Being Leftist and Anti-Semitic in Germany - Susanne Urban

Of course, this then carried over from Europe to the U.S. I pretty much despise the 'New Left' because of their coziness with neo-Nazis and blatant antisemitism, and find the beautification of Saint Pancake, AKA Rachel Corrie, disgusting as well.

In any case, the younger people here who consider themselves 'progressives', 'leftists', or whatever, you really need to look into why the Talking Heads of your wing are so doctrinaire and bigoted toward Israelis. Avoid blind acceptance of whatever the 'Alternative Press' puts out and not just be gullible little fashion victims of the Fashionably Progressive; the latter have more than their share of sociopaths, and are even more agenda-driven and manipulative than corporate media. And, it's okay to point out that Noam Chomsky is full of shit; he's not a God,( Really! He isn't! No Shit!) or even particularly well informed when it comes to politics. See his ludicrous defense of Pol Pot for almost a decade after it was decisively proven Pot was a mass murderer.

__________________
"The real question of life after death isn't whether or not it exists, but even if it does, what problems this really solves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

"A day without sunshine is, you know, night."- Shannon

As an introduction to how people can be manipulated, by the 'Left', the 'Right', or any other ideology, familiarize yourself with Antonio Gramsci, and read some of his writings on 'cultural hegenomy'. His strategies are being used on you, and you likely aren't even aware of it.

Antonio Gramsci - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

__________________
"The real question of life after death isn't whether or not it exists, but even if it does, what problems this really solves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

"A day without sunshine is, you know, night."- Shannon

Shouldn't this be in the "Historic" section?
There is not much left of this in modern time... at least that's the feeling I have...


And I dunno of these "Leftists" are Anti-Semitic just because they are Pro-Palestinian?...
First Palestinians & Arabs are Semites aswell... shocking isn't it...

Second:
The state of Israel is not a race... so crtisism of Israel should not be labled as racism since that is suggesting that Israel is a Jewish Supremacist nation..

I think that the right of existance for the palestine people (not the militias but the civilians) is often overlooked...


My position on Israel is:
They have the upper hand and moral & logic dictates that they have to be the ones that give the impulses for a working peace...
But what I see are phony peace offers that always require that all irrational militiant organisation cease all violence, while at the same time the construction/protection of settlements is being continued => this means that Israel does not only not accept the right of existance of a Palestine state... it is also activly expanding into the territory of that not existing state....
Israel should stop negotiating with "terrorists" (and when a peace deal requires that terrorists stop all activities, that is negotiating with terrorists) and they should negotiate with the palestine people, despite disruptions by extremists...

I think Israel does not do this because of inner politics... they are a meltingpot of different cultures and have a serious social problems and with Israeli radical extremists... if the settlement policy would be stopped and reversed, Israel would be confronted with a horrible inner conflict that would be more dangerous for Israels existance than all militant arabs in the world...

I am just sad for all the normal people in the conflict... Palestinians & Israelis alike... both sides are in the hand of extremists and both build a horrible future for their kids

EDIT:
Is this view of the world anti-semitic or radical? I doubt it...

__________________

I wonder if the laughter over this post would be considered as anti-Semitic or not.

I really wasn't sure where to put it, but since it has modern relevance and given the number of posts on Israel I decide it still fell under 'current events' and antisemitism is a major factor in virtually every UNGA voting.

Antisemitism is on the rise in Europe, and is a major propaganda feature on Arab television, Iranian foreign policy, and the major platform in Hamas' charter, not to mention being Hezbollah's main pretence for existence.


The vast bulk of their criticisms are rooted in it, almost exclusively one-sided, almost no criticism of terrorist violations of the Geneva Convention, a complete repudiation of Israel's right to defend itself, and they contribute to terrorist fronts, disseminate terrorist propaganda, and do everything possible to make the tactic of using children as human shields a very, very successful propaganda tool, the reason this despicable policy is still going on to this day. They need to realize their support is getting children killed; well, at least those who really do care. Most obviously don't; it just wouldn't be fashionable to do anything to stop this practice among the 'freedom fighters' ...

This is an old and very lame attempt at distortion and semantics. The word antisemitism, or anti-semitism if you prefer, was coined specifically to apply to prejudice and hate toward Jews, and that is the correct usage.

