PDA

View Full Version : Occupy Wall Street and the Jews



Odysseus
01-24-2012, 05:42 PM
Jonathan Neumann — January 2012
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/occupy-wall-street-and-the-jews/

On the eve of Yom Kippur, Jews across New York City hurriedly finished their pre-fast meals before dashing to synagogue for Kol Nidre services. But on that night in October, several hundred Jews foreswore synagogue and headed to an obscure park in the Wall Street district where a protest claiming to represent the exploited 99 percent of society against the exploitative 1 percent was in its third week. A protest that, along with its sister protests across the nation, would become marred with incidents of murder and suicide, sexual assault and rape, violence, drug use, theft, bullying, public defecation, indecent exposure, defacement of American flags, littering, and disease—even tuberculosis.

A Kol Nidre service was being held there.

By that point in the brief lifespan of the Occupy Wall Street protest, disturbing comments and placards directed against Jews and Israel had been on display on a daily basis and had, understandably, become a matter of interest to Jewish commentators and a cause of concern for Jewish communities and others in the city and across the nation.

What did Jews and Israel have to do with protests ostensibly intended to focus the nation’s attention on domestic economic issues? And why, despite the apparent hostility toward them and the Jewish state, were Jews so involved?

The Yom Kippur service, the Sukkoth that followed several days later, a Simchat Torah celebration that followed the Sukkoth, Shabbat dinners, a prayer meeting to mark the onset of the new Jewish month—all were held not only to help those Jews who had chosen to take up residence at Zuccotti Park practice their faith, but also to lend the Occupy Wall Street protest a religiously Jewish coloration.

Even now, following the removal of the Occupiers from the park and from similar makeshift protest locations across the country, three salient issues demand consideration by anyone, Jewish or non-Jewish, concerned with contemporary anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism—and all the more so in light of rumors that the protests may return with force after a winter hibernation. First is the extent of the anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism at the protests. Second is the role Jews played in the protests. And third is the question of the connection between the protests and Judaism itself.

_____________

Defenders and supporters of Occupy Wall Street have tried to downplay the extent of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel hostility, but it was more prevalent than their initial denials suggested or their belated statements of concern conceded.

To begin with, any conspiracy theory that connects a tiny portion (in this case 1 percent) of the population with exploitative banking practices is susceptible to taking on anti-Semitic undertones. This is especially the case when the list of supporters includes the American Nazi Party, Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini, Louis Farrakhan, white supremacist David Duke, Socialist Party USA, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Hezbollah, 911Truth.org, International Bolshevik Tendency, and myriad other dubious organizations and individuals. With such comrades in arms, leaders of Occupy Wall Street ought to have been much on guard against anti-Semitic talk.

Nor was the hostility a matter of undertones only. The tone, very early on, was set in part by signs and messages that were overtly anti-Semitic. “Google: (1) Wall St. Jews, (2) Jewish Billionaires, (3) Jews & FedRsrvBank,” read one sign. Another: “Nazi Bankers Wall Street.” The man holding up a sign that read “Hitler’s Bankers,” upon being pressed by passersby to explain himself, replied “Jews control Wall Street.” He was then asked whether the Fox News Channel had asked him to hold up the sign, presumably to make Occupy Wall Street look bad, and he responded, “F— Fox News. That’s bulls—t. F—ing Jew made that up.” Another protester, upon being interrogated by a skeptical elderly passerby sporting a yarmulke, brushed him away saying, “You’re a bum, Jew.”

An Occupier who had traveled from Georgia explained his anti-Jewish animus to a reporter from the New York Post by stating that “Jews are the smartest people in the world,” that “they control the media,” and that nobody is willing to point out this simple truth because “the media doesn’t want to commit suicide by losing the Jewish advertisers.” Still another Occupier expostulated in a widely circulated video: “The smallest group in America controls the money, media, and all other things. The fingerprints belong to the Jewish bankers who control Wall Street. I am against Jews who rob America. They are one percent who control America. President Obama is a Jewish puppet. The entire economy is Jewish. Every federal judge [on] the East Coast is Jewish.”

Occupy Wall Street’s group page on Facebook was littered with images of the title page of Henry Ford’s notorious pamphlet, The International Jew, as well as a picture featuring the phrase Arbeit Macht Frei, lifted from the entrance gate at Auschwitz, with the accompaniment: “We don’t work for bad money.”

At Occupy Los Angeles, one sign explained, in remarkable detail: the “[The] satanic cult called the Illuminati…represents Masonic and Jewish bankers who finagled a monopoly over government credit….Thus the people who control our purse strings are conspiring against us.” (It went on to claim how this nefarious force funded the first two world wars and is planning a third.) Another sign read “Humanity vs. the Rothschlds” [sic] as a speaker further advanced this classic trope: “How many people know that the wars, in WWII, both sides, were funded by the Rothschilds? Those are the bankers. So banking and war is [sic] very intertwined.”

