Hugo Chavez, remdinding everyone that he hates Jews

[Hababi]

"Venezuelan Jews, long uneasy with the Chávez government's alliances with Iran and other Middle Eastern countries that espouse anti-Israel views, are concerned that the government is sponsoring anti-Semitism in this hemisphere, a prominent journalist said Tuesday.

''The situation we have now in Venezuela is that for the first time in modern history we have government-sponsored anti-Semitism in a Western country,'' said Sammy Eppel. ``That is why this is very dangerous, not just for the Jewish community in Venezuela but for the Jewish community as a whole.''

Among the examples offered by Eppel:

Venezuelan government intelligence services twice have raided the country's most important Jewish center in a vague, ultimately unsuccessful search for weapons. Publications of the government's cultural ministry run articles entitled ''the Jewish Question,'' along with a Jewish star superimposed over a swastika."


A PATTERN?

These examples, according to Eppel, an analyst and journalist who has written for El Universal and El Mundo, among other publications, are evidence of a pattern of official intimidation against the country's fast-dwindling Jewish population. Many of them have resettled in South Florida since President Hugo Chávez's rise.

About 30 people attended Eppel's presentation Tuesday, sponsored by the Anti-Defamation League at the Aventura Chabad. Many of the examples were excerpts from government-linked media.

One 2006 article in El Diario de Caracas debates whether it will be necessary to ''expel [the Jews] from the country.'' Another article in the Diario VEA accuses Jews of being involved in the murder of a government prosecutor.

The Anti-Defamation League has admonished the Venezuelan government for making the Jewish community a ``target for intimidation.''

''We have called on the Venezuelan government to cease their rhetoric and their intimidation of the Jewish community in Venezuela,'' said Andy Rosenkranz, the ADL's regional director for Florida. ``It's very poisonous anytime you have government-sanctioned anti-Semitism take root because it's a dangerous atmosphere for the Jewish community but it also shows the world kind of intimidation and instigation that the government is capable of displaying.''

AN ALLIANCE

Eppel drew connections between the anti-Semitism and Chavez's alliance with the Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also stridently critical of the United States. ''Chavez actually believes he is going to defeat capitalism and the U.S.,'' Eppel said.

Venezuela's Jewish community once numbered 30,000, but community leaders estimate that number has dropped dramatically during Chavez's tenure in power. Several recently arrived Venezuelan Jews attended Eppel's presentation and lamented the situation in the country.

''It's a very positive thing to get information on what's going down there with our Jewish community,'' said Aventura resident Steven Sznajderman, 59, a Venezuelan Jew who moved to South Florida a year ago. ``There haven't been physical attacks yet on [Jews] in Venezuela, but we have to be on the lookout.''


http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/venezuela/story/372170.html

[DBoons Ghost]

Wow! I actually have something in common with Hugo Chavez?

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

The only thing worse would be if the Jews ran their government like they do in America.

[Reaganista]

The situation we have now in Venezuela is that for the first time in modern history we have government-sponsored anti-Semitism in a Western country
ok wtf

[Valhall]

The only thing worse would be if the Jews ran their government like they do in America.

You, my friend, are an idiot. Jews are no more of an issue than Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, or any other religion.

And since when do Jews run the American government?

[GreyHam]

thats interesting, he was being praised on the news today for negotiating the release of 2 captives from FARC

very interesting...

[Against Miik!]

You, my friend, are an idiot. Jews are no more of an issue than Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, or any other religion.

And since when do Jews run the American government?

Jews do have a lot of power in American government, and culture for that matter. And it is kind of a problem at this time in history, because it hinders any progress we hope to make in the Middle East, unless you call an open invasion of every country over there (minus Saudi Arabia), progress.

[Valhall]

Jews do have a lot of power in American government, and culture for that matter. And it is kind of a problem at this time in history, because it hinders any progress we hope to make in the Middle East, unless you call an open invasion of every country over there (minus Saudi Arabia), progress.


Not any more than Christians do.


And Jews in the Middle East haven't taken nearly as much violent measure in the Middle East as Christians as Muslims have. Hell, Jews have probably the most peaceful history of all 3 religions.

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

Not any more than Christians do.


And Jews in the Middle East haven't taken nearly as much violent measure in the Middle East as Christians as Muslims have. Hell, Jews have probably the most peaceful history of all 3 religions.

When you make up such a small percent of the population, than it becomes significant. How do you explain this?

And Jews have a very strong connection to what was the U.S.S.R., so they have a fair share of violence on their part as well.

[Against Miik!]

Well not exactly. Many arab countries are anti semetic, or at least appear to be. So our support of Israel puts a bullseye on us. If we stopped supporting Israel, and just let them be, it wouldn't be like appeasing the enemy. It would be more like we don't need to give aid to a country whose military is among the most powerful in the world.

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

I agree.

[-1up!-]

Hell, Jews have probably the most peaceful history of all 3 religions.

Easily explained; they never had the numbers or power that both Christians and Muslims attained through history.

[Iskandar]

Jews have done their fair share of violence in the Palestine conflict.

[wartree]

Not any more than Christians do.


And Jews in the Middle East haven't taken nearly as much violent measure in the Middle East as Christians as Muslims have. Hell, Jews have probably the most peaceful history of all 3 religions.

thats because they are weak

[Hababi]

Well not exactly. Many arab countries are anti semetic, or at least appear to be.


Not appear to be, they are. Several teach the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

So our support of Israel puts a bullseye on us.


I guess that's the price of valuing freedom and democracy. Yeah, if we were a backwards Islamic state they wouldn't hate us.

If we stopped supporting Israel, and just let them be, it wouldn't be like appeasing the enemy. It would be more like we don't need to give aid to a country whose military is among the most powerful in the world.

