Activism Change

The U.N., Jews, Racism, and the First Amendment

Question:

Dear Saabira & Medium Wave, I think it would be far more constructive and useful to continue this thread among ourselves, as I think we have more to learn from each other than trying to teach something to a guy who is not prepared to learn about the subject and in fact is obviously WILLINGLY ignorant – I mean read back some of the things in the thread and you can’t believe the guy… About religion:  Jewish SHOULD be a religion, and they CLAIM they are a race, but, I disagree.  That is what makes them RACIST.  In fact, in my book, there is only one race, the human race.  But there are nations.  There is nothing wrong with nations, it is natural, like tribes are groups of families, nations are groups of tribes (or rather should be – not so anymore in many parts of the world but I digress off topic).  Further, what is very funny, is their (the Zionists) constant use of the word Anti-Semitism – hey, semites are the people in a certain area which are actually including Africans and Arabs but not Europeans? These ‘jews’ are mostly East Europeans.  The Jews (original) in Ethiopia and Arab countries have little in common with them. Yes, there is also much evidence of collaboration between the Zionists and Hitler… so looking forward to more on the topic from you folks! Sorry Chu-Chu but I don’t have anything to say 2u matey! As this post is in numerous newsgroups and may cause unhappiness to some (?) FYI I am replying and only perusing the posting in alt.activism.  I have no access to the other news groups.  If Sabira and MW like to continue and everyone is in the same alt.activism, maybe we should keep it there? alt.politics seems fine, but youth-rights seems off topic? P.S:  Re: The U.N., Jews, Racism, and the First Amendment U.N.: Staffed mostly by Jews – after all it is located in Jew York? Jews: no offence – we are brothers in belief in the One God – but Zionists: to the sharks Racism:  Zionism=Racism and was formally declared so by the General Assembly (harder to manipulate) First Amendment: Sorry, not sure what it is having never businessed with USAmerica, but believe I am supposed to ‘take it’?

Response:

You’re quite a character Che’Gu Maru. For a person I have never met, or carried on a conversation with, you seem to know my every thought. That’s quite a feat!   Have you always been such a strong advocate of prejudice? Do you deny that you are indeed prejudice? Or do you claim to have psychic powers? Which is it? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I have a counter-challenge for you.  Tell us just how many Jews you have personally interacted with in your life (as well as blacks, American natives, and Hispanics while you are at it.) I’ve grown up with Jews.  I’ve worked and lived with Hispanics, African-Americans, and Jews.  (But, admittedly, not American natives)  I know from my personal experience of nearly 58 years that most generalizations about all of these people are false, that each individual is precisely that — an individual who should rightly be judged on his own merits and actions. I know from my own personal experience that so-called "Jewish" or "Zionist" conspiracies are a myth with no more substance than the Tooth Fairy.  Now you can argue all you want based upon your reading of fascist and racist literature or the fantasies of your own mind — but I know they are false.  It is as simple as that. Oh, one last note.  When I was in the army about a century or so ago (feels like the Punic Wars to me now), I would rather have had an honest Jew, Black, Hispanic, or any other loyal American guarding my back than a racist who despises his own American heritage and his Constitution.

Response:

Hi there,

[snip] I have a counter-challenge for you.  Tell us just how many Jews you have personally interacted with in your life (as well as blacks, American

natives, and Hispanics while you are at it.)

Nice to meet you…. My name is Saabirah and I’m Muslim.  I’ve spent a while living with Jews, Muslims and Christians in Israel/Palestine…. however, I am American.  I’ve "interacted" with groups of various types…. Lived in Boston which has a very large Hispanic community and now I live among and most of my friends are African American (I can’t stand being called "caucasian"!). I’ve grown up with Jews.  I’ve worked and lived with Hispanics, African-Americans, and Jews.  (But, admittedly, not American natives)  I know from my personal experience of nearly 58 years that most generalizations about all of these people are false, that each individual is precisely that — an

individual who should rightly be judged on his own merits and actions.

Absolutely.  When we make generalizations based upon cultural heritage we not only disregard the human dignity of all people but we show ourselves to be quite bigotted. I know from my own personal experience that so-called "Jewish" or "Zionist" conspiracies are a myth with no more substance than the Tooth Fairy.

Baloney!  Have you ever lived in Israel?  Now…. there is a hotbed of Zionism.  There are actually communities of Jews who will not be associated with Zionists because they hate the whole idea.  Would you call ethnic cleansing a myth?  That’s what was proposed in Israel… Haifa was targetted as the jumping off place. Now you can argue all you want based upon your reading of fascist and racist literature or the fantasies of your own mind — but I know they are false.  It is as simple as that.

I really don’t know how this thread began… but, one thing I can tell you… Zionism and the radical ideas of Zionist Jews…. tons of American Jews who hold dual citizenship… has nothing to do with any "tooth fairy" mindset. Oh, one last note.  When I was in the army about a century or so ago (feels like the Punic Wars to me now), I would rather have had an honest

Jew, Black, Hispanic, or any other loyal American guarding my back than a racist who despises his own American heritage and his Constitution.

