Pittsburgh synagogue shooting

Widdershins

batgoat wrote: »

Pretty sure you just labelled everyone that has an issue with Israel's behaviour in Palestine as "anti-semites"? Unless I'm misreading you...

You are. Criticism of any government is fine, as far as I'm concerned.

I think there's far too much reading between the lines and putting words into peoples' mouths. And that does apply to posters here...

mammajamma

This last year or two in the united states has provided the biggest/worst mass shootings, in schools, offices, churches, everywhere. Its getting worse.

As far as I can see, here are the two ingredients absolutely necessary for chaos.

Keep sub-dividing the population of a country via the introduction/strengthening of many directly opposed groups. In other words, do away with homogeneity.

Second, make arms available to those competing groups.

The united states is a dead man walking, its already over and just waiting for the inevitable.

Anthracite

2 Scoops wrote: »

which mainstreams the BSD movement, which mainsteams wildly anti Semetic and anti Israel policies

Woah woah woah there cowboy: what is is anti-semitic about opposing Israeli policies in the occupied territories?

Is it possible, do you think, to be equally opposed to the maltreatment/abuse/demonisation of Jewish people around the world and Palestinian people in Palestine?

Grayson

Widdershins wrote: »

Pardon? I am quite calm. It was said quite blandly. I find people have a very high threshold for antisemitism.

I have not accused anyone here of antisemitism if that's what you mean.

What is it with Boards posters attributing emotions to others?

Why did you advise me to calm down and not the ranting poster above, spewing insults?

Considering you've been very abusive to me in the past it's a bit rich saying that.

And you've found that people have a high threshold for anti semitism? Is there anyone here who's even vaguely said that it;'s ok? If it's in real life then I'd suggest getting better friends.

personally I think the anti semitism is the most unacceptable form of bigotry. partly because of the holocaust. We've all seen what can happen because of someones stupid belief that jews are bad. We've all seen where an irrational hatred of jews can lead.

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

Keep sub-dividing the population of a country via the introduction/strengthening of many directly opposed groups. In other words, do away with homogeneity.

Ireland in the 50s was pretty homogenous. It was a sh!thole. I think you might be indentifying the wrong source for the problems in the US - homogeneity per se doesn't make things bad, and diversity per se does not make things good. It's entirely possible to have a happy, diverse society, and unless you have a suggestion as to how to make the US homogenous, they should probably get cracking on that.

Widdershins

Grayson wrote: »

Considering you've been very abusive to me in the past it's a bit rich saying that.

And you've found that people have a high threshold for anti semitism? Is there anyone here who's even vaguely said that it;'s ok? If it's in real life then I'd suggest getting better friends.

personally I think the anti semitism is the most unacceptable form of bigotry. partly because of the holocaust. We've all seen what can happen because of someones stupid belief that jews are bad. We've all seen where an irrational hatred of jews can lead.

I have not been abusive to anybody. If you are not confusing me with someone else (which has happened, I think there's another poster with a similar name or posting style) then why didn't you say so or report my post?

I don't have a clue who you are or why you would be holding a grudge.

I wasn't referring to you as the poster spewing insults.

Widdershins

Anthracite wrote: »

Woah woah woah there cowboy: what is is anti-semitic about opposing Israeli policies in the occupied territories?

Is it possible, do you think, to be equally opposed to the maltreatment/abuse/demonisation of Jewish people around the world and Palestinian people in Palestine?

Maybe if BDS focused on other countries, that might be easier to believe. And then there's this:
https://www.algemeiner.com/2018/10/26/poll-half-of-canadian-bds-supporters-would-continue-boycotting-israel-even-if-it-agreed-to-all-their-demands/?fbclid=IwAR1VTQUDY2KHor8G1WEOlm3tJ-Gn92f6GFed3rlJy9OFbqbKwdPGafAl0Z4

So even if Israel gave the Palestinian Arabs everything the BDS asks for, they would continue boycotting Israel.This is what the survey proves.

Personally I also find it morally dubious to punish ordinary people for anything their government does.

Anthracite

Widdershins wrote: »

Maybe if BDS focused on other countries, that might be easier to believe.

Isn't that like saying that you'd find the Cancer Society 'easier to believe' if it tried to cure heart disease, asthma and diabetes too?

