If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Eh? Landoverbabptist is a piss take, its satire. If you can't see the difference between that and Dave777's link then gawd elp us all...
If you want to know the more probable outcome of such an attack, I suggest you read these links http://www.exile.ru/2005-January-27/war_nerd.html Thats a general overview of how Iran will pay it out against a US invasion. The author may not have been in the military, but the sod knows more than people who I know who've been in for years. Even my strategic studies tutors have recommended him.
The second is a US training exercise which is a perfect model for an Iranian navy attack. http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html
First one's a good article, I think it pretty much outlines the whole situation
It never offended me... I'm just making a point.
What I mean to say is that people tend to jump on the fact that the link is anti-semetic, or if an anti-Muslim link is placed up people would be reactionary... But an anti-Christian one? How about if somebody posed something up about Mormons or Buddhists?
It's nothing deliberate on everyone's part, I think we're socialised in to selective compassion but at the end of the day a human is a human.
That you can’t even condemn the disgusting content of the website in question and instead wish to argue irrelevant pointless semantics by making a worthless and simplistic point is telling.
The accepted definition of anti-Semitism refers to policies, views or actions that harm or discriminate against the Jewish people. That site clearly does that, why can’t you condemn that instead of seeking to undermine hatred against the Jewish people by calling anti-Semitism a ‘fraud’?
That you cannot exercise intellectual honesty but instead refer to the proper definition of a term as "semantics" is all the more telling.
As for any link, I neither saw the link nor it was it "under discussion" save for a few posts out of the majority here. My understanding was that this is a thread about avoiding Cyprus due to some bogus presumed threat from Iran.
Looking now I only see a discussion board link.
At any rate, I apologise to the rest for having to sidetrack from the topic to deal with yet another Dis knee-jerk rant.
Its like when people use the 'literally' as in 'I literally died laughing' - they actually mean metaphorically, but everyone knows that the English language has moved on and words are now used in a way which differs from their original use.
Or politically we use the word facist against people on the far right - when in reality we should only use it to define members of Italian far right who were part of the Facist organisation. But again, language has moved on.
Or as a final example when I call someone a twat I'm not realistically suggesting they're female genatalia, but... well I think you get my drift.
The link was radioislam.org - dave777 who sadly has not yet been banned must have removed the link or a mod must have done it for him.
Referring to Jews as a "race" is another longtime revisionist pillar of Zionist ideology, NQA. Judaism is a RELIGION, not a race. There are black, Asian, caucasian, etc. Jews and where arguments of race pertain they are not of the same racial classification.
Anti-semitism in its populist PR revisionist connotation is actually and all too commonly mis-used a smokescreen to evade and denounce all criticism of Israel and its politics, a use with which intellectually honest academic would not align him/herself.
Whilst I can appreciate that general words may have euphamistic applications, this term as Dis and his ideological ilk would use it is wholly dishonest and particularist.
Now kindly return to the topic. Thanks.
Doubt you're interested but if you are please see:
http://www.jewfaq.org/judaism.htm
That gives what is more the actual Jewish position. Clandestine is ignoring a few factors and generalising – not at all like him!
Ideological ilk? As well as anti-Semitism can you not say Jew either? That’s patently what you mean. And before you rant on about the odd Jew that despises the very existence of Israel try and remember that such Jews are a tiny minority within Jewry – which is in itself a very small minority.
So a none-religious Jew is no longer Jewish? Hitler didn't agree. And its not like the Jews weren't being persecuted before Zionism. In fact a large part of zionism is the result of persecution against Jews.
And to be fair even if they are a religion rather than a race, anti-semitism is still seen as being anti-Jewish.
Yes, but he didn't just kill jews. He killed 20million Russians as well you know... if you aren't Aryan, you aren't good to him.
Plus... he was a tad off his rocker.
Can you not demonstrate some proof that you actually have a shred of intellectual honesty and acknowledge the difference between Judaism, a religion, and Zionism, a political ideology crafted by 19th century colonialist-minded Eastern European ideologues? Obviously not. So much for your credibility as an academic let alone a historian.
NQA, the Zionist movement long preceded the Nazi era and in fact if you do some research youll find that the German Zionist movement actually and knowingly championed the ascendency of Hitler and defended his policies until it was too late. One prime reason why of all political party-related newspapers, the Zionist press was left unmolested and free to operate under the Nazis. Their ideological insistence that Jews were a race was in point of fact perfectly in accord with Hitler's claims and one which allowed the Zionist leaders a closer association with his regime than the school texts and common rhetoric acknowledge.
I suggest you read the works of Norm Finkelstein who chronicles the lies and deceptions and wholly callous manipulations by Zionists to achieve their colonial apartheid state. You'd be surprised and shocked at the extent duplicity these heartless bastards went to to further their political agenda.
And as for non-religious Jews, what that has to do with the fact that being Jewish is not a race but a religion is beyond me. I would have to say that if someone is non-religious they are no more Jewish than they would be Christian, Buddhist or Muslim. They would be secular. The false PR long inculcated into the school textbooks and mainstream press confusing Race/Nationhood with Judaism is false.