What about a Muslim?? — Saabirah Not everything that is faced can be changed But, nothing can be changed until it is faced. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

You’re right.  The real topic isn’t Jews.  The real topic is to stand opposed to the promotion of irrational hatred based upon lies targeting ANY American citizen. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Really – it is a waste of time to discuss jews… there are more important problems…. jews make up how many of the worlds 5 billion people? 6 million?  I have nothing against juice, I love orange juice, pinapple juice, mango juice…

Response:

Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? I have never seen Lord Haw Haw advocate censorship of any group’s views, though he deplores the Jewish death grip on the channels of public discourse in the US. What’s the difference between inciting violence towards an ethnic group and trying to shut them up?  (And before you claim Haw-Haw hasn’t directly solicited violence towards Jews and minorities, I realize that.

Jews are only a slight minority in the US compared to Muslims who outnumber Jews today.  However, I will say that Jews are very effective in inciting violence toward the Arab people in Palestine as well as manipulating the US to achieve their own ends. [snip] Your selective blindness notwithstanding, Jews are the ONLY notable source of attacks on the First Amendment’s protection of free POLITICAL speech.

What are you talking about here?  Jews do not cherish their freedom of free Political speech?  Come on… get real!  Am I reading you right?  My goodness!  The political lobby of Jews in US government is almost over-powering… the media, politics… almost every sphere of American life is profoundly affected by Jewish freedom of speech. I return the ball to you.  Prove it. I think not.  Last time I "proved" something to you, you disappeared. You ducked my response.  It was a waste of my time.

I won’t go away…. Prove it to me. Moreover, prove that it is the fact that the people you may cite are Jews which is the cause of their behavior and not (for example) urban dwellers, educated, liberal arts scholars, and so on. But know that just because someone has what you think of as a Jewish name doesn’t mean that person is Jewish; just this week a lady named Cohen was buried with Catholic rites (because she was Catholic, of course). A person can be a Jew and a Catholic.

Sorry MW.  "Jewish" is not only a religion…. in fact, "Jewish" is more a nationality than a religion.  Go to Jerusalem and ask any Israeli his/her "nationality"…. Goodness!  There are no Israelis in Israel… they are all "Jews"….. btw….. Over 50% of Israelis (Jews) are atheists. [snip] Once again a Nazi demonstrates that when he talks about freedom, he means freedom for himself and chains for everyone else. Once again you demonstrate that you apply a double standard: one standard for Jews and another standard for other racists. I have yet to have come across any American Jew speaking as a Jew against any other ethnic or cultural group, other than those which are attempting to incite violence against innocent

people. Ummmm… and who might "those people" be?  It appears to me that Zionists incite quite a bit of violence themselves…. and persecution…. double standards… superiority complex…. It sounds like you have limited experience with Jews.

I don’t. But any decent person would speak out against such vicious slimeballs, so their having been Jewish is incidental.  (And don’t side-step about Israel and the Arabs. This discussion is about the Constitution of the United States, so any reference to a foreign nation is irrelevant.)

Excuse me!!  When billions of tax dollars every year go to support the State of Palestine…. When Middle Eastern affairs are manipulated to the advantage of the State of Israel…. while Israel is allowed to perpetrate violence against Palestinians without a word from the US… and Arab/Muslim countries are bombed I cannot see how you can say that international affairs do not belong in this discussion. Historically, it was the Nazis — racists like yourself —

Hold on there…. "Nazi" is a catch phrase which is used so often by Jews that it makes me sick!  Have you seen the Holocaust memorials all over the US??  Who is commemorated at those memorials?? ONLY Jews!  Yes…. 6 million Jews were slaughted in the Holocaust of WWII… However, another 2 million people died… Christians, gypsies, homosexuals, the physically "imperfect"…. etc., etc.  1/4 of all who died in the Holocaust of WWII were NOT Jews.  Why do we "remember the Holocaust" and only remember Jews?? No, Che — YOU are the racist.  I am an anti-racist. who were the book burners.  It was the anti-Semitic Marxists like Stalin who censored the works of Soviet writers.

What is this?  Marxists were only anti-Semitic?  Marxists were anti-anything except for Marxism for goodness sakes.  This constant bandying about of the phrases "Nazi" and "anti-Semitic" makes me sick…. Are Jews crybabies??  Let’s call a spade a spade.  Bigots are bigots no matter what their particular nationality/religion/political persuation may be.  Not all bigots and racists are Nazi’s.  What about Zionists who just dream of displacing the indiginous people of Palestine from their homeland?  Is that racist? It was the Christians during the middle ages who declared works contrary to their beliefs heresy and then burned the authors at the stake if they failed to recant. It was never the Jews. It is NOW the Jews.  All manner of things cannot be said in public in this day and age.  The Jews, who control the media, are the present equivalent of book burners.

THANK YOU!!!!!! All you are trying to do is to blame your victims Say what?

When will Jews STOP PLAYING THE VICTIM GAME???  You use "Holocaust Guilt" to manipulate and achieve your own ends.  You live in the US, enjoy your wealth and comfort yet cause the suffering of the Arab people in Palestine.  Hypocrite! for your own sins. Say what?

Jews may have been victims of Adolph Hitler.  imho…. the Jewish people who have become Zionists prove that they have learned the lesson that Hitler taught very well…. "The abused becomes the abuser." Nice try, but most Americans are far too smart (and too decent) to swallow such rubbish. No, most Americans are too stupid or preoccupied to recognize the truth.