Widdershins wrote: »

And then there's this:
https://www.algemeiner.com/2018/10/26/poll-half-of-canadian-bds-supporters-would-continue-boycotting-israel-even-if-it-agreed-to-all-their-demands/?fbclid=IwAR1VTQUDY2KHor8G1WEOlm3tJ-Gn92f6GFed3rlJy9OFbqbKwdPGafAl0Z4

So even if Israel gave the Palestinian Arabs everything the BDS asks for, they would continue boycotting Israel.This is what the survey proves.

Well it doesn't actually prove that, it may suggest it. But the poll seems a tad flawed:

The poll — commissioned by the group La’ad Canada, and carried out by Campaign Research in mid September — found that 12 percent of the 1,485 Canadians surveyed were aware of the Palestinian-led boycott movement, which has attracted support from a limited but growing number of students, academics, cultural figures, and others in North America.

In addition, it was carried out by a Jewish lobby group, who may or may not have an incentive to skew the results, consciously or unconsciously.

Widdershins wrote: »

Personally I also find it morally dubious to punish ordinary people for anything their government does.

I have some sympathy with that view, but who is voting for the Israeli government? Can you suggest other non-violent means whereby we can get Israel the change the way it brutalises the people who are just trying to live where they have lived for thousands of years and had their land taken from under them?

batgoat

Jewish group in Pittsburgh telling Trump not to visit until he denounces White Nationalism and have said the events that transpired are a culmination of his rhetoric...

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5bd66a3de4b0d38b5884ee66/amp?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067&__twitter_impression=true

Sweetemotion

batgoat wrote: »

Jewish group in Pittsburgh telling Trump not to visit until he denounces White Nationalism and have said the events that transpired are a culmination of his rhetoric...

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5bd66a3de4b0d38b5884ee66/amp?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067&__twitter_impression=true

Here is the Israeli ambassadors reply.

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

Ireland in the 50s was pretty homogenous. It was a sh!thole. I think you might be indentifying the wrong source for the problems in the US - homogeneity per se doesn't make things bad, and diversity per se does not make things good. It's entirely possible to have a happy, diverse society, and unless you have a suggestion as to how to make the US homogenous, they should probably get cracking on that.

!00% the biggest problem in the united states is its increasingly mixed population. If it was a single homogenous group, it would be able to rectify and overcome problems (if not immediately, then eventually). A diverse society is simply a bunch of different groups pulling in different directions forever, and that prevents problems from being unilaterally challenged and solved.

Its a mess.

How do you define "****hole" for the 50's? That incredibly small percentages of the population weren't having as a good a time as now? Wealth? Opportunity?

Because if so, those elements are not in discussion per se. Unity is best, despite the circumstances of any given timeframe. If Ireland had been 25% indian people, 17% Russian, 4% Sumatran, 20% catholic, 14% hindu etc etc...….how easily would we have won our freedom from the English, do you think? Would it have been easier, or harder than with 100% irish people?

The idea of homogeneity versus diversity is ridiculous at its core. How on earth "diversity" turned from an antonym into a synonym for the strength of a society has to be one of the biggest social coups of the decade.

As for ideas on how to "make things homogenous", theres no need. It will take its natural course. The same way it has throughout the entirety of human existence. Its one thing to watch it happen from far away, its another thing to invite it to happen in your own home.

But who knows, maybe this one time will be different!

batgoat

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Here is the Israeli ambassadors reply.

That doesn't negate the view of this Jewish group and all the other Jewish people who have said the same thing... Even Israeli publications have said it so the Israeli Ambassador isn't the be all and end all in this matter.

Anthracite

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Here is the Israeli ambassadors reply.

I haven't watched the video, but I wouldn't be hugely surprised if Netanyahu's ambassador gave Trump a full rim job.

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

As for ideas on how to "make things homogenous", theres no need. It will take its natural course.

What, like happened in 'homogenous' 19th century Britain as the Picts, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Irish etc. etc.? Everybody gradually merges into a new society with elements of each?

I'm not sure what history you've been reading. I presume you are not familiar with the Roman empire either?

Sweetemotion

batgoat wrote: »

That doesn't negate the view of this Jewish group and all the other Jewish people who have said the same thing... Even Israeli publications have said it so the Israeli Ambassador isn't the be all and end all in this matter.

Just like your Huffpost link isn't the be all and end all in this matter.

brendanwalsh

America is a dump lads. The American dream died a long time ago. Take a trip to Detroit, Hartford, Springfield ma, places that have literally nothing going for them. Thank god we were born this side of the Atlantic on this great Emerald Isle in spite of our own issues.