To highlight such talk is to invite one predictable retort: One cannot hold an entire movement responsible for the excesses of outliers. But, despite the assertions of its advocates, Occupy Wall Street was not in fact a movement. Its ranks never numbered more than a modest few hundred people in Manhattan—which made its anti-Semitic cohort statistically significant. Its lack of structure, moreover, and near inability to repudiate sentiments by its participants meant that even a fringe was no less part of the whole.

_____________

Read the rest at http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/occupy-wall-street-and-the-jews/

DumbAss Tanker
01-24-2012, 06:47 PM
Interesting take, however I'm not at all sure trying to add a visible Jewish presence at Hobotown is going to do anything positive for reducing its anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli overtones, it seems to me there's a pretty good chance of it actually stoking them.

Odysseus
01-25-2012, 09:30 AM
Interesting take, however I'm not at all sure trying to add a visible Jewish presence at Hobotown is going to do anything positive for reducing its anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli overtones, it seems to me there's a pretty good chance of it actually stoking them.

Agreed. It simply gives the target a higher profile and moves it closer to the berm.

Lanie
01-25-2012, 01:21 PM
I have a Jewish who defends the movement. He says it's not an organized movement with leaders, but one with just regular people. I keep trying to tell him that while that may have been true at first, not anymore. We've been in the middle of an argument and my head is about to explode.

Odysseus
01-25-2012, 03:24 PM
I have a Jewish who defends the movement. He says it's not an organized movement with leaders, but one with just regular people. I keep trying to tell him that while that may have been true at first, not anymore. We've been in the middle of an argument and my head is about to explode.

Tell him that there used to be lots of Jews who thought just like him. They had the job of policing the ghettos and became Kapos in the camps. Eventually, they were killed, too. Next time that you see him, tell him that I have no respect for those who would willingly consign themselves to cattle cars in the hope of being the last one gassed.

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 03:32 PM
Anti-Israel? Is that not allowed?

What other countries are off limits? Apparently not NATO allies like France and Turkey.

Lanie
01-25-2012, 03:38 PM
Tell him that there used to be lots of Jews who thought just like him. They had the job of policing the ghettos and became Kapos in the camps. Eventually, they were killed, too. Next time that you see him, tell him that I have no respect for those who would willingly consign themselves to cattle cars in the hope of being the last one gassed.

My friend wouldn't bow down to anybody in the hopes of not being a victim. He just thinks it's a sincere movement. I can't convince him there's a fringe side.


Anti-Israel? Is that not allowed?

What other countries are off limits? Apparently not NATO allies like France and Turkey.

Like I said, fringe side. Next time you have time, go see if you can visit an open forum on Israel by one of the anti-Israel groups (notice I said anti-Israel and not Pro-Palestinian. There's a difference). The stuff they can can be completely off the wall.

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 03:39 PM
Like I said, fringe side. Next time you have time, go see if you can visit an open forum on Israel by one of the anti-Israel groups (notice I said anti-Israel and not Pro-Palestinian. There's a difference). The stuff they can can be completely off the wall.

Do they call them cheese eating surrender monkeys?

djones520
01-25-2012, 03:43 PM
Do they call them cheese eating surrender monkeys?

Do the Israeli's make it a national support to surrender first?

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 03:49 PM
Do the Israeli's make it a national support to surrender first?

Good thing that Royal Navy frigate was in the Straits a few days ago or Iran would have gotten the Charles de Gaulle.

djones520
01-25-2012, 03:52 PM
Good thing that Royal Navy frigate was in the Straits a few days ago or Iran would have gotten the Charles de Gaulle.

Indeed it is. I bet the Brits saw the Frenchies running the white flag up the mast, and they decided to move in and save them some embarrasement. :D

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 03:57 PM
Indeed it is. I bet the Brits saw the Frenchies running the white flag up the mast, and they decided to move in and save them some embarrasement. :D

Hey. Cartman had a light sabre!

Lanie
01-25-2012, 04:40 PM
Do they call them cheese eating surrender monkeys?

No, but some of them suggest the possibility that earlier Zionists such as Hertzl kept Jews from being saved during the holocaust because they would be brought to a place other than Israel. Some of them talk about how we shouldn't condemn suicide bombings because they're persecuting Palestinians. Some of them will say that IDF killed far more people than what's actually recorded during an event. Some of these "Socialists" for the "working class" will openly say that they do not support the Israeli working class. It goes on and on.

Not that this is advertised that well in the OWS movement, so I really don't like people condemning Jews who sympathize with the OWS movement. Having sympathy for a movement portrayed as being a working class movement should not be condemned as working for the Gestapo.