Thank you…. or, I might add that Americans are fed so much propaganda by the media which is controlled by Jews that they do not know the truth and they are too lazy to search out the "truth". Saabirah

Response:

Really – it is a waste of time to discuss jews… there are more important problems…. jews make up how many of the worlds 5 billion people? 6 million?  I have nothing against juice, I love orange juice, pinapple juice, mango juice… — WWW.MATHABA.NET Your Antidote to the New World Order!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hmmm……. it seems that you don’t have a clue about ZIONISM. Why is it you are so upset when someone points out a fact that the LEADING ADVOCATES against freedom of speech are the same ones who control the media and the UN – Zionists. But that is simply not true.  The leading newspapers are still controlled by the Luce and Hearst families, hardly Jewish let alone Zionist.  You are asserting things which simply are factually false, and doing so in such a bald-faced way that you expect people to swallow it whole. Wasn’t it Gobbels who developed the doctrine of the big lie?  And isn’t this an exact application of that same technique?

Response:

Hmmm……. it seems that you don’t have a clue about ZIONISM. Why is it you are so upset when someone points out a fact that the LEADING ADVOCATES against freedom of speech are the same ones who control the media and the UN – Zionists. But that is simply not true.  The leading newspapers are still controlled by the Luce and Hearst families, hardly Jewish let alone Zionist.

Utter bullshit, Che. Let’s look at the nation’s three most prestigious and influential newspapers: the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post. Taken from http://www.natvan.com/who-rules-america/ These three, dominating America’s financial and political capitals, are the newspapers which set the trends and the guidelines for nearly all the others. They are the ones that decide what is news and what isn’t, at the national and international levels. They originate the news; the others merely copy it. And all three newspapers are in Jewish hands. The New York Times is the unofficial social, fashion, entertainment, political, and cultural guide of the nation. It tells America’s "smart set" which books to buy and which films to see; which opinions are in style at the moment; which politicians, educators, spiritual leaders, artists, and businessmen are the real comers. And for a few decades in the last century it was a genuinely American newspaper. The New York Times was founded in 1851 by two Gentiles, Henry J. Raymond and George Jones. After their deaths, it was purchased in 1896 from Jones’s estate by a wealthy Jewish publisher, Adolph Ochs. His great-great-grandson, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., is the paper’s current publisher and the chairman of the New York Times Co. The executive editor is Joseph Lelyveld, also a Jew (he is a rabbi’s son). The Sulzberger family also owns, through the New York Times Co., 33 other newspapers, including the Boston Globe, purchased in June 1993 for $1.1 billion; twelve magazines, including McCall’s and Family Circle with circulations of more than 5 million each; seven radio and TV broadcasting stations; a cable-TV system; and three book publishing companies. The New York Times News Service transmits news stories, features, and photographs from the New York Times by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines. Of similar national importance is the Washington Post, which, by establishing its "leaks" throughout government agencies in Washington, has an inside track on news involving the Federal government. The Washington Post, like the New York Times, had a non-Jewish origin. It was established in 1877 by Stilson Hutchins, purchased from him in 1905 by John R. McLean, and later inherited by Edward B. McLean. In June 1933, however, at the height of the Great Depression, the newspaper was forced into bankruptcy. It was purchased at a bankruptcy auction by Eugene Meyer, a Jewish financier and former partner of the infamous Bernard Baruch, industry czar in America during the First World War. The Washington Post is now run by Katherine Meyer Graham, Eugene Meyer’s daughter. She is the principal stockholder and the board chairman of the Washington Post Co. In 1979 she appointed her son Donald publisher of the paper. He now also holds the posts of president and CEO of the Washington Post Co. The Washington Post Co. has a number of other media holdings in newspapers, television, and magazines, most notably the nation’s number-two weekly newsmagazine, Newsweek. In a joint venture with the New York Times, the Post publishes the International Herald Tribune, the most widely distributed English language daily in the world. The Wall Street Journal, which sells 1.8 million copies each weekday, is the nation’s largest-circulation daily newspaper. It is owned by Dow Jones & Company, Inc, a New York corporation which also publishes 24 other daily newspapers and the weekly financial tabloid Barron’s, among other things. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter R. Kann, who is a Jew. Kann also holds the posts of chairman and publisher of the Wall Street Journal. Most of New York’s other major newspapers are in no better hands than the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. In January 1993 the New York Daily News was bought from the estate of the late Jewish media mogul Robert Maxwell (born Ludvik Hoch) by Jewish real-estate developer Mortimer B. Zuckerman. The Village Voice is the personal property of Leonard Stern, the billionaire Jewish owner of the Hartz Mountain pet supply firm. And, as mentioned above, the New York Post is owned by News Corporation under the Jew Peter Chernin. The days when most cities and even towns had several independently owned newspapers published by local people with close ties to the community are gone. Today most "local" newspapers are owned by a rather small number of large companies controlled by executives who live and work hundreds or even thousands of miles away. The fact is that only about 25 per cent of the country’s 1,500 papers are independently owned; the rest belong to multi-newspaper chains. Only 100 of the total number have circulations of more than 100,000. Only a handful are large enough to maintain independent reporting staffs outside their own communities; the rest must depend on these few for all of their national and international news. In only 50 cities in America are there more than one daily newspaper, and competition is frequently nominal even among them, as between morning and afternoon editions under the same ownership. Examples of this are the Huntsville, Alabama, morning News and afternoon Times; the Birmingham, Alabama, morning Post Herald and afternoon News; the Mobile, Alabama, morning Register and afternoon Press; the Springfield, Massachusetts, morning Union, afternoon News, and Sunday-only Republican; the Syracuse, New York, morning Post-Standard and afternoon Herald-Journal — all owned by the Jewish Newhouse brothers through their holding company, Advance Publications. The Newhouse media empire provides an example of more than the lack of real competition among America’s daily newspapers: it also illustrates the insatiable appetite Jews have shown for all the organs of opinion control on which they could fasten their grip. The Newhouses own 26 daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the country’s largest cable networks; the Sunday supplement Parade, with a circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Mademoiselle, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Bride’s, Gentlemen’s Quarterly, Self, House & Garden, and all the other magazines of the wholly owned Conde Nast group. This Jewish media empire was founded by the late Samuel Newhouse, an immigrant from Russia. When he died in 1979 at the age of 84, he bequeathed media holdings worth an estimated $1.3 billion to his two sons, Samuel and Donald. With a number of further acquisitions, the net worth of Advance Publications has grown to more than $8 billion today.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? I have never seen Lord Haw Haw advocate censorship of any group’s views, though he deplores the Jewish death grip on the channels of public discourse in the US. What’s the difference between inciting violence towards an ethnic group and trying to shut them up?  (And before you claim Haw-Haw hasn’t directly solicited violence towards Jews and minorities, I realize that. Jews are only a slight minority in the US compared to Muslims who outnumber Jews today.  However, I will say that Jews are very effective in inciting violence toward the Arab people in Palestine as well as manipulating the US to achieve their own ends. [snip] Your selective blindness notwithstanding, Jews are the ONLY notable source of attacks on the First Amendment’s protection of free POLITICAL speech. What are you talking about here?  Jews do not cherish their freedom of free Political speech?