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

!00% the biggest problem in the united states is its increasingly mixed population. If it was a single homogenous group, it would be able to rectify and overcome problems (if not immediately, then eventually). A diverse society is simply a bunch of different groups pulling in different directions forever, and that prevents problems from being unilaterally challenged and solved

When has the United States ever had a homogenous population or anything close to it?

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

As for ideas on how to "make things homogenous", theres no need. It will take its natural course. The same way it has throughout the entirety of human existence.

That reads to me like a proposal for entirely unlimited migration worldwide, given that migration has been happening throughout the entirety of human existence, and only in relatively recent times was in any way hindered by the existence of artificial lines like borders.

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

What, like happened in 'homogenous' 19th century Britain as the Picts, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Irish etc. etc.? Everybody gradually merges into a new society with elements of each?

I'm not sure what history you've been reading. I presume you are not familiar with the Roman empire either?

The big difference is space and free movement of people to establish what they want. You may have noticed there is no more space anymore. There is also the ignored point of time. Huge amounts of time for the assimilation of small groups of people with plenty of space. Does that sound anything remotely like today? During some of the past couple of years, the equivalent population of Ireland has moved into europe. Imagine another Ireland just appearing in Europe in the space of a year!? Filled with lots and lots of the least compatible people you could find, both culturally and religiously!

You may also have noticed Scotland, England, Ireland and northern Ireland don't seem to be joined at the hip so much ANd after how much time is that the result? And as for the roman empire, it collapsed due to its diversity and was overcome by unified and therefore inherently stronger groups that both raided and took over.

You also missed everything else I said.

How about that question of which would have been easier? Would a diverse "country" of Ireland composed of 20 different groups and religions have been better suited to overcoming the English to establish "their" land....or a single unified group? But you already know the answer.

This is all semantics, the diversity thing is just a gigantic magicians trick that doesn't stand up to an ounce of scrutiny or common sense :P

And yeah, history will repeat. If you cant see it literally taking shape all over the world right now, whether the USA or boko haram in Nigeria, Brexit or Saudi arabia and on and on….you would need to be wilfully blind to not see where this is going.

mammajamma

hill16bhoy wrote: »

When has the United States ever had a homogenous population or anything close to it?

Common language evolved very quickly, common ancestry, common religion of Christianity, zero mollycoddling of social welfare and the "do or die" to join society. For the vast majority, these people came from Europe. They even looked like each other! It was quickly a necessity to assimilate to each other.

Now, not so common language, I was riding a train in new York recently and was surprised that all of the advertisements in that particular carriage were in Spanish. How does that kind of thing bring people together, seriously, literally putting up barriers of communication? That's "diversity" for you....division and separation.

At the beginning, with genuinely huge, mostly empty country, the beginnings of the US was diverse. But it had all the elements necessary to create its own unique identity.

For comparisons sake, imagine if the American indian population of the US was gigantic, filling the place coast to coast. How well do you think an influx of people from another continent, with an entirely different way of life would have been greeted? Conducive to harmony? I think you can guess how that would have played out.

America was unique, it formed together under unique circumstances, now its time is just about over again. Apples and oranges to Europe.

mammajamma

hill16bhoy wrote: »

That reads to me like a proposal for entirely unlimited migration worldwide, given that migration has been happening throughout the entirety of human existence, and only in relatively recent times was in any way hindered by the existence of artificial lines like borders.

Oh for sure, you want the world to erupt in an absolute inferno, just have billions of people wander around where they like. Akin to telling the people of the country they can just mosey in and out of each others houses whenever they want, day or night, just take what they want while theyre at it.

Yeah, that would lead to something alright: A biblical crackdown. Same thing as now, only the reaction is happening in slow motion.

Odhinn

Widdershins wrote: »

Maybe if BDS focused on other countries, that might be easier to believe. And then there's this:
..........

Why would they? Syria is under UN sanctions, as is south Sudan, sudan, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Congo and so on. The lack of official sanctions on Israel, due to the US veto makes BDS nessecary.


Do you think that Israel should be able to ethnically cleanse the West Bank and Arab East |Jerusalem without penalty?

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

And as for the roman empire, it collapsed due to its diversity and was overcome by unified and therefore inherently stronger groups that both raided and took over.