One of the reasons they're so strong is that they have a good relationship with us. Abandoning our strategic and moral relationship with them would be an act of cowardice.


Jews have done their fair share of violence in the Palestine conflict.

not really. And, the Palestinians have done quite an unfair share of the violence. When Israel tries to come to the table to negotiate, Hamas has a bomb underneath the table.

[Iskandar]

Jews are the ones with the state, remember.

[Hababi]

thats because they are weak

not really.

There was a cult in Japan that was pretty small but still managed to release a sarin gas attack that killed a lot of people. Size doesn't matter. Culture does. Judaism has been a very positive force in the world for a long time.

[Iskandar]

So has Islam.

[Hababi]

So has Islam.

Islam has led to many great things in the world, particularly in educational advancement. But it has a long and very despicable history with slavery, which persisted long after Christianity as a whole found that the practice was repellent, and continues today in Sudan and Mauritania. And, violent, radical movements have been a significant part of the faith for a long time.

[Iskandar]

Islam has led to many great things in the world, particularly in educational advancement. But it has a long and very despicable history with slavery, which persisted long after Christianity as a whole found that the practice was repellent, and continues today in Sudan and Mauritania. And, violent, radical movements have been a significant part of the faith for a long time.It's done no worse than Christianity, and Judaism would have done the same if it had had the numbers and influence.

All religions have dirty laundry.

[Hababi]

It's done no worse than Christianity,


The point is that it has. Christianity came out in force against slavery more than 150 years ago. Islam did not. Slavery is still practiced in some Muslim lands.

Islam has given birth to several significant violent sects just in the last two hundred years. Christianity has not.


All religions have dirty laundry.

But they don't have an equal load.

[Iskandar]

The point is that it has. Christianity came out in force against slavery more than 150 years ago. Islam did not. Slavery is still practiced in some Muslim lands.In the most backwards, underdeveloped Muslim lands. And I find the link between slavery and religion questionable. Islam doesn't go out of its way to encourage slavery.

Islam has given birth to several significant violent sects just in the last two hundred years. Christianity has not.You never consider why this might be.

Why do you think this is so?

[Hababi]

In the most backwards, underdeveloped Muslim lands.

Even in the most backwards, underdeveloped Christian lands (no West Virginia joke), slavery is part of the past. The distant past.


And I find the link between slavery and religion questionable. Islam doesn't go out of its way to encourage slavery.


Mohammad had slaves. Jesus didn't. Paul preached a message of equality.


Christians mainly live in the developed West.
How can you be so blind
Now you're going to bring up Christian Africa. I know it.

If you know it then you shouldn't have even brought it up. Slavery was most prevalent and persistent in Muslim African lands.

[Iskandar]

Mohammad had slaves. Jesus didn't. Paul preached a message of equality.That's part of the distant past.

None of this has anything to do with whether slavery is an integral part of Islam (hint: it's not).

[Hababi]

That's part of the distant past.

None of this has anything to do with whether slavery is an integral part of Islam (hint: it's not).

what do you mean by 'integral part'?

And, hatred of Jews is an integral part for a whole lot of Muslims, a bond they share with Hugo.

[Iskandar]

what do you mean by 'integral part'?

And, hatred of Jews is an integral part for a whole lot of Muslims, a bond they share with Hugo.Meaning if slavery is necessarily a part of Islam, which it obviously isn't.

Similarly, there is no reason why Muslims must have conflict with Jews.

[Valhall]

All religions have dirty laundry.

Which is exactly why I don't understand why people would specifically single out Judaism...I think it's just an excuse to hate a minority.

Nobody that has a distaste for Jews, complains about thier "heavy" involvement in American politics, or targets them in any way has ever shown me sufficient evidence thereof, or proof that it's moreso than any other religion.

And, tbqh, if I was a Jewish nation completely surrounded by Islamic nation that have shown no regret, remorse, or intention of not being hostile, I would have a rather powerful military and an alliance with the U.S. as well. Most of Israel's actions are justified. Most.



Similarly, there is no reason why Muslims must have conflict with Jews.

Yet they (Islamic nations) insist on it, which confuses me.

[Hababi]

Meaning if slavery is necessarily a part of Islam, which it obviously isn't.

Of course slavery isn't a necessary part of Islam. But it recieves a lot different treatment, and has a much different historical record in the last 200 years, than Christianity and Judaism.


Similarly, there is no reason why Muslims must have conflict with Jews.

Once again, the point is that for many Muslims, it is their religions teachings that Jews are evil.

There's absolutely no reason why people should have been burned at the stake, in Christianity. That doesn't change the fact that people were. But that's ancient history.

[Iskandar]

I don't think you understand the conflict, then.

Israel is on land the Muslims traditionally held, and value for religious reasons. Same goes for the Jews, it's their homeland. Add in a couple million Palestinians living in refugee camps and there's your conflict.
Islamic nation that have shown no regret, remorse, or intention of not being hostile,The Arab world has adopted a far more conciliatory attitude to Israel in modern times.
Once again, the point is that for many Muslims, it is their religions teachings that Jews are evil.Do you think Islam teaches that Jews are evil?

[Hababi]

I don't think you understand the conflict, then.

Israel is on land the Muslims traditionally held, and value for religious reasons. Same goes for the Jews, it's their homeland. Add in a couple million Palestinians living in refugee camps and there's your conflict.

The Muslim objection is to a Jewish state.


The Arab world has adopted a far more conciliatory attitude to Israel in modern times.


Erm, Jews can not gain citizenship, or even own land, in many Muslim nations. Jews are treated little better by Islamic governments today than they were 500 years ago.


Do you think Islam teaches that Jews are evil?

You talk about Islam as a cohesive whole. Many prominent Islamic leaders do.