No.  That’s not it.  It’s that Jews do not believe everyone else should have the same freedom. Come on… get real!  Am I reading you right?

No, you’re not. My goodness!  The political lobby of Jews in US government is almost over-powering… the media, politics… almost every sphere of American life is profoundly affected by Jewish freedom of speech. I return the ball to you.  Prove it. I think not.  Last time I "proved" something to you, you disappeared. You ducked my response.  It was a waste of my time. I won’t go away…. Prove it to me.

I don’t think we disagree. Moreover, prove that it is the fact that the people you may cite are Jews which is the cause of their behavior and not (for example) urban dwellers, educated, liberal arts scholars, and so on. But know that just because someone has what you think of as a Jewish name doesn’t mean that person is Jewish; just this week a lady named Cohen was buried with Catholic rites (because she was Catholic, of course). A person can be a Jew and a Catholic. Sorry MW.  "Jewish" is not only a religion…. in fact, "Jewish" is more a nationality than a religion.

I agree.  That’s my point. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Go to Jerusalem and ask any Israeli his/her "nationality"…. Goodness!  There are no Israelis in Israel… they are all "Jews"….. btw….. Over 50% of Israelis (Jews) are atheists. [snip] Once again a Nazi demonstrates that when he talks about freedom, he means freedom for himself and chains for everyone else. Once again you demonstrate that you apply a double standard: one standard for Jews and another standard for other racists. I have yet to have come across any American Jew speaking as a Jew against any other ethnic or cultural group, other than those which are attempting to incite violence against innocent people. Ummmm… and who might "those people" be?  It appears to me that Zionists incite quite a bit of violence themselves…. and persecution…. double standards… superiority complex…. It sounds like you have limited experience with Jews. I don’t. But any decent person would speak out against such vicious slimeballs, so their having been Jewish is incidental.  (And don’t side-step about Israel and the Arabs. This discussion is about the Constitution of the United States, so any reference to a foreign nation is irrelevant.) Excuse me!!  When billions of tax dollars every year go to support the State of Palestine…. When Middle Eastern affairs are manipulated to the advantage of the State of Israel…. while Israel is allowed to perpetrate violence against Palestinians without a word from the US… and Arab/Muslim countries are bombed I cannot see how you can say that international affairs do not belong in this discussion.

To clarify, it was not I who said that.  It was a prior poster. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Historically, it was the Nazis — racists like yourself — Hold on there…. "Nazi" is a catch phrase which is used so often by Jews that it makes me sick!  Have you seen the Holocaust memorials all over the US??  Who is commemorated at those memorials?? ONLY Jews!  Yes…. 6 million Jews were slaughted in the Holocaust of WWII… However, another 2 million people died… Christians, gypsies, homosexuals, the physically "imperfect"…. etc., etc.  1/4 of all who died in the Holocaust of WWII were NOT Jews.  Why do we "remember the Holocaust" and only remember Jews?? No, Che — YOU are the racist.  I am an anti-racist. who were the book burners.  It was the anti-Semitic Marxists like Stalin who censored the works of Soviet writers. What is this?  Marxists were only anti-Semitic?  Marxists were anti-anything except for Marxism for goodness sakes.  This constant bandying about of the phrases "Nazi" and "anti-Semitic" makes me sick…. Are Jews crybabies??  Let’s call a spade a spade.  Bigots are bigots no matter what their particular nationality/religion/political persuation may be.  Not all bigots and racists are Nazi’s.  What about Zionists who just dream of displacing the indiginous people of Palestine from their homeland?  Is that racist? It was the Christians during the middle ages who declared works contrary to their beliefs heresy and then burned the authors at the stake if they failed to recant. It was never the Jews. It is NOW the Jews.  All manner of things cannot be said in public in this day and age.  The Jews, who control the media, are the present equivalent of book burners. THANK YOU!!!!!! All you are trying to do is to blame your victims Say what? When will Jews STOP PLAYING THE VICTIM GAME???  You use "Holocaust Guilt" to manipulate and achieve your own ends.  You live in the US, enjoy your wealth and comfort yet cause the suffering of the Arab people in Palestine.  Hypocrite! for your own sins. Say what? Jews may have been victims of Adolph Hitler.  imho…. the Jewish people who have become Zionists prove that they have learned the lesson that Hitler taught very well…. "The abused becomes the abuser."