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 04:49 PM
No, but some of them suggest the possibility that earlier Zionists such as Hertzl kept Jews from being saved during the holocaust because they would be brought to a place other than Israel. Some of them talk about how we shouldn't condemn suicide bombings because they're persecuting Palestinians. Some of them will say that IDF killed far more people than what's actually recorded during an event. Some of these "Socialists" for the "working class" will openly say that they do not support the Israeli working class. It goes on and on.

Not that this is advertised that well in the OWS movement, so I really don't like people condemning Jews who sympathize with the OWS movement. Having sympathy for a movement portrayed as being a working class movement should not be condemned as working for the Gestapo.

Kooks is kooks, Lanie. I was taking issue with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

Lanie
01-25-2012, 05:02 PM
Kooks is kooks, Lanie. I was taking issue with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

Criticism of Israel is certainly okay (although some people here probably disagree).

Thing is you do have the kooks in the crowd. From the OP:


Nor was the hostility a matter of undertones only. The tone, very early on, was set in part by signs and messages that were overtly anti-Semitic. “Google: (1) Wall St. Jews, (2) Jewish Billionaires, (3) Jews & FedRsrvBank,” read one sign. Another: “Nazi Bankers Wall Street.” The man holding up a sign that read “Hitler’s Bankers,” upon being pressed by passersby to explain himself, replied “Jews control Wall Street.” He was then asked whether the Fox News Channel had asked him to hold up the sign, presumably to make Occupy Wall Street look bad, and he responded, “F— Fox News. That’s bulls—t. F—ing Jew made that up.” Another protester, upon being interrogated by a skeptical elderly passerby sporting a yarmulke, brushed him away saying, “You’re a bum, Jew.”

An Occupier who had traveled from Georgia explained his anti-Jewish animus to a reporter from the New York Post by stating that “Jews are the smartest people in the world,” that “they control the media,” and that nobody is willing to point out this simple truth because “the media doesn’t want to commit suicide by losing the Jewish advertisers.” Still another Occupier expostulated in a widely circulated video: “The smallest group in America controls the money, media, and all other things. The fingerprints belong to the Jewish bankers who control Wall Street. I am against Jews who rob America. They are one percent who control America. President Obama is a Jewish puppet. The entire economy is Jewish. Every federal judge [on] the East Coast is Jewish.”



Now, the two paragraphs above have nothing to do with Israel.

It has more, but you can read it for yourself. I think what happened is that some people in Manhattan had legitimate grievances and protested. It encouraged others in the country to protest. When some of the fringe activist groups saw that it was catching on, they hijacked the movement. I could be wrong, but that's what it looks like.

Adam Wood
01-25-2012, 05:11 PM
Kooks is kooks, Lanie. I was taking issue with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.Wow. If " F—ing Jew made that up" and "you're a bum, Jew" don't count as antisemitism, what does?

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 05:17 PM
Wow. If " F—ing Jew made that up" and "you're a bum, Jew" don't count as antisemitism, what does?

What do those two statements have to do with Israel?

noonwitch
01-25-2012, 05:18 PM
Kooks is kooks, Lanie. I was taking issue with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

Good Luck with that.

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 05:19 PM
Good Luck with that.

Yes, it is a windmill.

Rockntractor
01-25-2012, 05:41 PM
Wow. If " F—ing Jew made that up" and "you're a bum, Jew" don't count as antisemitism, what does?

It meant they are very good lovers and adept at acquiring money.

Adam Wood
01-25-2012, 06:56 PM
What do those two statements have to do with Israel?Well, other than the fact that Israel does tend to have lots of Jews living there, nothing. Are you seriously trying to claim that those kinds of statements are "criticism of Israel?"

Lanie
01-25-2012, 08:06 PM
Well, other than the fact that Israel does tend to have lots of Jews living there, nothing. Are you seriously trying to claim that those kinds of statements are "criticism of Israel?"

No, he's trying to tick you off with technicality statements.

Elspeth
01-25-2012, 08:10 PM
At Occupy Los Angeles, one sign explained, in remarkable detail: the “[The] satanic cult called the Illuminati…represents Masonic and Jewish bankers who finagled a monopoly over government credit….Thus the people who control our purse strings are conspiring against us.” (It went on to claim how this nefarious force funded the first two world wars and is planning a third.) Another sign read “Humanity vs. the Rothschlds” [sic] as a speaker further advanced this classic trope: “How many people know that the wars, in WWII, both sides, were funded by the Rothschilds? Those are the bankers. So banking and war is [sic] very intertwined.”

:eek::eek:

These sound like late-night radio listeners. Not enough tin foil in the world for that.:D

Arroyo_Doble
01-25-2012, 09:15 PM
Well, other than the fact that Israel does tend to have lots of Jews living there, nothing. Are you seriously trying to claim that those kinds of statements are "criticism of Israel?"

