response 75 of 89:

Nov 13 11:46 UTC 2003

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=360041&displayTy
peCd=1&sideCd=1&contrassID=2

According to a poll "which appeared Monday in the respected Italian daily
Corriere della Sera": 

||  More than a sixth of the Italians surveyed said they thought it would
||  be best if Israel ceased to exist altogether, and fully 22 percent of
||  respondents said that Italian Jewish citizens "are not real Italians." 

100 years ago anti-semitism was such that Europeans were happy to see the
establishment of a Jewish homeland, a place to which Jews could go -- away
from them.

Today's anti-semites aren't even happy with the existence of a Jewish state
(though have no difficulty with Arab states, a French state, or touching
upon the religious rather than national element, Christian or Islamic states).
They don't Israel to exist and Jews should live there... but they sure
don't want them in their country.

One is sadly reminded that hitler's first choice was to deport Jews from
Germany and countries that he had conquered. When no one would take them,
in 1942 the "final solution" was devised.

response 77 of 89:

Nov 13 18:03 UTC 2003

So, Mr. tweneex, how does this "explain" European anti-semitism prior 
to the current situation?

(Answer:  They'll latch onto any excuse that appears convenient.)

response 79 of 89:

Nov 14 09:21 UTC 2003

Perhaps I haven't gotten to know you as well as I should, but I find #76
totally absurd and condoning racist logic.  Consider:

>I reckon much of the anti-Semitism in Europe has to due with Israel's conduct

I reckon much of the anti-black racism in America today has to do with
Zimbabwe's conduct....

or

I reckon much of the homophobia in America today has to do with those prissy
queens' conduct -- always flaunting their sexuality....

or

I reckon much of the anti-hispanic racism in America today has to do with
Mexico's involvement in the drug trade....

or even

I reckon much of the anti-muslim racism in America today has to do with
their involvement in terrorism....

Even assuming that Israel is "guilty" of the charges you don't even list,
what does that have to do with Italian, German, French or Chinese Jews?

I reckon much of the anti-Asian racism in America 20 years ago had to do
with Japan out-manufacturing America.  [Look up Vincent Chin.]

Should I be careful when I walk around town lest anyone know that I'm
Jewish and strike at me? Should observant Jews stay indoors after dark
lest they get beaten (as has happened in France and Germany)?

The PREJUDICE you describe above is WRONG.
Yet you not only rationalize it, you justify it!!

And it gets worse:

> To many, there's not really much difference between Hitler's treatment
> of the Jews and sharon's treatment of the Palestinians.

Really? In a few years, hitler murdered 6+ million Jews and an equal
number of other groups. But only Jews were marked for total eradication
and for the first (and hopefully last) time in history a "destruction
line" (as opposed to production or assembly line) was created to enable
this GENOCIDE.

Now here's a little secret.  The Palestinian Arabs during their intifada
(of their choice -- they were the aggressors who initiated violence and
they are the party who has refused to end the violence even whilst
pretending that they are its victim) are living as well as (if not
better than) German citizens in Germany did during World War II.
There were "checkpoints" at which papers had to be shown and often these
would need to be traversed to get from home to work. There were food
shortages, hunger and poverty.  War doees that. So does terrorism.
Germans also had to be careful that their enemies didn't use the situation
to their advantage. One could easily be accused of being a communist or
of hiding Jews (or even being Jewish) -- much as Palestinian Arabs fear
being labeled as "collaborators" (note, however, that in this sense it
is the terrorist groups who resemble the nazis).

I admit that the analogy is far from perfect, but I use it to illustrate
three things:

1. War/terrorism cause hardships

2. The hardshps endured by the Palestinian Arabs are typical for any
   population in the midst of a war or war-like situation.

3. There is NO SEMBLENCE WHATSOEVER between what Jews (and others)
   suffered at the hands of the nazis and what Palestinian Arabs
   suffer today.

Ironically, the real point of such false comparisons is usually to cast
Jews as nazis (not Arabs as Jews). Ponder the psychological motivations
behind such a warped comparison and ask if it isn't inherently anti-semitic.