Professor MacDonald makes a convincing case that it was the other way around:  that the Nazis actually learned from the Jews and that what we now see in Palestine is a continuation of ages-old Jewish evolutionary strategy. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice try, but most Americans are far too smart (and too decent) to swallow such rubbish. No, most Americans are too stupid or preoccupied to recognize the truth. Thank you…. or, I might add that Americans are fed so much propaganda by the media which is controlled by Jews that they do not know the truth and they are too lazy to search out the "truth". Saabirah

Response:

                          McCain’s False Colors                               By Paul Saunders 2/2/2000                    US Presidential Candidate John McCain may                    wave the banner of free markets and                    Capitalism but his views lean more towards                    those of his former communist captors.                    U.S. Sen. John McCain, Hanoi captive and alleged                    conservative, is now spouting in recent debates the propaganda                    of his former Communist captors. Sen. McCain says that he                    wants the government to forcibly reduce the gap between "the                    rich" and "the poor" in America.                    To get rich in America’s free market, you have to earn your                    wealth by persuading consumers to freely vote for your                    products and services with their hard-earned dollars. In fact, no                    one can legally obtain unearned wealth in America unless the                    government uses its power to unjustly grant them a special                    privilege.                    To become and remain poor in America’s free market, a small                    percentage of people involuntarily suffer freak accidents or                    severe medical illnesses. These people deserve our compassion                    and voluntary benevolence. However, the majority of the poor                    become and remain poor in a free market because they refuse                    to think, refuse to make rational decisions, refuse to work.                    Justice is the moral virtue operating in a free market which                    makes hard-working, thinking people rich while it allows lazy,                    unthinking people to become and remain poor. Demagogues of                    the left and communists have never liked the justice operating in                    the free market. The Republican party once advocated:                    self-reliance, hard-work, free markets, and justice. Now Sen.                    McCain and other Republicans have betrayed these values and                    joined their Communist enemies to demand the equalization of                    outcomes from the free market. The future of America now                    rests with those who reject both the Democrats and                    Republicans and become radicals for Capitalism, free markets,                    and justice.

Response:

Thank you for the response.  Here’s a couple of comments in return: Of course there are Jewish fanatics (if you want to call them Zionists, go ahead).  But they are no more representative of Jews in general (or even of Israelis in my experience)  than The Order is of Christians or Bin Lada’s terrorists are of Muslims.  That’s pretty easy to prove, too.  If they or the Bin Lada type were more than a small minority of their own people, we never would have heard of a "peace process," let alone have seen it actually make some progress. The very concept of "race" in regard to human beings is a pseudo-concept which ought to be buried along with the aether and philisgon for the following reasons: (1)  It is impossible to set up any defining sets of physical characteristics which will divide people into groups in the way in which racists wish to do.  The exceptions always outway the regularities. (2)  Human DNA is Human DNA; there are no genus differences (which is precisely what a "racial difference" would have to be.  (3)  Empirical evidence demonstrates that in general a the more varied the gene pool of a group of human beings, the healthier and more intelligent they are — directly contrary to the racists’ claim regarding "racial purity."  Therefore, of course you ought to be uncomfortable being called "Caucasian" or any other racial typing — as should we all. There are, of course cultural differences and it IS possible to define one culture (or sub-culture) so as to mark it off from others.  Moreover, it is also possible to apply universal ethical criteria in judging these cultures (one which teaches its members to enjoy the pain of torturing others could legitimately be judged evil, whereas one which teaches compassion could legitimately be judged good, and so on).  In general, however, those cultures which have endured are ethically equals; their differences are not differences of ethics. Finally, forty years ago there weren’t that many American Muslims, nor did I happen to serve with any in the armed forces.  Of course, the situation is very different today; from what I understand (perhaps like a lot of other American minorities including blacks, Hispanics, and Jews who have always felt felt they had something to prove), Muslims serve on active duty in far larger numbers than their proportion of the population would suggest. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi there, Nice to meet you…. My name is Saabirah and I’m Muslim.  I’ve spent a while living with Jews, Muslims and Christians in Israel/Palestine…. however, I am American.  I’ve "interacted" with groups of various types…. Lived in Boston which has a very large Hispanic community and now I live among and most of my friends are African American (I can’t stand being called "caucasian"!). I’ve grown up with Jews.  I’ve worked and lived with Hispanics, African-Americans, and Jews.  (But, admittedly, not American natives)  I know from my personal experience of nearly 58 years that most generalizations about all of these people are false, that each individual is precisely that — an individual who should rightly be judged on his own merits and actions. Absolutely.  When we make generalizations based upon cultural heritage we not only disregard the human dignity of all people but we show ourselves to be quite bigotted. I know from my own personal experience that so-called "Jewish" or "Zionist" conspiracies are a myth with no more substance than the Tooth Fairy. Baloney!  Have you ever lived in Israel?  Now…. there is a hotbed of Zionism.  There are actually communities of Jews who will not be associated with Zionists because they hate the whole idea.  Would you call ethnic cleansing a myth?  That’s what was proposed in Israel… Haifa was targetted as the jumping off place. Now you can argue all you want based upon your reading of fascist and racist literature or the fantasies of your own mind — but I know they are false.  It is as simple as that. I really don’t know how this thread began… but, one thing I can tell you… Zionism and the radical ideas of Zionist Jews…. tons of American Jews who hold dual citizenship… has nothing to do with any "tooth fairy" mindset. Oh, one last note.  When I was in the army about a century or so ago (feels like the Punic Wars to me now), I would rather have had an honest Jew, Black, Hispanic, or any other loyal American guarding my back than a racist who despises his own American heritage and his Constitution. What about a Muslim?? — Saabirah Not everything that is faced can be changed But, nothing can be changed until it is faced.