No.

Adam Wood
01-26-2012, 10:47 AM
No.OK, then we're back to antisemitism pervading OWS. Nothing new there; the Left is filled with antisemites.

Lanie
01-26-2012, 11:17 AM
OK, then we're back to antisemitism pervading OWS. Nothing new there; the Left is filled with antisemites.

Now, that's not fair. The right has a lot of them too.

Stuff I've heard from conservatives:

The Jews have always been a stiff necked people. They're hardened. That's why they couldn't accept Jesus.

The Jews killed Jesus (nevermind that they needed the Romans, who also felt threatened by Jesus to do this).

Of course I support Israel. Errrrrr. Because God wants me to, and the truth is we're not supporting Jewish Israel as much as future Christian Israel. (Okay, I'll admit that I didn't hear that word for word, but some of these fundamentlists do pretty much say that).

Oh, and how many fundamentalist Christians just loooooove the Passions of the Christ by Mel Gibson? Their argument is that it's biblical. Not completely. There are scenes in there that aren't in the bible at all. When I did further research, I found that Mel Gibson had borrowed information from nuns who were openly anti-semite. One of them said that Jews put children in their passover bread. Do all these people supporting the film care about any of that? Nope. They also don't care that Gibson's father denies the holocaust and that Gibson has never spoken out against it.

Another thing I don't like is that Mel Gibson aside, conservative Christians don't like to tell the entire story behind Jesus's execution. Yes, there were some zealous Jewish leaders. There was also Roman occupation. They executed people who they felt got into their way. Jesus got in their way when he said that they shouldn't be turning his father's house into a house of thieves (charging Jews just for using the synagogue). I think about a million Jews were murdered during Roman occupation. Do conservative Christians have anything to say about that? No. I understand the focus of the story is to concentrate on Jesus and what he did for us, but do you realize how much of a slap in the face it is not to even acknowledge this in the story when we tell it? It's an even further slap in the face to portray Jews as somehow bad for wishing Jesus would do something about it. I do believe in Jesus as our messiah, but I honestly think the entire story should be getting told and it's not. I don't know how liberal churches present this story because I haven't been there. I do know how conservative churches and synagogues present this story. World of difference.

So honestly, I think the conservative side has a long way to go before they can truly point the finger at the left. If you want to say that parts of the radical left are anti-semite, then fine. My ultra leftist professor admitted it to me years ago. Don't point the finger and pretend your side is innocent.

Arroyo_Doble
01-26-2012, 11:36 AM
OK, then we're back to antisemitism pervading OWS. Nothing new there; the Left is filled with antisemites.

OK.

But what does that have to do with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism?

Adam Wood
01-26-2012, 11:40 AM
Now, that's not fair. The right has a lot of them too.

Stuff I've heard from conservatives:

The Jews have always been a stiff necked people. They're hardened. That's why they couldn't accept Jesus.

The Jews killed Jesus (nevermind that they needed the Romans, who also felt threatened by Jesus to do this).

Of course I support Israel. Errrrrr. Because God wants me to, and the truth is we're not supporting Jewish Israel as much as future Christian Israel. (Okay, I'll admit that I didn't hear that word for word, but some of these fundamentlists do pretty much say that).

Oh, and how many fundamentalist Christians just loooooove the Passions of the Christ by Mel Gibson? Their argument is that it's biblical. Not completely. There are scenes in there that aren't in the bible at all. When I did further research, I found that Mel Gibson had borrowed information from nuns who were openly anti-semite. One of them said that Jews put children in their passover bread. Do all these people supporting the film care about any of that? Nope. They also don't care that Gibson's father denies the holocaust and that Gibson has never spoken out against it.

So honestly, I think the conservative side has a long way to go before they can truly point the finger at the left. If you want to say that parts of the radical left are anti-semite, then fine. My ultra leftist professor admitted it to me years ago. Don't point the finger and pretend your side is innocent.Oh please. You're taking "grasping" to a whole new level.

I defy you to find similar actual documented examples on the Right of things like this (http://zombietime.com/gaza_war_protest/), this (http://www.zombietime.com/nakba-60/), this (http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/), or this (http://www.zombietime.com/israeli_consulate_protest_july_13_2006/). I can save you some time by telling you don't bother, because there is no such antisemitism on the Right. Are there some conservative antisemites? Yes. Is it pervasive amongst conservatives? No.

Adam Wood
01-26-2012, 11:41 AM
OK.

But what does that have to do with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism?The OP does not attempt to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism. The OP points out that antisemitism at OWS (in this case) is attempting to mask itself in the cloak of legitimate criticism of Israel.

Arroyo_Doble
01-26-2012, 12:02 PM
The OP does not attempt to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism. The OP points out that antisemitism at OWS (in this case) is attempting to mask itself in the cloak of legitimate criticism of Israel.