Second:
I didn't say anywhere they were race. But, they are considered a race by neo-Nazis. They are a definite ethnic group, regardless of whether they are religious or not. Mein KAmpf is a perennial best seller in the ME.

Nobody is overlooking them; the British created a two-state solution for them when they divided the Mandate and created Jordan out over 80% of the land.They didn't become 'palestinians' until 1964, they aren't a 'people', rather a mix of migrants from Egypt, Syria, and elsewhere. And, it was they who voted in Hamas in Gaza, in what everybody agreed was a free and fair election, so they have no excuse for whining; they voted for genocide and terrorism by their own hand.


Which they do; the last Intifada was kicked off by Arafat, after a demand that his books be open to examination; he refused, it came out he had over a billion dollars stashed overseas, and Abbas ordered an investigation into his corruption. The PLO and Hamas have rejected every effort at peace; they have do financial interest in it. They're doing just fine extorting aid and funds and infrastructure from the West They're racketeers and extortionists, not 'freedom fighters'.

this makes no sense. Israel should not defend itself, make all these unilateral peace agreements, and then the Hamas and PLO should still be able to attack them? Okay ...

The West Bank and Gaza are not, nor were they ever, closed to Jewish settlement; they are not magical Jew Free Zones. 'Expanding is hardly the right word, resettling is the accurate term. Jordan illegally annexed the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem after they and their allies waged a genocidal war on Israel in 1947-48, an attack condemned by the UN. See Resolution 181.

Israel has offered to accept the two-state solution; the PA refused, Hamas refuses to even recognize Israel and doesn't negotiate with them. They both like the status quo.
...
This makes no sense, either. Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza, they got over 80% of the vote in Gaza. The PA has observer status at the UN, and is recognized as the government of these 'palestinian people'. Hamas and the PA went to war with each other. How is Israel responsible for that? You're saying Israel should make peace but the 'palestinians' shouldn't be required to. Fat chance.

Israel is not being run by 'extremist radicals'.

Jews have every right to settle in the West Bank and Gaza; the idea that they don't is a prime example of racist thinking at work. Jordan and 'palestinians' massacred many and drove Jews out of the West Bank in 1947.
The people who are having the problems with 'diversity' and getting along with their neighbors are the 'palestinians'. The West Bank and Gaza havve never been designated by anybody as 'Jew Free Zones' except by the Arabs living there.



Yes, it is, and it is this bizarre outlook that people serious about peace in the region over fashion and hyperbole need to break free from agenda driven manipulation that leads to more death and genocidal states.

__________________
"The real question of life after death isn't whether or not it exists, but even if it does, what problems this really solves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

"A day without sunshine is, you know, night."- Shannon

In your case, most definitely ...

__________________
"The real question of life after death isn't whether or not it exists, but even if it does, what problems this really solves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

"A day without sunshine is, you know, night."- Shannon

Says St. Fruitcake, as he tries to dredge up the specter of anti-Semitism.

Boo!

__________________
Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush?

--Hunter S. Thompson

Part 1 of my response:

Oh really...

Every time Israel comes under international pressure, as it did recently because of the war crimes committed in Lebanon, it steps up the claim of anti-Semitism, and all of Israel's critics are anti-Semitic. 1974, the ADL, the Anti-Defamation League, puts out a book called The New Anti-Semitism. 1981, the Anti-Defamation League puts out a book, The New Anti-Semitism. And then, again in 2000, Abraham Foxman and people like Phyllis Chesler, they put out these books called The New Anti-Semitism. So the use of the charge "anti-Semitism" is pretty conventional whenever Israel comes under attack, and frankly it has no content whatsoever nowadays.... What does the evidence show? There has been good investigation done, serious investigation. All the evidence shows there's no—there's no evidence at all for a rise of a new anti-Semitism, whether in Europe or in North America. The evidence is zero. And, in fact, there's a new book put out by an Israel stalwart. His name is Walter Laqueur, a very prominent scholar. It's called The Changing Face of Anti-Semitism. It just came out, 2006, from Oxford University Press. He looks at the evidence, and he says no. There's some in Europe among the Muslim community, there's some anti-Semitism, but the notion that in the heart of European society or North American society there's anti-Semitism is preposterous - Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein on "Democracy Now"