"Some see the world as it is, and ask ‘Why?’ I see the world as it should be, and ask ‘Why not?’" –RK

Response:

Because, just as you seem to delight in gratuitiously denigrating Jews and other minorities, so do I delight in disparaging racists, bigots, and hate-mongers.

Entertainment at the Che’Gu Maru residents must be severely lacking. But it is not gratuitious in my case since I am a member of a minority myself (non-Christian Neanderthal) and therefore when you present anyone as subhuman who is not in your mind white and Christian, you are directly attacking me.

Here’s a challenge for you Che’Gu Maru. Try writing just one paragraph without fabricating what my thoughts or opinions are. Bet you can’t do it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? Could you possibly quote where I said such a thing? No, then it’s fabricated. Of course I know what slander is; it is the sort of thing you write about colored people. I also know the difference between explicit and implicit, which you seem to be ignoring.  While you may never have explicitly stated that anyone doesn’t have a right to express an opinion different than yours, this is implied by the sorts of invective you use. Do you know what slander is? Obviously I made a mistake in responding. Your intent is not to engage in discussion, but rather to denounce anything I say or post. Why don’t you do us both a favor and just "killfile" my post?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Because, just as you seem to delight in gratuitiously denigrating Jews and other minorities, so do I delight in disparaging racists, bigots, and hate-mongers. Entertainment at the Che’Gu Maru residents must be severely lacking. But it is not gratuitious in my case since I am a member of a minority myself (non-Christian Neanderthal) and therefore when you present anyone as subhuman who is not in your mind white and Christian, you are directly attacking me. Here’s a challenge for you Che’Gu Maru. Try writing just one paragraph without fabricating what my thoughts or opinions are. Bet you can’t do it.

I have a counter-challenge for you.  Tell us just how many Jews you have personally interacted with in your life (as well as blacks, American natives, and Hispanics while you are at it.) I’ve grown up with Jews.  I’ve worked and lived with Hispanics, African-Americans, and Jews.  (But, admittedly, not American natives)  I know from my personal experience of nearly 58 years that most generalizations about all of these people are false, that each individual is precisely that — an individual who should rightly be judged on his own merits and actions.  I know from my own personal experience that so-called "Jewish" or "Zionist" conspiracies are a myth with no more substance than the Tooth Fairy.  Now you can argue all you want based upon your reading of fascist and racist literature or the fantasies of your own mind — but I know they are false.  It is as simple as that. Oh, one last note.  When I was in the army about a century or so ago (feels like the Punic Wars to me now), I would rather have had an honest Jew, Black, Hispanic, or any other loyal American guarding my back than a racist who despises his own American heritage and his Constitution.

Response:

Hmmm……. it seems that you don’t have a clue about ZIONISM. Why is it you are so upset when someone points out a fact that the LEADING ADVOCATES against freedom of speech are the same ones who control the media and the UN – Zionists.

But that is simply not true.  The leading newspapers are still controlled by the Luce and Hearst families, hardly Jewish let alone Zionist.  You are asserting things which simply are factually false, and doing so in such a bald-faced way that you expect people to swallow it whole. Wasn’t it Gobbels who developed the doctrine of the big lie?  And isn’t this an exact application of that same technique?

Response:

What do the Jews have to do with it (other than they’re your favorite whipping boy because, I assume, you find they are too smart for you to compete with).? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – International experts worried about U.S.-based Internet racism By GEIR MOULSON

Response:

What do the Jews have to do with it (other than they’re your favorite whipping boy because, I assume, you find they are too smart for you to compete with).?

Contrary to what you might think, the Simon Wiesenthal Center isn’t ran by a bunch of Buddhist Monks… Yet, one more example of Jews for censorship.

Response:

Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? Once again a Nazi demonstrates that when he talks about freedom, he means freedom for himself and chains for everyone else. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What do the Jews have to do with it (other than they’re your favorite whipping boy because, I assume, you find they are too smart for you to compete with).? Contrary to what you might think, the Simon Wiesenthal Center isn’t ran by a bunch of Buddhist Monks… Yet, one more example of Jews for censorship.

Response:

What do the Jews have to do with it (other than they’re your favorite whipping boy because, I assume, you find they are too smart for you to compete with).? Contrary to what you might think, the Simon Wiesenthal Center isn’t ran by a bunch of Buddhist Monks…

Some people might speculate that Swiss-based information technology law expert David Rosenthal is also a member of the Tribe.

Response:

Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is?

I have never seen Lord Haw Haw advocate censorship of any group’s views, though he deplores the Jewish death grip on the channels of public discourse in the US. Your selective blindness notwithstanding, Jews are the ONLY notable source of attacks on the First Amendment’s protection of free POLITICAL speech. (Radical Christians and radical feminists certainly attempt to limit the scope of First Amendment as it relates to pornography, but that is a different matter.)  Jews are also in the avant garde of the effort to dismantle your cherished 2d Amendment rights. Once again a Nazi demonstrates that when he talks about freedom, he means freedom for himself and chains for everyone else.