Sorry I don't have time to rubbish all your arguments but this is a quick one: Rome was diverse from day one (don't believe me - learn about it), and only became more diverse as it expanded across Etruscan, Sabine, Latin, Greek and Celtic Italy. Most of its greatest emperors were Spanish or Illyrian. The empire was already masssively diverse and had been expanding and diversifying for over 500 years by the time it reached its greatest extent under (Spanish) emperor Hadrian.

So you can bin that theory for a start. HTH.

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

Common language evolved very quickly, common ancestry, common religion of Christianity, zero mollycoddling of social welfare and the "do or die" to join society. For the vast majority, these people came from Europe. They even looked like each other! It was quickly a necessity to assimilate to each other.

Oh look, this one should also take 30 seconds. You are suggesting that even just the *white* population of the US - everyone from Swedes to Italians, Irish speaking Irish to Poles, English to French, Dutch Menonites to Eastern European Jews...were homogenous?

I think you must be trolling, because this is the stupidest thing I've seen on Boards today, and that's saying something.

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

Sorry I don't have time to rubbish all your arguments but this is a quick one: Rome was diverse from day one (don't believe me - learn about it), and only became more diverse as it expanded across Etruscan, Sabine, Latin, Greek and Celtic Italy. Most of its greatest emperors were Spanish or Illyrian. The empire was already masssively diverse and had been expanding and diversifying for over 500 years by the time it reached its greatest extent under (Spanish) emperor Hadrian.

So you can bin that theory for a start. HTH.

"Sorry I don't have the capacity to back my position, so let me just pick on this one singular tangent and leggit"

Don't forget the part were it utterly collapsed and shrank dramatically in size again owing directly to the disparate competing groups within its hegemon. That's kind of important to the point.

But youre hiding behind an extreme tangent, so you know, whatever.

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

Oh look, this one should also take 30 seconds. You are suggesting that even just the *white* population of the US - everyone from Swedes to Italians, Irish speaking Irish to Poles, English to French, Dutch Menonites to Eastern European Jews...were homogenous?

I think you must be trolling, because this is the stupidest thing I've seen on Boards today, and that's saying something.

You can call my post stupid, but your are demonstrating clear cowardice in avoiding all the PERTINENT points of the matter. Of course I could point out the time frames where language unified somewhat to English, how quick it was in comparison to many other examples of the time (and since, and before). But you're basically just hiding behind negligible points that should "go without saying"...….buts its just too convenient an escape with deflective crap.

Youre living in a dreamworld, and it must be scary to fight reality that like that. Do you have access to a news channel at all?! That's rhetorical, I'm not interested in your tangential escapes, or in replying to you anymore.

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

Common language evolved very quickly, common ancestry, common religion of Christianity, zero mollycoddling of social welfare and the "do or die" to join society. For the vast majority, these people came from Europe. They even looked like each other! It was quickly a necessity to assimilate to each other.

Now, not so common language, I was riding a train in new York recently and was surprised that all of the advertisements in that particular carriage were in Spanish. How does that kind of thing bring people together, seriously, literally putting up barriers of communication? That's "diversity" for you....division and separation.

At the beginning, with genuinely huge, mostly empty country, the beginnings of the US was diverse. But it had all the elements necessary to create its own unique identity.

For comparisons sake, imagine if the American indian population of the US was gigantic, filling the place coast to coast. How well do you think an influx of people from another continent, with an entirely different way of life would have been greeted? Conducive to harmony? I think you can guess how that would have played out.

America was unique, it formed together under unique circumstances, now its time is just about over again. Apples and oranges to Europe.

I find it deeply ironic that people who are telling us that EU immigration leads to non-homogenous populations are trying to make out that a population made up of people from all different parts of Europe as well as elsewhere was a homogenous population.

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

Oh for sure, you want the world to erupt in an absolute inferno, just have billions of people wander around where they like. Akin to telling the people of the country they can just mosey in and out of each others houses whenever they want, day or night, just take what they want while theyre at it.

Yeah, that would lead to something alright: A biblical crackdown. Same thing as now, only the reaction is happening in slow motion.

I wasn't the person who suggested entirely unlimited worldwide migration - you were.

Because in the vast majority of human existence, that has been the case.

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

Youre living in a dreamworld, and it must be scary to fight reality that like that. Do you have access to a news channel at all?! That's rhetorical, I'm not interested in your tangential escapes, or in replying to you anymore.