To quote International Court of Justice Ad Hoc Judge Dr. John Dugard:

4. Terrorism is a scourge, a serious violation of human rights and international humanitarian law. No attempt is made in the reports to minimize the pain and suffering it causes to victims, their families and the broader community. Palestinians are guilty of terrorizing innocent Israeli civilians by means of suicide bombs and Qassam rockets. Likewise the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) are guilty of terrorizing innocent Palestinian civilians by military incursions, targeted killings and sonic booms that fail to distinguish between military targets and civilians. All these acts must be condemned and have been condemned.3 Common sense, however, dictates that a distinction must be drawn between acts of mindless terror, such as acts committed by Al Qaeda, and acts committed in the course of a war of national liberation against colonialism, apartheid or military occupation. While such acts cannot be justified, they must be understood as being a painful but inevitable consequence of colonialism, apartheid or occupation. History is replete with examples of military occupation that have been resisted by violence - acts of terror. The German occupation was resisted by many European countries in the Second World War; the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) resisted South Africa's occupation of Namibia; and Jewish groups resisted British occupation of Palestine - inter alia, by the blowing up of the King David Hotel in 1946 with heavy loss of life, by a group masterminded by Menachem Begin, who later became Prime Minister of Israel. Acts of terror against military occupation must be seen in historical context. This is why every effort should be made to bring the occupation to a speedy end. U ntil this is done peace cannot be expected, and violence will continue. In other situations, for example Namibia, peace has been achieved by the ending of occupation, without setting the end of resistance as a precondition. Israel cannot expect perfect peace and the end of violence as a precondition for the ending of the occupation.

5. A further comment on terrorism is called for. In the present international climate it is easy for a State to justify its repressive measures as a response to terrorism - and to expect a sympathetic hearing. Israel exploits the present international fear of terrorism to the full. But this will not solve the Palestinian problem. Israel must address the occupation and the violation of human rights and international humanitarian law it engenders, and not invoke the justification of terrorism as a distraction, as a pretext for failure to confront the root cause of Palestinian violence - the occupation.

A/HRC/7/17 of 21 January 2008

I would not use the term "country" but Edward Said sums up the reality quite nicely...

“Palestine became a predominately Arab and Islamic country by the end of the seventh century. Almost immediately thereafter its boundaries and its characteristics — including its name in Arabic, Filastin — became known to the entire Islamic world, as much for its fertility and beauty as for its religious significance...In 1516, Palestine became a province of the Ottoman Empire, but this made it no less fertile, no less Arab or Islamic...Sixty percent of the population was in agriculture; the balance was divided between townspeople and a relatively small nomadic group. All these people believed themselves to belong in a land called Palestine, despite their feelings that they were also members of a large Arab nation...Despite the steady arrival in Palestine of Jewish colonists after 1882, it is important to realize that not until the few weeks immediately preceding the establishment of Israel in the spring of 1948 was there ever anything other than a huge Arab majority. For example, the Jewish population in 1931 was 174,606 against a total of 1,033,314.” - Edward Said, “The Question of Palestine” via "If Americans Knew"

From Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein:

Although an economic boycott can be justified on moral grounds, the question remains whether diplomacy might be more effectively employed instead. The documentary record in this regard, however, is not encouraging. The basic terms for resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict are embodied in U.N. resolution 242 and subsequent U.N. resolutions, which call for a full Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza and the establishment of a Palestinian state in these areas in exchange for recognition of Israel's right to live in peace and security with its neighbors. Each year the overwhelming majority of member States of the United Nations vote in favor of this two-state settlement, and each year Israel and the United States (and a few South Pacific islands) oppose it. Similarly, in March 2002 all twenty-two member States of the Arab League proposed this two-state settlement as well as "normal relations with Israel." Israel ignored the proposal.

Not only has Israel stubbornly rejected this two-state settlement, but the policies it is currently pursuing will abort any possibility of a viable Palestinian state. While world attention has been riveted by Israel's redeployment from Gaza, Sara Roy of Harvard University observes that the "Gaza Disengagement Plan is, at heart, an instrument for Israel's continued annexation of West Bank land and the physical integration of that land into Israel." In particular Israel has been constructing a wall deep inside the West Bank that will annex the most productive land and water resources as well as East Jerusalem, the center of Palestinian life. It will also effectively sever the West Bank in two. Although Israel initially claimed that it was building the wall to fight terrorism, the consensus among human rights organizations is that it is really a land grab to annex illegal Jewish settlements into Israel. Recently Israel's Justice Minister frankly acknowledged that the wall will serve as "the future border of the state of Israel."