[Iskandar]

The Muslim objection is to a Jewish state.Naturally.

I don't doubt Jews would object to a Muslim state in Palestine.
Erm, Jews can not gain citizenship, or even own land, in many Muslim nations. Jews are treated little better by Islamic governments today than they were 500 years ago.I said Israel, not Jews.

[Hababi]

Naturally.

I don't doubt Jews would object to a Muslim state in Palestine.

They're objecting to it so much that they're trying to get a stable one created.:amaze:


I said Israel, not Jews.

How many of them even recognize the state of Israel?

Are they going to war? Not directly, no. They have Hamas and PLO for that.

[Iskandar]

They're objecting to it so much that they're trying to get a stable one created.:amaze: An Arab state in part of Palestine isn't the same as a Muslim state in all of Palestine.

Don't be a fool.

[Hababi]

An Arab state in part of Palestine isn't the same as a Muslim state in all of Palestine.

Don't be a fool.

Ok now you're comparing apples and oranges.

[Against Miik!]

I think if America is so worried about the future of Israel, we should doctor some religious texts so that they say the Jewish holy land is actually in Wyoming. They can have Wyoming, all of it. Then, even if terrorists attack Wyoming, we can't just be like, meh, its only Wyoming.

[Valhall]

I think if America is so worried about the future of Israel, we should doctor some religious texts so that they say the Jewish holy land is actually in Wyoming. They can have Wyoming, all of it. Then, even if terrorists attack Wyoming, we can't just be like, meh, its only Wyoming.

I'm not in support of bringing an attack upon on my home state, thank you....

[Smokey D]

not really.

There was a cult in Japan that was pretty small but still managed to release a sarin gas attack that killed a lot of people. Size doesn't matter. Culture does. Judaism has been a very positive force in the world for a long time.

Comparing Aum Shirinko to the violence committed by Jews in the past is retarded.

And the level of violence committed by a religion is strongly correlated to the connections between political establishment and the religion. Christianity was peaceful until it co-opted the Roman state. Jews were peaceful when politically dispossessed, but have histories of violence before and after that dispossession.

Also, Jews are considered people of the book and all that, meaning imposition of Islam by force is illegal in Islamic jurisprudence and they are destined to share in paradise.

[Mr. Ron]

Is this another "jews can do no wrong" thread by Steve?

[Iskandar]

Is this another "jews can do no wrong" thread by Steve?No, but it could become one if we're not careful.

[Futue te Ipsum]

The difference between jewish voting styles and the actions of the jewish lobby in america has always appeared weird to me. They appear to be going in vastly different directions to each other.

[YDtoad]

Comparing Aum Shirinko to the violence committed by Jews in the past is retarded.

And the level of violence committed by a religion is strongly correlated to the connections between political establishment and the religion. Christianity was peaceful until it co-opted the Roman state. Jews were peaceful when politically dispossessed, but have histories of violence before and after that dispossession.

Also, Jews are considered people of the book and all that, meaning imposition of Islam by force is illegal in Islamic jurisprudence and they are destined to share in paradise.

But you're ignoring the violent Islamic movements (eg Wahabi) who set out to make themselves political establishments. Not because they were being treated poorly by the authorities, unlike the Jews who formed the revolt of the Maccabees after extremely bad treatment, but rather because their reading of the Koran called for violence.

And, in regards to Islamic teaching, these are some of the scriptures that the anti-Jewish forces in Islamic areas use:
# Ignominy shall be their portion [the Jews'] wheresoever they are found... They have incurred anger from their Lord, and wretchedness is laid upon them... because they disbelieve the revelations of Allah and slew the Prophets wrongfully... because they were rebellious and used to transgress.3

# And thou wilt find them [the Jews] the greediest of mankind....4

# Evil is that for which they sell their souls... For disbelievers is a terrible doom.5

# Taste ye [Jews] the punishment of burning.6

# Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment.7

# Because of the wrongdoing of the Jews.... And of their taking usury ... and of their devouring people's wealth by false pretenses. We have prepared for those of them who disbelieve a painful doom.8

# Allah hath cursed them [the Jews] for their disbelief.9

# They [the Jews] will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is clear from what they say, but more violent is the hatred which their breasts conceal.10

# In truth the disbelievers are an open enemy to you.11

# And thou seest [Jews and Christians] vying one with another in sin and transgression and their devouring of illicit gain. Verily evil is what they do. Why do not the rabbis and the priests forbid their evilspeaking and their devouring of illicit gain? .... evil is their handiwork.12

# O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and Christians for friends.13

# The most vehement of mankind in hostility [are] the Jews and the idolators.14

# Fight against such of those [Jews and Christians] ... until they pay for the tribute readily, being brought low.15

# Allah fighteth against them [the Jews]. How perverse they are!16

# Believers, many are the rabbis and the monks who defraud men of their possessions... Proclaim a woeful punishment to those that hoard up gold and silver and do not spend it in Allah's cause.... their treasures shall be heated in the fire of Hell.... 17

# They [the Jews] spread evil in the land .... 18

# [The Jews] knowingly perverted [the word of Allah], know of nothing except lies ... commit evil and become engrossed in sin.19

3. Surah 111, v. 112, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran, an explanatory translation by
Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall (New York: Mentor Books, 1953). Also see The Koran, trans. with notes by N.J. Dawood (England: Penguin Books, rev. ed, 19 8 1), in which the translations are listed chronologically rather than by surah number, clearly illustrating that the anti-Jewish and anti-Christian implorations were introduced after Jews and Christians had refused to embrace Islam above their own religion. The themes illustrated in the text also are frequently reiterated with slight variations.