Well that's a real pity - there has been a dearth of people making serious efforts to sell us on the benefits of racial purity for the last 70 years or so. Can't think why.

Now where were we...oh yes, a massacre of innocent Jewish people by a far-right conspiracy theorist lunatic. Plus ca change, eh?

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

Youre living in a dreamworld,

Oh the irony...

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

Well that's a real pity - there has been a dearth of people making serious efforts to sell us on the benefits of racial purity for the last 70 years or so. Can't think why.

Now where were we...oh yes, a massacre of innocent Jewish people by a far-right conspiracy theorist lunatic. Plus ca change, eh?

Oh no youre absolutely right. More fool me for trying to offer rational explanation for the sh*t youre literally hearing and seeing day in day out all over the world, gathering pace day in and day out. Never let reality get in the way of a smug erroneous comment on the internet!

Look, don't worry about it. You think that this will all blow over (I genuinely would love to see what the future looks like in your head, and how it gets there, no joking). No matter what crap is spat out on an anonymous internet forum, reality will be there tomorrow and the day after, and events will continue unfolding. Insinuating Nazism is pathetic, however. Keep clinging to that winning strategy, and good luck with reality

mammajamma

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Oh the irony...

I wish you and yours all the best, primarily because you need it. Nighty night!

Widdershins

Might be helpful.
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-antisemitism

Sonics2k

Widdershins wrote: »

Might be helpful.
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-antisemitism

Especially helpful to you.

However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

Criticizing the actions of the Israeli army in Gaza is not antisemitic, by it's very definition.

So, again. Find me a member of the left (and this goes out to 2Scoops too) who is actually antisemitic.

Widdershins

Sonics2k wrote: »

Especially helpful to you.



Criticizing the actions of the Israeli army in Gaza is not antisemitic, by it's very definition.

So, again. Find me a member of the left (and this goes out to 2Scoops too) who is actually antisemitic.

Please don't put words into my mouth or presume to know my opinions. Thanks.

Sonics2k

Widdershins wrote: »

Please don't put words into my mouth or presume to know my opinions. Thanks.

I'm not. I'm simply waiting for you to back up your claim that left wing people are antisemitic.

You can't. Next you (or someone else like you) will try claiming that the Left are the real fascists!

Facts are facts. The shooter was not a Trump supporter. He was extremely right wing, Christian and a conservative.

Widdershins

Sonics2k wrote: »

I'm not. I'm simply waiting for you to back up your claim that left wing people are antisemitic.

You can't. Next you (or someone else like you) will try claiming that the Left are the real fascists!

Facts are facts. The shooter was not a Trump supporter. He was extremely right wing, Christian and a conservative.

You just have done right there.

Someone made a lot of effort to answer that question and you don't seem to have noticed or acknowledged, which seems very bad manners. It was quite brave of them to post in a hostile thread.

We must be three or four pages on now and there's a few of you in it. It's almost deserving on the ''has anything creepy or unnerving happened to you'' thread. So weird!

If anyone has an agenda it's your bunch. Your obsessive hectoring proves that.

There always has been Jew hate from all political directions. It's a sign of your ignorance that you think you're justified in harassing me for stating that fact.

batgoat

Protests in Pittsburg, house leaders chose not to travel with Trump.
https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2018/1030/1007455-pittsburg-synagogue/

Widdershins

Perhaps he was affected by the kind of rhetoric some people spout online. He didn't get this idea from Donald Trump. Time to really look at the language used around the Jewish homeland and the conflict?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/pittsburgh-gunman-told-police-jews-were-committing-genocide-to-his-people/?fbclid=IwAR0YICPOgPO-o4t7kSohvtBTKUwzlTHeSWempiuJgDfcl4NOdEd7eNj5SDs



Hopefully, the world is waking up to antisemitism. A small ray of much needed hope. https://www.timesofisrael.com/denmark-wont-fund-groups-that-promote-bds-question-israels-legitimacy/?fbclid=IwAR1XsmEJsZ5_WYmJefGVv5p8NvJ75Qc6Tns4T-betZubFxk3UcMcaOWgLjE

ceadaoin.

Sonics2k wrote: »

I'm not. I'm simply waiting for you to back up your claim that left wing people are antisemitic.

.