The current policies of the Israeli government will lead either to endless bloodshed or the dismemberment of Palestine. "It remains virtually impossible to conceive of a Palestinian state without its capital in Jerusalem," the respected Crisis Group recently concluded, and accordingly Israeli policies in the West Bank "are at war with any viable two-state solution and will not bolster Israel's security; in fact, they will undermine it, weakening Palestinian pragmatists…and sowing the seeds of growing radicalization."

Norman G. Finkelstein: Why an Economic Boycott of Israel is Justified

Where do you get your history? Abraham Foxman? You are ignoring a few things such as the reason the Arab League entered Palestine; remember the 1947 Civil War? In addition the World Court declared the Jewish settlements to be illegal so your argument there is defeated; the settlements and the wall are meant to expand Israeli territory and displace Palestinians. This is very similar to Nazi Lebensraum in my view...

Dr. Norman Finkelstein does not share your view and the one time Israel did agree to such a solution it was so unjust the Palestinians had no choice but to reject it...

Gush Shalom: Barak's Generous Offers

Israel never made peace; to this day they control Gaza! From Dr. John Dugard:

III. THE OCCUPATION OF GAZA

9. In its Advisory Opinion on the construction of a wall in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the International Court of Justice was not asked to pronounce on the legal status of Gaza. It, possibly therefore, confined its reaffirmation of the occupied status of the Occupied Palestinian Territory to the West Bank and East Jerusalem.7 The evacuation of Israeli settlements and the withdrawal of the permanent IDF presence from Gaza in 2005, has now given rise to the argument that Gaza is no longer occupied territory. On 15 September 2005 Prime Minister Sharon told the General Assembly that Israel's withdrawal from Gaza meant the end of its responsibility for Gaza.

10. On 19 September 2007 Israel seemed to give a new status to Gaza when its Security Cabinet declared Gaza to be "hostile territory" - a characterization that was shortly afterwards approved by the United States Secretary of State. Although the legal implications that Israel intends to attach to this "status" remain unclear, the political purpose of this declaration was immediately made known - namely the reduction of the supply of fuel and electricity to Gaza.

11. The test for determining whether a territory is occupied under international law is effective control,8 and not the permanent physical presence of the occupying Power's military forces in the territory in question. Judged by this test it is clear that Israel remains the occupying Power as technological developments have made it possible for Israel to assert control over the people of Gaza without a permanent military presence.9 Israel's effective control is demonstrated by the following factors:

(a) Substantial control of Gaza's six land crossings: the Erez crossing is effectively closed to Palestinians wishing to cross to Israel or the West Bank. The Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza, which is regulated by the Agreement on Movement and Access entered into between Israel and the Palestinian Authority on 15 November 2005 (brokered by the United States, the European Union and the international community's envoy for the Israeli disengagement from Gaza), has been closed by Israel for lengthy periods since June 2006. The main crossing for goods at Karni is strictly controlled by Israel and since June 2006 this crossing too has been largely closed, with disastrous consequences for the Palestinian economy;

(b) Control through military incursions, rocket attacks and sonic booms: sections of Gaza have been declared "no-go" zones in which residents will be shot if they enter;

(c) Complete control of Gaza's airspace and territorial waters;

(d) Control of the Palestinian Population Registry: the definition of who is "Palestinian" and who is a resident of Gaza and the West Bank is controlled by the Israeli military. Even when the Rafah crossing is open, only holders of Palestinian identity cards can enter Gaza through the crossing; therefore control over the Palestinian Population Registry is also control over who may enter and leave Gaza. Since 2000, with few exceptions, Israel has not permitted additions to the Palestinian Population Registry.

The fact that Gaza remains occupied territory means that Israel's actions towards Gaza must be measured against the standards of international humanitarian law.