4. Surah 11, v. 96, ibid.

5. Surah II, v. 90, ibid.

6. Surah III, v. 18 1, ibid., referring to the Jews of Medina. Two examples of the frequent
variation on this theme in the Koran:

Surah IX, v. 35: "Proclaim a woeful punishment to those that hoard up gold and silver.... Their treasures shall be heated in the dres of Hell, and their foreheads, sides and backs branded with them. . . . 'Taste then the punishment which is your due.",

Surah 111, v. 117-120: "They [the Jews] are the heirs of Hell.... They will spare no pains to corrupt you. They desire nothing but your ruin. Their hatred is clear from what they say ... When evil befalls you they rejoice." Ibid.

7. Surah IV, v. 56, ibid.

8. Surah IV, v. 160, 161, ibid.

9. Surah IV, v. 46, ibid.

10. Surah III, v. 117-120, Dawood trans.

11. Surah IV, v. 101, Pickthall trans.

12. Surah V, v. 62, 63, ibid.

13. Surah V, v. 51, ibid.

14. Surah V, v. 82, ibid.

15. Surah IX, v. 29, ibid.

16. Surah IX, v. 30, ibid.

17. Surah IX, v. 26-34, Dawood trans.

18. Surah V, v. 62-66, ibid.

19. Surah II, v. 71-85, ibid.

[Reaganista]

if i wanted to i could post a bunch of bible verses with [the jews] added in

[YDtoad]

if i wanted to i could post a bunch of bible verses with [the jews] added in

There's one controversial verse in one of the gospels, but that's about it.

[Cain]

Islam has led to many great things in the world, particularly in educational advancement. But it has a long and very despicable history with slavery, which persisted long after Christianity as a whole found that the practice was repellent, and continues today in Sudan and Mauritania. And, violent, radical movements have been a significant part of the faith for a long time.

just fyi we only kicked out slavery 150-odd years ago

not a long time

and imperialism, which the western world practiced as a whole until just 60-odd years ago, is really just another kind of cultural enslavement, and directly responsible for much of the third world's cultural gap with the rest of the world

imperialism proves its own doctrine correct by interrupting the ability of another country's culture to develop naturally, so that the cultural value systems get confused and the population of ex-colonies, newly independent, pine for the idea of prosperity western countries implanted and yet also feel compelled to utterly reject western values due to cultural identity crisis. this is one of the ways in which extremism is bred. i'm not one of those proponents of the noble savage idea, but islam was never a problem until western countries decided that arab culture made no sense and set out to reimagine it by western standards

unless of course you count the fact that islam allowed for such cultural and intellectual prosperity in the middle ages compared to the endlessly warring and stupid christians that europe was in danger of being converted en masse as a problem

and lastly, not every single cultural movement or idea can be reduced to religious practice. this is especially the case in arab nations.

[EinzingerIsGod]

and imperialism, which the western world practiced as a whole until just 60-odd years ago, is really just another kind of cultural enslavement, and directly responsible for much of the third world's cultural gap with the rest of the world

This. Slavery is still perpetrated by people of all faiths in the developed world against third world nations using disguised methods.

[Iskandar]

Posting random verses from the Qur'an isn't an argument.

[gregulus]

Posting random verses from the Qur'an isn't an argument.

[the Jews]

[Iskandar]

Lol.

[Hababi]

Posting random verses from the Qur'an isn't an argument.

They're not random. They show the foundation for which the anti-Jewish forces in Muslim nations take their inspiration.

[Cain]

First of all, you can't take little bits of the Quran and point to individual verses as "look look see here i've found the secret to muslim anti-semitism" because everything in the Quran becomes meaningless when taken in isolation rather than with the whole body of the rest of the work. It is not written in a chronological or "sensible" fashion by Western standards but rather through a series of revelations that were gradually given to Muhammad over a long period of time by God. Several of the revelations are self-contradictory at first glance, and many of the earlier ones (i.e. the ones given to Muhammad early in his "prophethood") gain further meaning through later ones.

It's not like the Bible, so pointing to verses the way you would to point things out for a Christian is much less firm grounds for analysis of what the Quran says. No offense but I doubt you have a magnificent and deep understanding of the Arab mind or culture, as I do not in the slightest and yet at least I know that many Westerners have an utterly superficial understanding of the Quran because they look at it through their own sphere of understanding, which uses the Bible as its standard reference point for any kind of "holy book." This has ALWAYS been the imperialist way to observe other cultures, and is the way you're observing this stuff now.

Also, Arabic is a notoriously difficult language to translate, and most Arab scholars of the Quran have long maintained that the poetry and divine presence the words of the Quran exude for them in Arabic is utterly lost when translated to another language. They feel as though they are reading a different book entirely when they read it in English, for example. Because Arab words can have multiple meanings in different contexts, and the etymology of the words are so convoluted, it's very poor form to snag English-translated verses from it that you probably got from a radical pro-Israel, anti-Arab website as proof of your case.

[Hababi]

First of all, you can't take little bits of the Quran and point to individual verses as "look look see here i've found the secret to muslim anti-semitism" because everything in the Quran becomes meaningless when taken in isolation rather than with the whole body of the rest of the work. It is not written in a chronological or "sensible" fashion by Western standards but rather through a series of revelations that were gradually given to Muhammad over a long period of time by God. Several of the revelations are self-contradictory at first glance, and many of the earlier ones (i.e. the ones given to Muhammad early in his "prophethood") gain further meaning through later ones.

It's not like the Bible, so pointing to verses the way you would to point things out for a Christian is much less firm grounds for analysis of what the Quran says. No offense but I doubt you have a magnificent and deep understanding of the Arab mind or culture, as I do not in the slightest and yet at least I know that many Westerners have an utterly superficial understanding of the Quran because they look at it through their own sphere of understanding, which uses the Bible as its standard reference point for any kind of "holy book." This has ALWAYS been the imperialist way to observe other cultures, and is the way you're observing this stuff now.