This guy thinks there is a pretty strong anti semitic element in left wing politics in the UK. Suppose he is wrong. And his wife who was threatened with rape , and all the other Jewish people or those who support them who were targeted. They are all wrong too. Just a coincidence.


https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/john-mann-mp-anti-semitism-and-how-labour-racists-threatened-my-wife-with-rape-1-9123392

nullzero

Bondo wrote: »

So, the shooter hated Trump and yet it's Trump's fault the guy killed a bunch of Jews.

Can someone explain this to me?

You clearly don't understand the discussion.
Thou shalt not do anything but follow the consensus or thou shall be cast as an anti semite.

The attack in question is a horrible, unthinkable atrocity, but the clamor to blame the Zionist Donald Trump for encouraging it is ill informed, lazy and the calling card of the mindless caricature of modern "Liberal" thought processes.

Widdershins

nullzero wrote: »

You clearly don't understand the discussion.
Thou shalt not do anything but follow the consensus or thou shall be cast as an anti semite.

The attack in question is a horrible, unthinkable atrocity, but the clamor to blame the Zionist Donald Trump for encouraging it is ill informed, lazy and the calling card of the mindless caricature of modern "Liberal" thought processes.

How does it work if a Jew doesn't follow the consensus of blaming DT or whatever the consensus is ?

What's the Boards definition of Zionism?

nullzero

Widdershins wrote: »

How does it work if a Jew doesn't follow the consensus of blaming DT or whatever the consensus is ?

What's the Boards definition of Zionism?

I have no idea what you're talking about.
Not all Jewish people are part of a hive mind and individuals can assess things for themselves.
Jewish people who for instance take issue with the treatment of Palestinians by Israel find themselves labelled as "self hating Jews" and other such nonsense.

As for the boards definition of Zionism, I appreciate your consistency in as much as your continue to be condescending and inflammatory whilst side stepping logic and reason.

Donald Trump is a Zionist, his actions are the actions of a Zionist and I'm sure Jared Kushner is delighted with those actions. Your inability to recognise simple facts that are openly and publicly provable is strange to say the least.

Widdershins

nullzero wrote: »

I have no idea what you're talking about.
Not all Jewish people are part of a hive mind and individuals can assess things for themselves.
Jewish people who for instance take issue with the treatment of Palestinians by Israel find themselves labelled as "self hating Jews" and other such nonsense.

As for the boards definition of Zionism, I appreciate your consistency in as much as your continue to be condescending and inflammatory whilst side stepping logic and reason.

Donald Trump is a Zionist, his actions are the actions of a Zionist and I'm sure Jared Kushner is delighted with those actions. Your inability to recognise simple facts that are openly and publicly provable is strange to say the least.

Ok. It was just a question.:eek:

I'm a supporter of Israel's right to exist and happy to say I'm a zionist so wondered what that means to people here. No talking to some people.

Wow. Hive mind? Nobody suggested such a thing...

Widdershins

ceadaoin. wrote: »

This guy thinks there is a pretty strong anti semitic element in left wing politics in the UK. Suppose he is wrong. And his wife who was threatened with rape , and all the other Jewish people or those who support them who were targeted. They are all wrong too. Just a coincidence.


https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/john-mann-mp-anti-semitism-and-how-labour-racists-threatened-my-wife-with-rape-1-9123392

Don't hold your breath for an acknowledgement of your link, from them. My experience of the UK Left is that Jews who complain are always 'wrong' and accused of trying to smear dear leader, Jeremy Corbyn. This also happened recently. https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-woman-said-kicked-in-the-face-while-protesting-uk-labour-anti-semitism/

Personally I feel JC did a lot to further antisemitism not least by bringing the term ''antizionism'' into common parlance and normalising it.

nullzero

Widdershins wrote: »

Ok. It was just a question.:eek:

I'm a supporter of Israel's right to exist and happy to say I'm a zionist so wondered what that means to people here. No talking to some people.

Wow. Hive mind? Nobody suggested such a thing...

I never said you had suggested anything, I simply used "hive mind" as something of my own invention to make a point.
Jesus, can you make it through one day without being shocked or outraged by something?

To be honest, to anyone in this day and age in the face of the brutal mistreatment of Palestinians by Israel to say that they are proud to be a Zionist is akin to saying that you were proud to support apartheid in South Africa in the 1980's, or proud to be a Nazi in 1940's Germany.
The right of the Jewish state to exist is a moot point by now, it does exist but its behaviour is that of a tyrannical regime, not that of a down trodden home for a persecuted minority.