A/HRC/7/17 of 21 January 2008

Part 2 of my response:

The International Court of Justice ruled in July of 2004 that the Jewish settlements are indeed illegal under international law; you lost this position in 2004. According to Dr. John Dugard:

Jewish settlements in the West Bank are illegal. They violate article 49, paragraph 6, of the Fourth Geneva Convention and their illegality has been confirmed by the International Court of Justice in its advisory opinion on the Wall. Despite the illegality of settlements and the unanimous condemnation of settlements by the international community, the Government of Israel persists in allowing settlements to grow. Sometimes settlement expansion occurs openly and with the full approval of the Government. As recently as December 2006, the Israeli Government officially approved the building of a new settlement - Maskiot - in the northern Jordan Valley. More frequently, expansion takes place stealthily under the guise of "natural growth", which has resulted in Israeli settlements growing at an average rate of 5.5 per cent compared with the 1.7 per cent average growth rate in Israeli cities. Sometimes settlements expand unlawfully in terms of Israeli law, but no attempt is made to enforce the law. Outposts are frequently established and threats to remove them are not carried out. As a result of expansion, the settler population in the West Bank numbers some 260,000 persons and that of East Jerusalem nearly 200,000. As indicated above, the Wall is presently being built in both the West Bank and East Jerusalem to ensure that most settlements will be enclosed within the Wall. Moreover, the three major settlement blocks of Gush Etzion, Ma'aleh Adumim and Ariel will effectively divide Palestinian territory into cantons, thereby destroying the territorial integrity of Palestine.

A/HRC/4/17 of 29 January 2007

Now before you scream anti-semitism the President of the International Court of Justice was a Jewish woman named Cohen; she was a member of the Cohanim no less assuming this is her given name at birth.

Like many Zionists he presents Israel as the victim even though they are the belligerent military occupier. Does he think we are all stupid enough to believe his cries of persecution? Look at the following comment:

Israel is a state where a Jew cannot marry a gentile by law and a member of the Cohanim (Cohen priest class) cannot marry a Jew who has a gentile parent by rule of rabbinical law. This is done to maintain the purity of the race; as a matter of fact the Cohen line is indeed genetically unique due to this strict law of breeding.

This reminds me of 1943 Nazi Germany marriage laws for their elite SS officers and troops.

Ah, well, the propagandists have stopped by, and frantically hope to derail the thread with some fine examples of just what I was discussing.

Note one of the key tenets of Gramiscian policy: Always try to keep focus and debate completely one-sided, in the hopes of keeping the truth on hold by attempting to put your opponents constantly on the defensive.

Frank hopes to do that by avoiding the issue of antisemitism altogether, by introducing a whole raft of issues at once, rather than concede he's merely a Nazi apologist and his collection of arguments have been exploded over and over again since Willis Carto and his ilk began their little crusade in the 80's. Constant repetition is important, no matter how often your arguments are repudiated. Never deviate from the orthodoxy, and never allow any deviation to go unchallenged; require your people to accept it all completely.

__________________
"The real question of life after death isn't whether or not it exists, but even if it does, what problems this really solves." - Ludwig Wittgenstein

"A day without sunshine is, you know, night."- Shannon

In other words you are defeated and can do nothing but call me names?

There we go folks; Picaro knows he cannot debate me because I know applicable international law and history on the issue. I can debunk every myth he throws my way so he does what many Zionists do when unable to face the truth? He resorts to logical fallacy such as calling his opponents Nazi's...how original!

What a classless way of admitting defeat Picaro..,

P.S. Please do not report his posts; this is something all people should witness! This is sheer Zionist hate in action.

2nd P.S. Spotlight and the subsequent American Free Press rule Picaro!

What names would that be, Frank? ... You never addressed the topic of the thread, and you still haven't.

You're not debating anything. Your knowledge of international law, much less history, is yet to be demonstrated. Nobody is holding their breath waiting for these wondrous moments either.

You've never debunked anything. Spamming is not 'debate', nor is distorting history.

What logical fallacy would those be, exactly? Your tactics merely involve lying by omission, for the most part. Typing out huge quantities of it doesn't impress anyone.

Ah, yes, say nothing relevant, then pronounce 'victory' ...

What's to report? You do radio shows for VNN.

I suppose this is supposed to mean something ...

Whenever you fell like getting around to the topic, Frank; we can wait