Also, Arabic is a notoriously difficult language to translate, and most Arab scholars of the Quran have long maintained that the poetry and divine presence the words of the Quran exude for them in Arabic is utterly lost when translated to another language. They feel as though they are reading a different book entirely when they read it in English, for example. Because Arab words can have multiple meanings in different contexts, and the etymology of the words are so convoluted, it's very poor form to snag English-translated verses from it that you probably got from a radical pro-Israel, anti-Arab website as proof of your case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_antisemitism#Jews

[Cain]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_antisemitism#Jews

lol even better

i think that for an analysis of a deeply complex issue you would have some sort of background deeper than an online encyclopedia.

wikipedia's great for general information about stuff you don't know anything about (i can see why you're using it, therefore), but it's not so great for this kind of thing.

please respond to my post in the meantime. my sources are all books ftr

[Hababi]

lol even better

i think that for an analysis of a deeply complex issue you would have some sort of background deeper than an online encyclopedia.

wikipedia's great for general information about stuff you don't know anything about (i can see why you're using it, therefore), but it's not so great for this kind of thing.

please respond to my post in the meantime. my sources are all books ftr

yeah ummm thanks for continuing to be intellectually dishonest.

[Cain]

yeah ummm thanks for continuing to be intellectually dishonest.

Look, can you talk about my points or not? My only point is that if this were a research paper wikipedia would be the last thing I would cite. That should be the standard for any kind of research based argument, especially one about Muslim anti-semitism, no matter where it takes place.

[Hababi]

Look, can you talk about my points or not? My only point is that if this were a research paper wikipedia would be the last thing I would cite. That should be the standard for any kind of research based argument, especially one about Muslim anti-semitism, no matter where it takes place.

What I am saying is that the presence of anti-Jewish verses in the Koran is an established fact. You can not merely attempt to say that they're translation difficulties, etc. they're there. A lot of Muslims don't use them to embrace anti-Jewish bigotry, but some do.

[Dr Hooch]

They're not random. They show the foundation for which the anti-Jewish forces in Muslim nations take their inspiration.

The bible is full of condemnation of gays, but rather than complain about the institutional homophobia in christianity you just agree with it.

If you were brought up a muslim, you (not 'one', you) would probably hate jews.

You're easily as bad as they are.

[Hababi]

The bible is full of condemnation of gays, but rather than complain about the institutional homophobia in christianity you just agree with it.

The Bible has some verses that establish homosexual relationships as being sinful. Homophobia is fear and hatred of homosexuals. There's a huge gulf between the two. There are a whole lot of sins defined in the Bible, but if I hated people who committed them, I'd hate roughly 99.9% of all humanity.


If you were brought up a muslim, you (not 'one', you) would probably hate jews.

You're easily as bad as they are.

When you make faulty conclusions based on faulty arguments, you don't have a leg to stand on.

[Cain]

What I am saying is that the presence of anti-Jewish verses in the Koran is an established fact. You can not merely attempt to say that they're translation difficulties, etc. they're there. A lot of Muslims don't use them to embrace anti-Jewish bigotry, but some do.

Your line of reasoning on the latter point stems from the same ignorant assumptions those poorly-educated extremists make--they equate Israel with all of Judaism, and are taught extreme interpretations of what the Quran says to fill the modern political and national need to eradicate what most Arabs see as just another imperialist encroachment on their territory (which is perfectly supportive of the point Smokey D made above). Even Hamas concedes that its anti-Semitism, such as it is, stops at the modern political entity of Israel and the political way it's percieved in the region--as an oppressor with Western backing. And when they see such a strong backing from the West of Israel and no backing for the Muslims, the only conclusion they can come to is that for the West to care so vehemently about something that trumpets itself as the "Jewish homeland," the West must be controlled by the Jews. And then it's the whole superstitious hate-filled ballgame all over again.

If you're going to view the issue in any serious, logical terms, you need to get your head out of the Holy Sand and recognize that it's harmful to Israel's interests for supporters and detractors to equate it with world Jewry, firstly, and then to recognize that the extremism arises from that equation on both sides, whether it's the extremism of a West Bank settler or the extremism of a Hamas rocket launcher. The religious stuff isn't the end-all-and-be-all, especially when viewed from such a superficial point of view as the one in which you've raised the whole issue.

Secondly: translations often DO confuse the issue because when the Quran is referring to a certain group or class of Jews they simply refer generally to "The Jews" as a whole when translated. Even if you claim in a subsequent post to be aware of this, look at your language: "anti-Jewish," not "anti-some Jews." You're dealing in the same generalizations the Muslim extremists deal in, frankly, only from the opposite point of view. The Jews as a whole share in paradise because they have had a prophet of God speak to them, and the God the muslims believe in is the exact same God the other two monotheistic religions believe in.

And finally, your second post deals only with my third paragraph.

[wartree]

He hates jew, but loves Naomy Campbel

[Hababi]

Your line of reasoning on the latter point stems from the same ignorant assumptions those poorly-educated extremists make--they equate Israel with all of Judaism


So long as you refuse to accept the very clear link between so called anti-zionism and anti-semitism, you are being intellectually dishonest. The overwhelming body of extreme antizionism is cloaked antisemitism.


and are taught extreme interpretations of what the Quran says to fill the modern political and national need to eradicate what most Arabs see as just another imperialist encroachment on their territory


And here you fail to realize that virulent antisemitism was popular in the Middle East before the state of Israel.


Even Hamas concedes that its anti-Semitism, such as it is, stops at the modern political entity of Israel


hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha



hen to recognize that the extremism arises from that equation on both sides, whether it's the extremism of a West Bank settler or the extremism of a Hamas rocket launcher.