Shame on you for your repeated misrepresentation of people on this thread and your accusations of anti semitism against anyone questioning the status quo in Israel. Not to mention your mind boggling inability to recognise the fact that Donald Trump is the most hawkish Zionist president in living memory.

You need a serious reality check.
No people deserve to be persecuted, be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Black or any religious persuasion or racial grouping.
Jews have been massively persecuted throughout history and that is a massive injustice, it does not however excuse the persecution of Palestinians by Israel (who incidentally does not represent all Jewish people).
If you're proud to be a Zionist in 2018 then you're either missing some important information or you actively relish the persecution of Palestinians in Israel, which is it?

Widdershins

nullzero wrote: »

I never said you had suggested anything, I simply used "hive mind" as something of my own invention to make a point.
Jesus, can you make it through one day without being shocked or outraged by something?

To be honest, to anyone in this day and age in the face of the brutal mistreatment of Palestinians by Israel to say that they are proud to be a Zionist is akin to saying that you were proud to support apartheid in South Africa in the 1980's, or proud to be a Nazi in 1940's Germany.
The right of the Jewish state to exist is a moot point by now, it does exist but its behaviour is that of a tyrannical regime, not that of a down trodden home for a persecuted minority.

Shame on you for your repeated misrepresentation of people on this thread and your accusations of anti semitism against anyone questioning the status quo in Israel. Not to mention your mind boggling inability to recognise the fact that Donald Trump is the most hawkish Zionist president in living memory.

You need a serious reality check.
No people deserve to be persecuted, be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Black or any religious persuasion or racial grouping.
Jews have been massively persecuted throughout history and that is a massive injustice, it does not however excuse the persecution of Palestinians by Israel (who incidentally does not represent all Jewish people).
If you're proud to be a Zionist in 2018 then you're either missing some important information or you actively relish the persecution of Palestinians in Israel, which is it?

I'm fine. I do find rudeness and long rants kind of mildly surprising but at least I manage to go through the day without screeching at people like you chaps do, so, I'm happy. Thanks for clarifying your views this time.

FatherTed

nullzero wrote: »

I never said you had suggested anything, I simply used "hive mind" as something of my own invention to make a point.
Jesus, can you make it through one day without being shocked or outraged by something?

To be honest, to anyone in this day and age in the face of the brutal mistreatment of Palestinians by Israel to say that they are proud to be a Zionist is akin to saying that you were proud to support apartheid in South Africa in the 1980's, or proud to be a Nazi in 1940's Germany.
The right of the Jewish state to exist is a moot point by now, it does exist but its behaviour is that of a tyrannical regime, not that of a down trodden home for a persecuted minority.

Shame on you for your repeated misrepresentation of people on this thread and your accusations of anti semitism against anyone questioning the status quo in Israel. Not to mention your mind boggling inability to recognise the fact that Donald Trump is the most hawkish Zionist president in living memory.

You need a serious reality check.
No people deserve to be persecuted, be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Black or any religious persuasion or racial grouping.
Jews have been massively persecuted throughout history and that is a massive injustice, it does not however excuse the persecution of Palestinians by Israel (who incidentally does not represent all Jewish people).
If you're proud to be a Zionist in 2018 then you're either missing some important information or you actively relish the persecution of Palestinians in Israel, which is it?

Can you be a supporter of Zionism and also be against the current Israeli government and their actions?

Widdershins

FatherTed wrote: »

Can you be a supporter of Zionism and also be against the current Israeli government and their actions?

Yes.:)

nullzero

Widdershins wrote: »

I'm fine. I do find rudeness and long rants kind of mildly surprising but at least I manage to go through the day without screeching at people like you chaps do, so, I'm happy. Thanks for clarifying your views this time.

My views have been clear from the get go.
This attack was horrific and unjustified.
The notion that Trump is in some way responsible for it when he's a raging Zionist is idiotic.
Equating criticism of Israel with anti semitism is incorrect, inflammatory and libelous.

You are a Zionist, in this day and age that means you support the mistreatment of Palestinians in Israel.
To say you are a Zionist and don't support Israeli policies against Palestinians is to say you are in fact not a zionist which suggests you don't have the first notion about the subject you're not only discussing but professing some level of expertise in.