Given the level of ideological evasion and knee jerk reactionism from those like Dis who live to avoid the truth and condemn all exposure and critique of these purposely blurred distinctions with labels like "anti-Semitism" and "Self-hating Jew", its doubtful youll ever realise how deeply ingrained these false paradigms are unless you undertake some research from anti-Zionist scholars (Dr. Alfred Lilienthal, Avi Shlaim, Norm Finkelstein, Edward Said for starters).
Well done for pointing out the obvious. You'll also find out persecution of Jews preceeded Zionism. To use one example http://ddickerson.igc.org/cliffords-tower.html
I assume that any time now you'll be repeating the claims that the Zionists created the nazi movement.
An atheist? An agnostic?
Different circumstances, the majority of Russians died as a result of war, reprisals following partisan raids or starvation/exposure after their crops and home were destroyed. Hitler didn't deliberately set out to kill every last Russian (he wanted them as a slave population).
He did set out to kill every last Jew and the majority of them weren't killed as part of war, but deliberately murdered.
Er yes, him and Stalin both. But I'm not sure what that's got to do with it.
I leave you to either continue making little more than snide remarks toward me from a clear lack of study on the subject or to pursue your own study, especially from the works of Finkelstein. I suggest "The Holocaust Industry" as a detailed insight into the disingenuous misuse of Holocaust history by hardline Zionist ideologues and its callous affront in doing so to the legacy of the victims.
Or don't. Snide remarks are undoubtedly much less time consuming and intellectually challenging than research.
Which is why the ship named Tel Aviv, captained by a Nazi and flying the Swaztika, carried Jewish emigrees official to Britsh Mandated Palestine. I truly suggest you read Finkelstein's work to see just how inflated many of the Holocaust claims truly are, despite the acknowledged depth of atrocity which the Holocaust was for all too many Jews and other victims.
And before you launch into a diatribe about Holocaust denial, I in no way deny the Holocaust.
It's time though that honest discourse and not inflammatory emotive soundbites prevailed concerning those responsible - both directly and by deceitful politically motivated collusion as well as the the reasons why so many German Jews did not choose to accept Zionist schemes to have them shipped to Palestine years before. Then as now, many Jews did not/do not subscribe to this equally dehumanising ideology.
Yes, so why don't we call a non-religious person of Jewish parentage the same? Why still a jew? They hold no Jewish beleif.
He sure did a good job of killing many in concentration camps. Well, actually, it was more the SS and Soldiers who did it... under no real orders from him to kill them. It was obviously just fun.
I somehow don't want to trust either of their beleifs, they are quite barmy. If I am to beleive the same, I don't think Hitler is a good example of someone to beleive. Someone more... sane, maybe?
Partly because even the most atheistic Jews still identify themselves as being Jewish. And from a religious perspective someone who is legally (from a religious pov) Jewish is so even if they’re an atheist and even if they convert to another religion.
It’s mainly a cultural thing though IMO, although it’s more than that because although some things are universal Ashkenazic and Sephardic culture are distinct and different; bagels and smoked salmon for instance is an Ashkenazic thing and Sephardic stuff is totally different. (Ashkenazic food is better though).
Another thing, while Zionism was not born out of Nazi anti-Semitism it was largely due to the most horrific and cruel pogroms in tsarist Russia, most during Alexander III’s reign I believe and the work of the Holy League and Pobedonostsev. Something Clandestine forgets, although tbh I'm sure Clandestine would try and claim anti-Semitism was the deliberate creation of fanatical Zionists.
In a manner of speaking yes it was Dis. Certainly in the sense of its generations long use as a debate deadening accusation toward any who have dared and dare today to hold up the spotlight of scrutiny to its callous, colonialist and racist agenda and legacy. An agenda which from its earliest advocacy patently and avowedly disregarded (and ultimately dispossessed through terrorism and military brutality) those who had inhabited the land for centuries. More a deliberate "tool" rather than "creation" of the Zionist movement.
But you've made it perfectly clear how morally relativistic you are and how desperate you are to force the historic record to conform to your ideological preconceptual framework, however much of it must be ignored, evaded or dishonestly excused. Like other exclusivistic and particularistic group doctrines (Naziism, Apartheid, etc.) born of the same 19th century colonialist era mindset, Zionism is narcissistic and exceptionalistic. Not an ideology for any who seek to claim an affinity with the concept of pluralistic democratic principle and social justice.
It should, however, be pointed out that "fanatical Zionists" is superfluous. Zionism IS a fanatical ideology and always was. Perhaps a key reason so many European Jews rejected it and its notions of the errors of assimilating and identifying themselves with the societies they were born into as citizens of any country should. Im sure you and Rabbi Kahane would have been the best of friends.
Pobedonostsev was a right twat. So was Alexander III, but thatsj ust not the point. He didn't exactally have his own mind anyway. Might have been dangerous if he did.