Of course once again you always feel compelled to equate the two sides but mention so called Israeli extremism first.

The Palestinian majority accepts suicide bombing as a tactic of destroying Israel.

[Cain]

So long as you refuse to accept the very clear link between so called anti-zionism and anti-semitism, you are being intellectually dishonest. The overwhelming body of extreme antizionism is cloaked antisemitism.

I explained in my post above one of the major reasons why that link exists, buddy.

And here you fail to realize that virulent antisemitism was popular in the Middle East before the state of Israel.

It was popular, yeah, when Jews started coming into Palestine and lobbying the British for their own state in Palestine. The British polticial establishment as a whole was naturally predisposed to their case, too, because of the Empire's own anti-semitic stereotyping about Jewish world influence: support of a Jewish state would mean that powerful Jewish constituencies, who secretly ran everything anyway according the diplomats responsible for forging the Balcour declaration, would give their political allegience and power to the British. This "Jews control everything" world influence idea was encouraged by people like Chaim Weiszmann to achieve that--far from rejecting the stereotype as anti-Semitic, the emergence of a Jewish state depended on the ability of leader Zionists to make the British believe that Israel was something the "world Jewish community," with all its "secret influence," wanted and was represented by. Again, perfectly supportive of Smokey D's point, and again, if you adhere to that line, you yourself are trafficking in anti-Semitic stereotyping. It helped Israel get created but it's obviously not going to help it last.

The Arabs could never have been as successful in their own attempted manipulations of the British because of their lack of unity and extreme disorganization of the region after the Ottoman Empire collapsed, not to mention English stereotyping of the Arab culture combined with their own predisposition to Zionist case, which itself was based in anti-Semitic stereotypes. As a result, the Arabs have always viewed themselves with the inferiority complex of the outsider, which stretches all the way back to Islam's beginnings: the reason Islam was so revolutionary for the Arabs was rooted in the inferiority complex they had due to the fact that God had spoken to the Christians and the Jews but not the Arabs. They view Israel with superstitions and misconceptions that are extensions of that complex: they imagine Israel representing the closed world of the West, which the Muslims can never enter into because the West has never cared about Muslims and sought only to subjugate them. We go out of our way to support those misconceptions when we talk about Israel and Zionism the way you do, in such black-and-white, good-and-evil, and ultimately unfair terms. It's bad for Israel in the end, not to mention the rest of the Middle East.

[Give me Beer]

Am I the only one who finds it disgusting when countries are coined "insert religious group" 's land, where no other religion can be? I kind of find the idea of religious or ethnic states gross. This goes for Saudi Arbia's "OMG, ONLY MUSLIMS ALLOWED YO" as the Jewish "This is a JEWISH state boy."

Why do most people agree with this in the first place?

[Dr Hooch]

So long as you refuse to accept the very clear link between so called anti-zionism and anti-semitism, you are being intellectually dishonest. The overwhelming body of extreme antizionism is cloaked antisemitism.


To be wronged by a group of people and to hate their actions leads to an inevitable, and regrettable, failure to seperate the two. It's not excusable but it's inevitable, and you demonstrate this whenever you go off on an anti-islamic rant.


And here you fail to realize that virulent antisemitism was popular in the Middle East before the state of Israel.

middle east?

morelike

EVERYWHERE

Israel was only formed to get rid of all the jews


Of course once again you always feel compelled to equate the two sides but mention so called Israeli extremism first.

The Palestinian majority accepts suicide bombing as a tactic of destroying Israel.

It's true guys

steve asked them

[Cain]

Am I the only one who finds it disgusting when countries are coined "insert religious group" 's land, where no other religion can be? I kind of find the idea of religious or ethnic states gross. This goes for Saudi Arbia's "OMG, ONLY MUSLIMS ALLOWED YO" as the Jewish "This is a JEWISH state boy."

Why do most people agree with this in the first place?

not everyone agrees but they'll always be important as long as people consider ethnicity and religion important.

[Iskandar]

Dammit, this thread turned into another Steve hating Islam fest.

I wonder if that was his intention all along.

[Cain]

Dammit, this thread turned into another Steve hating Islam fest.

I wonder if that was his intention all along.

these things have a tendency to get derailed like that

[Hababi]

Am I the only one who finds it disgusting when countries are coined "insert religious group" 's land, where no other religion can be? I kind of find the idea of religious or ethnic states gross. This goes for Saudi Arbia's "OMG, ONLY MUSLIMS ALLOWED YO" as the Jewish "This is a JEWISH state boy."

Why do most people agree with this in the first place?

Except that Jews don't have citizenship rights in most Islamic states, whereas there is a large Arab population in Israel, with full rights and representation in the government. Of course, antisemitic critics of Israel try to ignore that.

Dammit, this thread turned into another Steve hating Islam fest.

I wonder if that was his intention all along.
I don't hate Islam.

[Iskandar]

Except that Jews don't have citizenship rights in most Islamic states, whereas there is a large Arab population in Israel, with full rights and representation in the government. Of course, antisemitic critics of Israel try to ignore that.Yeah life is just peachy for Arabs in the occupied territories.
I don't hate Islam.More than I hate Jews.

[Hababi]

Yeah life is just peachy for Arabs in the occupied territories.

Yeah, regions waging terrorist war against a nation usually aren't great places to live. If they stopped fighting, then they'd be fine. But the Palestinians can't seem to stop fighting each other, let alone Israel.

[Iskandar]

Yeah, regions waging terrorist war against a nation usually aren't great places to live. If they stopped fighting, then they'd be fine. But the Palestinians can't seem to stop fighting each other, let alone Israel.You're totally ignorant of the real situation in the occupied territories.