Once again you demonstrate that you apply a double standard:  one standard for Jews and another standard for other racists.

Response:

Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? I have never seen Lord Haw Haw advocate censorship of any group’s views, though he deplores the Jewish death grip on the channels of public discourse in the US.

What’s the difference between inciting violence towards an ethnic group and trying to shut them up?  (And before you claim Haw-Haw hasn’t directly solicited violence towards Jews and minorities, I realize that.  However, the sort of invective he uses has precisely the same effect, and I am certain both you and he know precisely what you are doing, encouraging the Buford Farrows and other crazies who are hardly defenders of democracy in any guise.) Your selective blindness notwithstanding, Jews are the ONLY notable source of attacks on the First Amendment’s protection of free POLITICAL speech.

I return the ball to you.  Prove it.  Moreover, prove that it is the fact that the people you may cite are Jews which is the cause of their behavior and not (for example) urban dwellers, educated, liberal arts scholars, and so on.  But know that just because someone has what you think of as a Jewish name doesn’t mean that person is Jewish; just this week a lady named Cohen was buried with Catholic rites (because she was Catholic, of course). (Radical Christians and radical feminists certainly attempt to limit the scope of First Amendment as it relates to pornography, but that is a different matter.)  Jews are also in the avant garde of the effort to dismantle your cherished 2d Amendment rights.

Again, prove it.  JPFO would dispute this, I think. Once again a Nazi demonstrates that when he talks about freedom, he means freedom for himself and chains for everyone else. Once again you demonstrate that you apply a double standard:  one standard for Jews and another standard for other racists.

I have yet to have come across any American Jew speaking as a Jew against any other ethnic or cultural group, other than those which are attempting to incite violence against innocent people.  But any decent person would speak out against such vicious slimeballs, so their having been Jewish is incidental.  (And don’t side-step about Israel and the Arabs.  This discussion is about the Constitution of the United States, so any reference to a foreign nation is irrelevant.) Historically, it was the Nazis — racists like yourself — who were the book burners.  It was the anti-Semitic Marxists like Stalin who censored the works of Soviet writers.  It was the Christians during the middle ages who declared works contrary to their beliefs heresy and then burned the authors at the stake if they failed to recant.  It was never the Jews. All you are trying to do is to blame your victims for your own sins.  Nice try, but most Americans are far too smart (and too decent) to swallow such rubbish.

Response:

Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is?

Could you possibly quote where I said such a thing? No, then it’s fabricated. Do you know what slander is? Obviously I made a mistake in responding. Your intent is not to engage in discussion, but rather to denounce anything I say or post. Why don’t you do us both a favor and just "killfile" my post?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? I have never seen Lord Haw Haw advocate censorship of any group’s views, though he deplores the Jewish death grip on the channels of public discourse in the US. What’s the difference between inciting violence towards an ethnic group and trying to shut them up?  (And before you claim Haw-Haw hasn’t directly solicited violence towards Jews and minorities, I realize that.  However, the sort of invective he uses has precisely the same effect, and I am certain both you and he know precisely what you are doing, encouraging the Buford Farrows and other crazies who are hardly defenders of democracy in any guise.)

I don’t buy it. Your selective blindness notwithstanding, Jews are the ONLY notable source of attacks on the First Amendment’s protection of free POLITICAL speech. I return the ball to you.  Prove it.

I think not.  Last time I "proved" something to you, you disappeared.  You ducked my response.  It was a waste of my time. Moreover, prove that it is the fact that the people you may cite are Jews which is the cause of their behavior and not (for example) urban dwellers, educated, liberal arts scholars, and so on. But know that just because someone has what you think of as a Jewish name doesn’t mean that person is Jewish; just this week a lady named Cohen was buried with Catholic rites (because she was Catholic, of course).

A person can be a Jew and a Catholic. (Radical Christians and radical feminists certainly attempt to limit the scope of First Amendment as it relates to pornography, but that is a different matter.)  Jews are also in the avant garde of the effort to dismantle your cherished 2d Amendment rights. Again, prove it.  JPFO would dispute this, I think.

Lipset & Raab in "Jews and the New American Scene" (p. 147) write that "overwhelmingly, [Jews] have taken the liberally correct position on such issues as abortion, gun control, and nuclear freeze proposals."  That hardly proves they are in the avant garde, but the concessions of two Jews who are respected enough to be published by the Harvard U. Press does suggest that Jews "overwhelmingly" seek to undermine your 2d Amendment rights. Of course, this is merely anecdotal, but if you watch Waco:  The Rules of Engagement, you will see Jewish gun-control freak Charles Schumer in action. While doing his damnedest to justify the government pogrom, he seems a grotesque caricature of the stereotypical evil Jew.  Indeed, he is an evil man, even if it has nothing to do with his Jewishness. Once again a Nazi demonstrates that when he talks about freedom, he means freedom for himself and chains for everyone else. Once again you demonstrate that you apply a double standard:  one standard for Jews and another standard for other racists. I have yet to have come across any American Jew speaking as a Jew against any other ethnic or cultural group, other than those which are attempting to incite violence against innocent people.