Yes. That is the accusation that is used to silence criticism of the nation of Israel.

How are these antisemitic?



“Obama stop giving bunker buster bombs to an extremist Israeli regime. Stop being Israel’s hit-man. AIPAC will still dump you in 2012.”

“USA and Israel are criminal psychopathic nations, an axis of evil, mass murderers, financial predators if not stopped no one has a future! Hands off Iran.”

“Occupy Wall Street, Not Palestine,”

“Palestinians, too, are part of the 99% around the world that suffer at the hands of the 1% whose greed and ruthless quest for hegemony have led to unspeakable suffering and endless war.”

“while people are losing jobs, homes, and hope, politicians—dominated by powerful special interests—are sending more of our tax money to Israel than to any other country on earth.”

Adam Wood
01-26-2012, 12:17 PM
Yes. That is the accusation that is used to silence criticism of the nation of Israel.

How are these antisemitic?



“Obama stop giving bunker buster bombs to an extremist Israeli regime. Stop being Israel’s hit-man. AIPAC will still dump you in 2012.”

“USA and Israel are criminal psychopathic nations, an axis of evil, mass murderers, financial predators if not stopped no one has a future! Hands off Iran.”

“Occupy Wall Street, Not Palestine,”

“Palestinians, too, are part of the 99% around the world that suffer at the hands of the 1% whose greed and ruthless quest for hegemony have led to unspeakable suffering and endless war.”

“while people are losing jobs, homes, and hope, politicians—dominated by powerful special interests—are sending more of our tax money to Israel than to any other country on earth.”

No one said they are.

txradioguy
01-26-2012, 02:08 PM
Now, that's not fair. The right has a lot of them too.

Stuff I've heard from conservatives:

The Jews have always been a stiff necked people. They're hardened. That's why they couldn't accept Jesus.

The Jews killed Jesus (nevermind that they needed the Romans, who also felt threatened by Jesus to do this).

Of course I support Israel. Errrrrr. Because God wants me to, and the truth is we're not supporting Jewish Israel as much as future Christian Israel. (Okay, I'll admit that I didn't hear that word for word, but some of these fundamentlists do pretty much say that).

Oh, and how many fundamentalist Christians just loooooove the Passions of the Christ by Mel Gibson? Their argument is that it's biblical. Not completely. There are scenes in there that aren't in the bible at all. When I did further research, I found that Mel Gibson had borrowed information from nuns who were openly anti-semite. One of them said that Jews put children in their passover bread. Do all these people supporting the film care about any of that? Nope. They also don't care that Gibson's father denies the holocaust and that Gibson has never spoken out against it.

Another thing I don't like is that Mel Gibson aside, conservative Christians don't like to tell the entire story behind Jesus's execution. Yes, there were some zealous Jewish leaders. There was also Roman occupation. They executed people who they felt got into their way. Jesus got in their way when he said that they shouldn't be turning his father's house into a house of thieves (charging Jews just for using the synagogue). I think about a million Jews were murdered during Roman occupation. Do conservative Christians have anything to say about that? No. I understand the focus of the story is to concentrate on Jesus and what he did for us, but do you realize how much of a slap in the face it is not to even acknowledge this in the story when we tell it? It's an even further slap in the face to portray Jews as somehow bad for wishing Jesus would do something about it. I do believe in Jesus as our messiah, but I honestly think the entire story should be getting told and it's not. I don't know how liberal churches present this story because I haven't been there. I do know how conservative churches and synagogues present this story. World of difference.

So honestly, I think the conservative side has a long way to go before they can truly point the finger at the left. If you want to say that parts of the radical left are anti-semite, then fine. My ultra leftist professor admitted it to me years ago. Don't point the finger and pretend your side is innocent.

And I supposed you have links to those alleged "Conservative" quotes?

Yeah...didn't think so. :rolleyes:

Lanie
01-26-2012, 02:11 PM
Oh please. You're taking "grasping" to a whole new level.

I defy you to find similar actual documented examples on the Right of things like this (http://zombietime.com/gaza_war_protest/), this (http://www.zombietime.com/nakba-60/), this (http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/), or this (http://www.zombietime.com/israeli_consulate_protest_july_13_2006/). I can save you some time by telling you don't bother, because there is no such antisemitism on the Right. Are there some conservative antisemites? Yes. Is it pervasive amongst conservatives? No.

Because anti-semitism (as in Jew hating, stereotyping Jews, etc) only comes in the form of anti-Israel protests. :rolleyes:

Hello? Anti-semitism has been around since the Bible ages. It was there while Israel was up, after it fell and during the disaspora, and after it came back up.

txradioguy
01-26-2012, 02:13 PM
Because anti-semitism (as in Jew hating, stereotyping Jews, etc) only comes in the form of anti-Israel protests. :rolleyes:


It also comes in the form of your garden variety leftist and their fellow travelers that practice radical Islam.