People don't fight one another and launch rocket attacks for no reason.

[Hababi]

You're totally ignorant of the real situation in the occupied territories.

People don't fight one another and launch rocket attacks for no reason.

yes yes it's all israel's fault they're the target of Arab hatred :rolleyes:

[McP3000]

yes yes it's all israel's fault they're the target of Arab hatred :rolleyes:
:amaze:

Tell me a single country in the middle-east that supports Israel.

[Iskandar]

yes yes it's all israel's fault they're the target of Arab hatred Actually, it is their fault.

They chose to establish a state there.

[Hababi]

Actually, it is their fault.

They chose to establish a state there.

Yes, Israel's cardinal sin is that it dared to exist.

[YouGottaBeCrazy]

Well, it's not their land, and had no right to be there.

[Iskandar]

Yes, Israel's cardinal sin is that it dared to exist.Actually, their cardinal sin is that they stole a lot of land in the Six-Day War and they still haven't given up all of it.

[Cain]

Except that Jews don't have citizenship rights in most Islamic states, whereas there is a large Arab population in Israel, with full rights and representation in the government. Of course, antisemitic critics of Israel try to ignore that.


I don't hate Islam.

lulz for avoiding all the actual content of my posts

well done

why didn't you join the air force with such mastery of evasive maneuvers

[Iskandar]

Join the IDF.

[Hababi]

Actually, their cardinal sin is that they stole a lot of land in the Six-Day War and they still haven't given up all of it.

Stole land? We've been through this before. The war was initiated by the Arab nations, and Israel justifiably seized land for security purposes. If that delegitimizes it, then I strongly suggest you advocate for redrawing the map of Europe and America.

[Iskandar]

Seized land.

[Hababi]

Seized land.

Yeah, victory in war has always led to adjusting land borders. Do you know nothing about history?

[Iskandar]

Yeah, victory in war has always led to adjusting land borders. Do you know nothing about history?"Adjusting borders" that only led to more conflict.

The conflict will not end until the 1947 borders are firmly reestablished.

[Cain]

Join the IDF.

Seriously, I don't think Steve ever talked so much about anti-Semitism until after he yelled at me for comparing him to Nazis. I used to do that a lot, back in the good old days of my forum membership. Like in that thread where he suggested that every black guy in an inner-city neighborhood driving a nice-looking car should be arrested for welfare fraud. I mean, I admit, it did get pretty tiresome. Steve even yelled at me for it and said my response to everything was to compare whatever the issue was to Nazis and World War II. Now that I know a tiny bit more about things other than WWII I don't really do that anymore.

But then he started doing it, and all the time. Like his World War II phase when the Iraq war started going south. Suddenly every single issue in that war got reduced to an argument about whether the atomic bomb was right or some bullshit about World War II and how it was a good war and how the Islam extremists were just as bad as the Nazis. And now it's all about the Israelis and anti-Semitism, and anyone who is slightly on the fence about whether Israel is always right gets painted all over with the Jew-hater brush.

I mean Steve if you're gonna steal naive argument methods from me I'd like a little rep credit plzkthx.

EDIT: Anyway on topic Steve I would love to see an informed response to either or both of my posts.

[Hababi]

"Adjusting borders" that only led to more conflict.

The conflict will not end until the 1947 borders are firmly reestablished.

There was going to be conflict no matter what. The adjusted borders just gives Israel a better shot at handling the threat.

[Iskandar]

There was going to be conflict no matter what. The adjusted borders just gives Israel a better shot at handling the threat.No they don't they only prolonged and worsened the conflict so much more.

The more land Israel has returned, the more Arab nations have adopted a conciliatory attitude to Israel. It's a bargaining chip for peace.

[Cain]

There was going to be conflict no matter what. The adjusted borders just gives Israel a better shot at handling the threat.

The "adjusted borders" gave Israel the land it felt like it needed to actually have a Jewish state. You can't deny that it treated the whole issue as one of neccesary expulsion of Arabs, so that the Jews could lay claim to the land. It's one of the major reasons that when Israel invaded Lebanon it raided PLO headquarters for the deeds and ownership papers of the lands they seized (which of course still belonged to Arab Palestinians), as a way to invalidate the "credentials" the PLO had in favor of its claim to the territory.

Of course, they were forced to give those documents back a couple of years later, but still, their whole attitude towards the Palestinian question has been based around their denial that they have claims to any of the territory, and Israel has consistently taken steps to ensure that it is able to stay in denial rather than deal with the messy identity-politics questions about what kind of a Jewish state Israel is and how the Palestinians and their attitudes fit in that state. That attitude has led to pretty much all of the current conflict. If those attitudes had been moderated, for instance, in the days after the Six-Day's War, we might be looking at a very different situation.

[Hababi]

No they don't they only prolonged and worsened the conflict so much more.

The more land Israel has returned, the more Arab nations have adopted a conciliatory attitude to Israel. It's a bargaining chip for peace.

Actually, the more land Israel has given back, the more radical and belligerent the Palestinians have gotten.

[Iskandar]

Actually, the more land Israel has given back, the more radical and belligerent the Palestinians have gotten.Conditions haven't improved there.

[Cain]

Actually, the more land Israel has given back, the more radical and belligerent the Palestinians have gotten.

Have you ever read "From Beirut to Jerusalem?"

[Iskandar]

Have you ever read "From Beirut to Jerusalem?"I don't think it would have any effect on Steve.

Palestinians are essentially wild dogs in a kennel to him.

[Hababi]

Conditions haven't improved there.

Because the radical Palestinian factions won't let them.

[Cain]

I don't think it would have any effect on Steve.

Palestinians are essentially wild dogs in a kennel to him.

Yeah but I want to know anyway.

I mean, he really shouldn't type anymore on the subject unless he's read it.