It sounds like you have limited experience with Jews. But any decent person would speak out against such vicious slimeballs, so their having been Jewish is incidental.  (And don’t side-step about Israel and the Arabs.  This discussion is about the Constitution of the United States, so any reference to a foreign nation is irrelevant.) Historically, it was the Nazis — racists like yourself —

No, Che — YOU are the racist.  I am an anti-racist. who were the book burners.  It was the anti-Semitic Marxists like Stalin who censored the works of Soviet writers.  It was the Christians during the middle ages who declared works contrary to their beliefs heresy and then burned the authors at the stake if they failed to recant.  It was never the Jews.

It is NOW the Jews.  All manner of things cannot be said in public in this day and age.  The Jews, who control the media, are the present equivalent of book burners. All you are trying to do is to blame your victims

Say what? for your own sins.

Say what? Nice try, but most Americans are far too smart (and too decent) to swallow such

rubbish. No, most Americans are too stupid or preoccupied to recognize the truth.

Response:

Because, just as you seem to delight in gratuitiously denigrating Jews and other minorities, so do I delight in disparaging racists, bigots, and hate-mongers.  But it is not gratuitious in my case since I am a member of a minority myself (non-Christian Neanderthal) and therefore when you present anyone as subhuman who is not in your mind white and Christian, you are directly attacking me. Aren’t you being a bit hypocritical, since it’s your objective to shut up all Jews?  If that isn’t censorship, what is? Could you possibly quote where I said such a thing? No, then it’s fabricated.

Of course I know what slander is; it is the sort of thing you write about colored people. I also know the difference between explicit and implicit, which you seem to be ignoring.  While you may never have explicitly stated that anyone doesn’t have a right to express an opinion different than yours, this is implied by the sorts of invective you use. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Do you know what slander is? Obviously I made a mistake in responding. Your intent is not to engage in discussion, but rather to denounce anything I say or post. Why don’t you do us both a favor and just "killfile" my post?

Response:

You can speculate all you want, but the fact that someone has a last name with a Germanic derivation hardly means he is Jewish any longer. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some people might speculate that Swiss-based information technology law expert David Rosenthal is also a member of the Tribe.

Response:

Hmmm……. it seems that you don’t have a clue about ZIONISM. Why is it you are so upset when someone points out a fact that the LEADING ADVOCATES against freedom of speech are the same ones who control the media and the UN – Zionists. A Zionist is not a religious Jew in general but a supremacist racist fanatic for whom non-Zionists are Goyim (dogs) and non-Zionist Jews are traitors. The same way an Islamist is not a Muslim (not noticed because people in their ignorance think because the ‘religion’ is called Islam one who follows it is a Muslim – far from it – Islamist is a NEW word the same as ZIONIST is) but a political supremacist who names his supremacist hate-ideology after his religion in order to seek legitimacy. Please CheGuMaru – don’t get so uptight about a topic if you don’t know enough about it. I am merely an observer, and I see this degenerating into a personal slander match – can you not talk constructively and politely to people, and do what is always a good policy in life – put yourself in the other’s person’s shoes and FIRST OF ALL consider if they MIGHT NOT BE RIGHT even remotely? It saves a lot of embarassment later.  Years from now you may actually get to reading up on the subject and then feel sorry how you felt about HawHaw or whoever and wish you could look all those people up and apologise. TRUST ME I have been there myself! — WWW.MATHABA.NET Your Antidote to the New World Order!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You can speculate all you want, but the fact that someone has a last name with a Germanic derivation hardly means he is Jewish any longer. Some people might speculate that Swiss-based information technology law expert David Rosenthal is also a member of the Tribe.

Response:

International experts worried about U.S.-based Internet racism By GEIR MOULSON GENEVA (February 16, 2000 Associated Press) – Experts at a U.N. meeting Wednesday said Wednesday that the United States could do more to curb the use of the Internet for racist material while upholding freedom of speech. "New forms of communications technology such as the Internet are being used to support the dissemination of racial hatred," Mary Robinson, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, told participants in a three-day seminar on racism. Speakers noted the legal challenges of controlling Internet content in, and originating from, the United States, where the First Amendment of the constitution guarantees freedom of speech. There are an estimated 250 to 400 self-proclaimed hate groups in the United States with their own Web sites. The Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, whose monitors follow links from hate groups’ Web sites, said last year about 2,000 sites had surfaced as "problematic," for example, offering instructions for bomb-making or extolling the Ku Klux Klan. "The United States has developed into a safe haven for racists spreading their word worldwide by using the Internet," Swiss-based information technology law expert David Rosenthal said in a paper submitted to the conference, which started Wednesday. European countries, most of which outlaw racist speech, say most racist and hate sites are made available in or through the United States, he said. Although the U.S. government cannot ban racist speech outright, it could impose "reasonable restrictions," such as requiring a permit that would force publishers to identify the content of their sites, Rosenthal argued. A possible strategy to deal with Internet hate sites could be based on whether they amount to discrimination, an area where U.S. law is strict, he said. —

Response:

Filed under: Youth activism

Related Posts

• R
• Linda Thompson Update
• Suicide is NOT the option
• ELECTIONS 92: Clinton/Gore on Labor
• Teen Advice Online- http://www.winternet.com/~tfen ner/advice/
• Why kissing up?
• "necessity" defense for homeless campers
• Gay Youth Group Bans AIDS Dissidents
• EPA Chief Not Consulted on US Climate Report
• "The Wages of Apostasy: LIFE UNDER FIRE", by David Irving