Lanie
01-26-2012, 02:15 PM
Yes. That is the accusation that is used to silence criticism of the nation of Israel.

How are these antisemitic?



“Obama stop giving bunker buster bombs to an extremist Israeli regime. Stop being Israel’s hit-man. AIPAC will still dump you in 2012.”

“USA and Israel are criminal psychopathic nations, an axis of evil, mass murderers, financial predators if not stopped no one has a future! Hands off Iran.”

“Occupy Wall Street, Not Palestine,”

“Palestinians, too, are part of the 99% around the world that suffer at the hands of the 1% whose greed and ruthless quest for hegemony have led to unspeakable suffering and endless war.”

“while people are losing jobs, homes, and hope, politicians—dominated by powerful special interests—are sending more of our tax money to Israel than to any other country on earth.”

Well, there is some anti-semitism there in the sense that some of these people are blaming all of America's problems on Israel. If we were not friends with Israel, we'd still be putting lots of money into foreign policy, giving to countries that some would argue we shouldn't because we need the money, etc. Israel is not the reason that we have greed in this country, but some of these protesters make it out to be that way.

Also, one of those people had an upside down American flag with the star of David where the stars should be. That's suggesting that Israel is somehow America, the largest superpower. If Israel is controlling America, the largest superpower, then doesn't this go back to the idea that Jews run the world?

Lanie
01-26-2012, 02:40 PM
Oh, and Adam, I have some news for you. Come of think of it, the others need to listen to. Everybody listen closely, because this will be a shock.

Israel is a socialist country.

Here's why. Only six percent of Israel is privately owned. The rest of it is owned by the government. Actually, one of the issues that the Palestinians have with Israel is that Israel bought up land that originally belonged to them so they could hold out for Jewish people wanting to "come home." These Palestinians do not have the option of buying the land back that is reserved for government ownership. Now, three percent of Palestinians do own some of the six percent (and Jews own about three percent of the other). However, Israel is generally a socialist country because most of the land if owned by the government.

Also, would you like to know which country first recognized Israel as a legitimate country? If you guessed the USA, then you're wrong. It was the Soviet Union. That's right. Stalin (even though he was an anti-semite himself) was hoping to find a Communist ally in Israel.

Anybody who wants to know more about Israel (who is fiscally speaking and sometimes socially speaking, a leftist country) can read more about it here. This is actually one reason why Jews are having such an issue with staying away from the left. It's because historically speaking, they are part of the left.

Seriously, this is sweet.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/is.html


The global economic downturn affected Israel's economy primarily through reduced demand for Israel's exports in the United States and EU, Israel's top trading partners. Exports of goods and services account for about 40% of the country's GDP. The Israeli Government responded to the recession by implementing a modest fiscal stimulus package and an aggressive expansionary monetary policy - including cutting interest rates to record lows, purchasing government bonds, and intervening in the foreign currency market. The Bank of Israel began raising interest rates in the summer of 2009 when inflation rose above the upper end of the Bank's target and the economy began to show signs of recovery.

Who has universal healthcare? We don't, but Israel sure does.

http://www.jpost.com/JerusalemReport/Article.aspx?id=175612

Check this out. If I argued for this stuff on here, I'd be met with a lot of arguments.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/Looking+at+Israel/Looking+at+Israel-+Social+Services.htm


Care of the elderly, assistance for single parents, programs for children and youth, adoption agencies,as well as prevention and treatment of alcoholism and drug abuse, comprise a large part of the services available to individuals and families. Correctional services encompass adult and juvenile probation frameworks, remedial programs for school dropouts, and residential and observational services for youth in distress. Sheltered workshops and employment counseling are among the rehabilitation services available for the physically disabled. Mentally retarded persons are cared for through various residential and community-based programs.

Care and services for the elderly have become a major component of Israel's health and social service capabilities. While the total population has increased five-fold since the country's establishment, the number of senior citizens (age 65+) has increased 10-fold, now representing nearly 10 percent of Israel's over 7 million inhabitants. Much of this growth has been due to mass immigration. Over one million immigrants have arrived since 1989, more than 12 percent of them aged 65 and over.



Over here, we're debating whether to cut Medicare.

I don't care if you are gay, you won't use it to get out of joining Israel's military. No link necessary.

Actually, the gay rights community acknowledges Israel on well their country does for homosexual rights.

http://www.gaytlvguide.com/start-here/gay-rights-in-israel

All in all, Israel is a leftist country. I think I'm in love. lol.

Adam Wood
01-26-2012, 04:42 PM
Oh, and Adam, I have some news for you.

