely to be.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Nikk
To argue that germans in particular and europeans in general had no target other than jews for their xenophobia over tha last few centuries is, I submit, not tenable.


Could you name for me the "targets" of European xenophobia during the last few centuries?

[DanishDynamite]

Cleopatra:Could you name for me the "targets" of European xenophobia during the last few centuries? Swedes! Germans! Frenchies! Poles! Gypsies! Etc, etc, etc.

[Skeptic]

It seems to me that he was using the soviet example to say that just as one is wrong to stigmatise all jews because some jews are sh#ts so the same approach should be applied to the germans.

To repeat, the antisemitism here is not because he claims all jews should be blamed for communism (he doesn't), but in what he claims those "bad" jews did. He doesn't merely claim that some jews were communists. He claims--and uses Ford for a source--that the jews CAUSED communism, e.g., that communism is somehow a "jewish" thing, a conspiracy against the gentiles.

The claim that communism should be blamed on the jews in the first place--if only "just" on some of them--is an old antisemitic lie, dating back to the PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION at least. He might as well have said, "look, just because SOME jews are sh#ts that poison wells and drink gentile blood, it doesn't mean that ALL of them are like that."

[DanishDynamite]

Skeptic:This is just an old antisemitic lie; he might as well have said, "look, just because SOME jews are sh#ts that poison wells and drink gentile blood, it doesn't mean that..." Not that I know anything at all about the question, but if a majority of Jews were involved in Communism, why wouldn't it be fair to accuse Jews of leading the Communist Revolution?

Afterall, you regularly accuse Muslims of anything bad that the Palestinians do?

[Nikk]

Originally posted by JamesM

I totally agree, but if you were an MP for the CDU, a party that I believe have a bit of an image problem when it comes to their relationship with the war and such like, would you not find another group to illustrate your point with, other than the Jews? Would you use the books of Henry Ford as evidence? With the best will in the world, that was naive at best. He must have known what the impact of his words were likely to be.

Well I doubt if he expected to be thrown out of the party!

As I have made clear I only have a superficial knowledge of this matter. That said I imagine that many germans, the young in particular, are simply fed up with tales and hints of war guilt. Perhaps open criticism of jewish bastards instead of german bastards has a delicious tinge of the forbidden about it. If that is the case then this kind of response i.e. expulsion is probably counter productive. After all if all politicians who make lying or misleading statements are expelled from their parties it will be the end of party politics as we know it!

[Skeptic]

Skeptic:Not that I know anything at all about the question, but if a majority of Jews were involved in Communism, why wouldn't it be fair to accuse Jews of leading the Communist Revolution?

And IF the majority of jews had, in fact, drank gentile blood, it would be fair to accuse the jews of drinking it, too. It's antisemitic to say communism is "jewish" for the simple reason that it isn't true: in fact, no more than a tiny minority of jews were communists, nor were more than a tiny minority of communists jews.

Of course, remember: this "majority rule" applies ONLY to jews. If a majority of jews had supported communism--and they didn't--it would be fair (in your view) to claim they, as a group, supported communism. However, if a majority of palestinians support suicide bombing of israeli children--and they DO--then it is "racist stereotyping" to say that they, as a group, support terrorism; or their support is "really" just an "expression of despair" due to being "occupied"; or it's all Sharon's fault; or whatever.

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Could you name for me the "targets" of European xenophobia during the last few centuries?

Well Danish Dynamite made a start but where does one stop?

Here are a few random thoughts.

In Britain catholics did not have the vote until the 19th century, they were seen as different and potentially hostile. We had a christianised jew as PM in the 19thC but I don't think we have had a catholic.

Briain has had lengthy wars with the Spanish and of course the French - no shortage of xenophobia involved there.

Elsewhere in europe there have been plenty of religous wars - the Hugenots fled from France to Britain in the 16thC (errm I think).

Then of course the war between christians and turks following the conquest of Constantinople went on intermittently for nearly 400 years. A certain amount of hatred was probably involved I think.

The colonisation of the New World led to genocide on a heroic scale. As a service to our american viewers a special mention goes to U.S. for the genocide of the american indian and black slavery.

I don't know if everybody regards the mass murders of the communists of their fellow citizens as xenophobia but I think it deserves a mention.

Finally, lets not forget the little guys. Lets hear it for Belgium. Most people may only know it as the place you stop for a pee when you drive from the UK to Germany but in the 19thC they colonised the Congo and killed 3,000,000 ( yes that is 3 million ) people.

[Nikk]

Originally posted by Skeptic
......... It seems to me that he was using the soviet example to say that just as one is wrong to stigmatise all jews because some jews are sh#ts so the same approach should be applied to the germans................

To repeat, the antisemitism here is not because he claims all jews should be blamed for communism (he doesn't), but in what he claims those "bad" jews did. He doesn't merely claim that some jews were communists. He claims--and uses Ford for a source--that the jews CAUSED communism, e.g., that communism is somehow a "jewish" thing, a conspiracy against the gentiles.