Have you read it? It's very good.

Anyway, Steve, here's a reading list:

"From Beirut to Jerusalem" by Tom Friedman
"One Palestine, Complete" by Tom Segev
"A Peace to End All Peace" by David Fromkin

[Hababi]

"One Palestine, Complete" by Tom Segev


I can only guess the solution he wants. One-staters are, for the most part, people with anti-Jewish leanings. It's a historically and culturally ignorant position.

[Cain]

I can only guess the solution he wants. One-staters are, for the most part, people with anti-Jewish leanings. It's a historically and culturally ignorant position.

it's about the history of the British mandate of Palestine and the title is a quote. it's not about solutions to the current israel-palestine situation.

way to go for making yourself look totally ignorant again. i mean i know it's only the internet and everything but you should really set your standards a little higher.

so sorry, the full title is: One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs under the British Mandate

[Reaganista]

Yeah, victory in war has always led to adjusting land borders. Do you know nothing about history?
irony

[Smokey D]

But you're ignoring the violent Islamic movements (eg Wahabi) who set out to make themselves political establishments. Not because they were being treated poorly by the authorities, unlike the Jews who formed the revolt of the Maccabees after extremely bad treatment, but rather because their reading of the Koran called for violence.

What? The Jews were violent before they were dispossessed by the Romans. That want I meant.

And yes, politically connected religions are historically more violent than non-politically connected ones.

And, in regards to Islamic teaching, these are some of the scriptures that the anti-Jewish forces in Islamic areas use:

Yep, there is a lot of anti-Jewish stuff. But it's not anti-Semitic in the way we think of it, and Jews are still considered people of the book.

And historically, Islam has been the most peaceful of the Abrahamic religions, especially towards the Jews.

[Iskandar]

Because the radical Palestinian factions won't let them.It's not the fault of the "radical Palestinian factions" that the Palestinians have been living in a refugee camp for the last 60 years.

Time to grow up and apportion Israel its fair share of the blame. The age of Israel-can-do-no-wrong is over. Both sides are at fault.

[Dr Hooch]

Yeah, victory in war has always led to adjusting land borders. Do you know nothing about history?

I thought it was these arab dogs living in the past and we were the modern progressive judeochristians

Well actually I never thought that but i thought you did

[Hababi]

it's about the history of the British mandate of Palestine and the title is a quote. it's not about solutions to the current israel-palestine situation.

way to go for making yourself look totally ignorant again. i mean i know it's only the internet and everything but you should really set your standards a little higher.

so sorry, the full title is: One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs under the British Mandate

I'm well aware of the history of the British Mandate. The British gave the Zionists the smallest amount they could, basically, while trying to appease King Abdullah.

What? The Jews were violent before they were dispossessed by the Romans. That want I meant.

I don't see the point of going back and comparing 2500 years ago to today.


Yep, there is a lot of anti-Jewish stuff. But it's not anti-Semitic in the way we think of it, and Jews are still considered people of the book.


Ok good finally someone admits the obvious.

But yes, Jews certainly received better treatment under some Islamic leaders (Saladin) than many of the Christian leaders of the medieval era. Of course, much has changed in Christianity since then.

And historically, Islam has been the most peaceful of the Abrahamic religions, especially towards the Jews.

In modern history, Islam has been, by far, the most violent.

It's not the fault of the "radical Palestinian factions" that the Palestinians have been living in a refugee camp for the last 60 years.

Erm yeah it is. If they weren't more concerned with blowing up Israel than having a real home of their own, they wouldn't be in refugee camps.

Time to grow up and apportion Israel its fair share of the blame. The age of Israel-can-do-no-wrong is over. Both sides are at fault.

Equating the two sides is completely and utterly wrong.

[Smokey D]

I don't see the point of going back and comparing 2500 years ago to today.

I was just pointing out the historic correlation between political proximity to the state and the tendency of a religion to be violent. You're the one who brought up the past when you mentioned that Judaism has a less violent past than Islam. I was just saying this is a useless comparison because Islam was always intimately connected to the coercive powers of the state while for the last 2000 years Judaism has not.

Ok good finally someone admits the obvious.

But no more than traditional Christianity.



But yes, Jews certainly received better treatment under some Islamic leaders (Saladin) than many of the Christian leaders of the medieval era. Of course, much has changed in Christianity since then.

Virtually all Muslim leaders treated Jews (and Christians) better than Christians treated Muslims and Jews.

In modern history, Islam has been, by far, the most violent.


Only because Christianity has become disassociated from the state.


Equating the two sides is completely and utterly wrong.

So is saying Israel has no part in the peace, or has committed no wrongs. And you don't need to equate to understand culpability lies on both sides.

[Iskandar]

Erm yeah it is. If they weren't more concerned with blowing up Israel than having a real home of their own, they wouldn't be in refugee camps.Whose fault it is that they're in refugee camps, first of all?

And you don't seem to get that having a state of their own is the key to Palestinians improving their lives, and peace.

[McP3000]

it's about the history of the British mandate of Palestine and the title is a quote. it's not about solutions to the current israel-palestine situation.

way to go for making yourself look totally ignorant again. i mean i know it's only the internet and everything but you should really set your standards a little higher.

so sorry, the full title is: One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs under the British Mandate
Dude, chill out. It's one ****ing book...get over it. There's plenty of other and similar knowledge and solutions that exist outside this book.

[Cain]

Dude, chill out. It's one ****ing book...get over it. There's plenty of other and similar knowledge and solutions that exist outside this book.

I think you must have missed the point I was making with that post. Maybe you should read what our conversation had led up to to understand it.

[Amit]

mcp3000 is like zero's understudy

[Cain]

mcp3000 is like zero's understudy

oh ok gotcha