~ a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter ~

Also, would you like to know which country first recognized Israel as a legitimate country? If you guessed the USA, then you're wrong. It was the Soviet Union. That's right. Stalin (even though he was an anti-semite himself) was hoping to find a Communist ally in Israel.

~ more stuff that doesn't matter ~

Just wanted to address this little factoid. The Soviets were the first to recognize Israel as a matter of law on May 17, 1948, three days after the Israeli declaration of independence from British rule. The United States, who actually worked on the creation of Israel in the first place, officially recognized Israel eleven minutes after Ben-Gurion finished reading the declaration, but in a de facto manner, which is how we do it in the United States. After Israeli elections were held, we recognized Israel as a matter of law, which is how we do it in the United States.

So yes, the Soviet Union managed to be the first nation in the world to recognize Israel as a matter of formal law, but despite how you try to frame it, that is not some sort of black mark on the United States.

Lanie
01-26-2012, 11:19 PM
Just wanted to address this little factoid. The Soviets were the first to recognize Israel as a matter of law on May 17, 1948, three days after the Israeli declaration of independence from British rule. The United States, who actually worked on the creation of Israel in the first place, officially recognized Israel eleven minutes after Ben-Gurion finished reading the declaration, but in a de facto manner, which is how we do it in the United States. After Israeli elections were held, we recognized Israel as a matter of law, which is how we do it in the United States.

So yes, the Soviet Union managed to be the first nation in the world to recognize Israel as a matter of formal law, but despite how you try to frame it, that is not some sort of black mark on the United States.

I don't think I said anything about a black mark. I'm just saying that Israel is generally a leftist country. They have social programs which would make most conservatives here throw a fit.

txradioguy
01-26-2012, 11:24 PM
I don't think I said anything about a black mark.

You should have quit right there. It would have saved you the pain of being exposed yet again as the Libtard idiot you really are.

Novaheart
01-26-2012, 11:48 PM
Jonathan Neumann — January 2012
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/occupy-wall-street-and-the-jews/

I was stunned a couple of years ago when the drug lords of Monterrey Mexico had the peasants blocking the bridge to the US and having a riot-lite. A fiftysomething man (given that it's Mexico he may have been younger) made a statement I never expected to hear- I can't remember the exact words in Spanish, but it translated to "It's the Jews, who have been ruling America since 1764 (can't remember the exact year, but it was the 18th century.

I wasn't aware that anti-semitism ran so high or so close to the surface in Mexico, especially a place in Mexico which I can't honestly imagine has any Jewish residents.

Despite my staunch support for Israel and Zionism, and distaste for anti-semitism I still find myself being accused of anti-semitism because I don't hide my fascination with the fact that in any given day, I am bound to be pissed off by Amy Goodman, Ari Lewis, Naomi Klein, or some other devotee of Howard Zinn. Why there is a cluster of Jews on the radio and in my face with their hatred for this country, Western European culture, and a sovereign Israel is beyond me. Are we forbidden from being honest? I can find some pretty nasty WASPS as well. But you never get to the point where you can point out that you see these things, and comment on them from time to time, because we live in a country where the favorite debate tactic is not to disprove the message, but to discredit the speaker.

Novaheart
01-26-2012, 11:51 PM
I don't think I said anything about a black mark. I'm just saying that Israel is generally a leftist country. They have social programs which would make most conservatives here throw a fit.

They also pick their own vegetables, do they not?

Novaheart
01-26-2012, 11:57 PM
Anti-Israel? Is that not allowed?



The Jews have one country on this planet to call their ancestral home. IS it too much to ask for them to have a tiny piece of dirt?

Rockntractor
01-27-2012, 12:08 AM
The Jews have one country on this planet to call their ancestral home. IS it to much to ask for them to have a tiny piece of dirt?

Your point is a very good one. Israel is a tiny percentage of the middle east that was of very little interest to the surrounding population at the time they BOUGHT it from it's occupants.
There really is no need for any other argument, to begrudge them their homeland is antisemitic!

Lanie
01-27-2012, 08:52 AM
Your point is a very good one. Israel is a tiny percentage of the middle east that was of very little interest to the surrounding population at the time they BOUGHT it from it's occupants.
There really is no need for any other argument, to begrudge them their homeland is antisemitic!

I'm pro-Israel, but only because they're there now. I can't very well support Hamas trying to destroy them all. It was NOT okay to buy up land from Britain to take from the Palestinians. Europe has always had this perspective about what land ownership means and they love to force it on the rest of the world. That you all don't see that boggles me.

As for where the Jews should live, obviously Israel since it's there now. What's wrong with the rest of the world? Jews should be allowed to live where they want to in theory. No instead, they've been pushed away for centuries because they were supposedly more loyal to a country that didn't exist for the time being. THAT was anti-semitic. The idea that the Jews should all live on one homeland is anti-semitic.

on edit: Just out of curiousity, what do you think about the fact that we won't just leave America and let the Native Americans *completely* have their land back? Does that make us anti-Indian?