And sure enough, you quickly leave the victim end of the equation:

> Remember, Hitler always portrayed his anti-Semitic actions as an attempt to
> save the German people.

See?

> It's fashionable to assume he was lying and just wanted rid of them

It's not "fashionable". It's FACTUAL.
Jews didn't stab Germany in the back in WW I.
Jews didn't own a disproportionate amount of wealth or power.
And hopefully I needn't discredit nazi concepts of racial purity.


> I don't see why people have to defend the Israelis *for their present
racist actions*, such as Building a "Berlin Wall" around Palestine.

That's your example of "racism"? A FENCE built to keep OUT terrorists?
(Not to keep people IN, as in East Berlin.)  Of course, no wall is being
built "around Palestine". Only on the border between a prospective
PA state and Israel.

> It is right and proper that they should receive a cedrtain amount of
protection given the history of the Holocaust,

I disagree. The Holocaust is history. All I ask is that its lessons not be
forgotten so quickly and that it not be made a mockery by false attempts
to equate its victims with their tormentors.

> but to allow them to dominate and attempt to subjugate another ethnic group

Who has done so and where? Since 1937, Israel (and the Jewish Agency before
it) has accepted the two-state solution formula, such that neither ethnic
group would be ruled, "dominated" nor "subjugated" by the other. The Arabs
refused then and many still do today.

> makes a mockery of the creation of the modern state of Israel.

Israel provides equal protection under the law for all its citizens,
regardless of their ethnic or religious background. (Arabs were made full
citizens in 1951, a decade prior to the civil rights movement in the US.)

> Sharon was democratically elected by the majority.

And this happened AFTER the start of the intifada and AFTER modern European
anti-semitism was in place.

Do you know something about the space-time continuum that we don't -- such
that causality can be violated and the reaction can be said to produce the
cause?

> [Sharon]'s gone too far in this Knesset.

(That's like saying that "Bush's gone too far in this Congress.")

Evidently you believe that Sharon is evil and are attempting to demonize him.
Yet you've not shown that his actions are evil (or even go "too far").
Evidently you simply believe that Sharon is evil, and thus anything he does
is evil.  (A circular reversal of causality.  Assume Sharon is evil. Thus
what he does is evil. Therefore he's evil....)

Why don't you tell us what he's done that's "too far"?

Keep in mind that the concept of a security fence predates his Prime
Ministership. Such fences already separate Israel from Lebanon (which is why
there have not been successfull Hezbollah infiltrations across the border;
they're relegated to firing anti-aircraft weapons as artillery) and between
Israel and Gaza (which is why no suicide bombers have managed to attack Israel
from Gaza).

response 81 of 89:

Nov 14 12:05 UTC 2003

Thankyou, willcome. I'll reply to the much longer response
#79 when I have a little more time.

response 83 of 89:

Nov 15 11:28 UTC 2003

I'd blame it on all of 'em.

response 85 of 89:

Nov 16 05:04 UTC 2003

05:04   Turkish news website: police arrest two men, one woman in
        connection with Istanbul synagogue bombings 

Just to emphasize, even under the so-called "occupation", with the horrible
implications that this conjures (but does not imply), only 11,000 people in
Gaza required food hand-outs from UNRWA. Following 3 years of Arafat's
current war, that number skyrocketed by a factor of 65x. These additional
704,000 people didn't need food assistance because of the "occupation" but
because of the violence initiated by Arafat.

Just think. Had Arafat been interested in a negotiated settlement, a
Palestinian Arab state would now be celebrating its 3rd anniversary
rather than 3 years of violence.  Just as had the Arab High Command
(as the Palestinian Arab leadership was called back in 1948, before
these Arabs were termed "Palestinians") agreed to the 1947 UN peace
plan there would have been no wars and the Arab state would be
celebrating it's 56th anniversary next year.

response 87 of 89:

Nov 16 19:45 UTC 2003

Right, tsty, that's a cogent and complete explanation of how one might
operate:  With the single goal to destroy e\/erything.

I wonder if senility set in after your bizzare typing style did.

response 89 of 89:

Nov 27 08:11 UTC 2003

whore.