The claim that communism should be blamed on the jews in the first place--if only "just" on some of them--is an old antisemitic lie, dating back to the PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION at least. He might as well have said, "look, just because SOME jews are sh#ts that poison wells and drink gentile blood, it doesn't mean that ALL of them are like that."


Could you quote or provide a link to exactly what he said. I am aware of course that the nazi's claimed that communism was an example of non aryan thinking.

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Mycroft:I agree, if the number of bank robbings is significantly higher than average

Or maybe even more common than in other countries.

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
"More acceptable"? You think there might be some component of a culture which encourages bank robbing? Can you provide an example?

Of course we're not really talking about bank robbery, but racism. Still, if you want to look at that analogy, I can find examples:

In the United States we have a body of literature that glorifies the "Wild West" and honors the outlaw. Stories about Jesse James and Billy the Kid tend to emphasize the adventure aspect and downplay their criminal aspect.

We also have our Chicago Gangland history, certain criminals from that era have gained a notoriety that can be romanticized.

From our Civil War, there is a part of our society that still glorifies the Confederacy and identifies with the "rebels".

Any of these aspects of our culture can lead someone to identify with and glorify criminals in such a way that robbing banks doesn’t seem so bad. Just yesterday my wife and I watched The Italian Job, a story where the “heroes” are all thieves, and the plot revolves around a crime.

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Yes it is. How else should one interpret "Europe is anti-semitic.”
I agree. However, such is not the case in Europe as far as anti-semitism goes. And, as I said before, if a minority is anti-semitic, one can't say that Europe is anti-semitic.

Hitler came to power with only 16% of the popular vote. What percentage of the population of Europe should be openly anti-Semitic before you agree that Europe has a problem?

[Chaos]

Could you name for me the "targets" of European xenophobia during the last few centuries?

The only foreigners (more exactly, people with different cultures) who were living among people in any number were the jews and the gypsies - I forgot them last time. So it is not surprising to me that these two peoples are targets of "specific" xenophobia.

Gypsies are still very unpopular here, and what´s more, they are "acceptably unpopular", meaning there will be no outrage whatsoever if someone demands that the gypsies move on. The name they are called here is "Zigeuner", a word that originally meant "travelling rogues". Gypsies have a reputation as criminals - which might, according to police statistics, be partially deserved.

All other foreigners were not so commonplace in peoples´ lives. Do not forget that, back then, there were no mass media to convey what happened halfway around the world. Muslims and most christian of the "other" faith were living somewhere else, far away.

Nikk

I could only find excerpts of the speech, and they are in German.

Link (http://focus.msn.de/G/GP/GPA/gpa.htm?snr=126123)

The most important part is this:

„Wir haben (...) gesehen, wie stark und nachhaltig Juden die revolutionäre Bewegung in Russland und mitteleuropäischen Staaten geprägt haben. Das hat auch den amerikanischen Präsidenten Woodrow Wilson 1919 zu der Einschätzung gebracht, die bolschewistische Bewegung sei „jüdisch geführt“. Mit einer gewissen Berechtigung könnte man im Hinblick auf die Millionen Toten dieser ersten Revolutionsphase nach der „Täterschaft“ der Juden fragen.

Juden waren in großer Anzahl sowohl in der Führungsebene als auch bei den Tscheka-Erschießungskommandos aktiv. Daher könnte man Juden mit einiger Berechtigung als „Tätervolk“ bezeichnen. Das mag erschreckend klingen. Es würde aber der gleichen Logik folgen, mit der man Deutsche als Tätervolk bezeichnet. (...)"

It translates as:

"We have (...) seen how strongly and lastingly jews have influenced the revolutionary movement in Russia and central European nations. This also led the American president Woodrow Wilson to his 1919 assessment that the bolshevik movement was "led by jews". With some justification we could, with regards to the millions of dead in this first revolutionary phase, ask questions about the "perpetratorship" of the jews.

Jews were acitve in large numbers both among the leadership and with the Cheka firing squads. Therefore, we could with some justification call jews a "people of perpetrators". This may sound shocking. However, it only follows the same logic that calls Germans a "people of perpetrators"."

Judge for yourselves.

[ZeeGerman]

Originally posted by Mycroft

Hitler came to power with only 16% of the popular vote. What percentage of the population of Europe should be openly anti-Semitic before you agree that Europe has a problem?

Not true. The NSDAP got the following results in the elections that lead to Hitlers rise to power:
1932 I : 37,36%
1932 II: 33,09%
1933 : 43,91%

See here (http://www.sn7.de/wahlen/wrtw.htm) for example.

Just nit-picking.

Zee

[hammegk]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004310

Which reason(s) do you chose, DanishDynamite? Or would you characterize the entire article as "Jewish bias" and unreliable?