Lanie
01-27-2012, 08:54 AM
You should have quit right there. It would have saved you the pain of being exposed yet again as the Libtard idiot you really are. Gotcha! Hooray! I did it!

Fixed to expose your idiocy.

It's not wrong that the US didn't acknowledge Israel first. I'm only saying that the USSR did thinking they'd have a communist ally. That's how leftist the new state of Israel was. Of course Stalin went back to his anti-semitic ways after realizing he didn't have a new ally. The idea that left equals anti-semitic when Israel itself is a leftist country is just boggling.

Odysseus
01-27-2012, 09:45 AM
Anti-Israel? Is that not allowed?

What other countries are off limits? Apparently not NATO allies like France and Turkey.
Criticism of Israeli policies? Sure it's allowed. But accusing Israel of genocide? Spreading lies about the history of Israel and the Arab Middle East? Not so much.

My friend wouldn't bow down to anybody in the hopes of not being a victim. He just thinks it's a sincere movement. I can't convince him there's a fringe side.
Ah, then he's just like those Jews who genuinely thought that the cattle cars were taking them for resettlement, who believed that Hitler just couldn't be serious. Quite a few of them even saw the sign at the gates of Auschwitz that said "Arbeit Macht Frei", and said, "You see? It's just a labor camp. They'd never kill this many workers in wartime. We're a strategic resource. I told you that there was nothing to worry about." They thought that everything was fine right up until the showers started spewing gas.

Kooks is kooks, Lanie. I was taking issue with the attempt in the OP to equate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
As you always do. But when an OWS supporter calls for the deportation of zionist Jewish bankers, what do you call that?

Yes. That is the accusation that is used to silence criticism of the nation of Israel.
While the claim that attacks against Israel which are motivated by antisemitism are legitimate criticism is used to silence those who point it out.


How are these antisemitic?


“Obama stop giving bunker buster bombs to an extremist Israeli regime. Stop being Israel’s hit-man. AIPAC will still dump you in 2012.”

“USA and Israel are criminal psychopathic nations, an axis of evil, mass murderers, financial predators if not stopped no one has a future! Hands off Iran.”

“Occupy Wall Street, Not Palestine,”

“Palestinians, too, are part of the 99% around the world that suffer at the hands of the 1% whose greed and ruthless quest for hegemony have led to unspeakable suffering and endless war.”

“while people are losing jobs, homes, and hope, politicians—dominated by powerful special interests—are sending more of our tax money to Israel than to any other country on earth.”

This is a very shrewd tactic, because it puts the Jew who objects to the statements used on the defensive. And, after all, it's not antisemitism in the classic sense, is it? It's not demanding forced conversions, mass deportations or genocide, but those really only apply to Jews within reach. For those Jews beyond the reach of an antisemite, it is innefectual to say “You cannot live among us as Jews,” “You cannot live among us,” or “You cannot live.” Israel is not simply a nation among nations, it is a Jewish nation, and the only effective attack on it is to say, “You cannot live in a state of your own.” This, in turn, ljustifies the demands for boycotts, divestment and sanctions, not to mention territorial losses and, ultimately, the complete annihilation of Israel as a poltical entity. Blind, dogmatic support for the Arab positions, and especially the Palestinian position, is an expression of this. After all, Israel has signed a peace agreement with the Palestinians that had specific obligations for both parties. Israel has met its obligations, which include transfers of territory, financial support and all sorts of other concrete aid to the Palestinians, while the Palestinian obligations, such as an end to incitement against Israel and suppression of terrorism, have not only not been met, but have grown in severity. Descriptions of Israel as an "apartheid" state or comparisons to Nazi Germany should be obvious antisemitism. But, don't take my word for it. When Israel and Zionism came under attack during a book fair at Harvard, Martin Luther King Jr. observed:

“It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is anti-Semitism. … Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews — make no mistake about it.”

Odysseus
01-27-2012, 10:08 AM
on edit: Just out of curiousity, what do you think about the fact that we won't just leave America and let the Native Americans *completely* have their land back? Does that make us anti-Indian?

Oh, Lanie...

You are equating the Jewish "incursion" into Palestine with our incursions into the New World, but you've got it backwards. The Jews of Judea were the indians. The various conquerors were the cowboys, and nobody ever did a finer job of reducing a region to ruin than the Arabs, Abbassids, Turks and other Muslims who governed the property. And even so, despite being scattered by the Romans and tortured, impoverished and humiliated by the Muslims for centuries, Jews have always remained there. Prior to the first Zionist congress in Europe, before a single Jew had left to settle there, Jerusalem had a Jewish majority, according to the Ottoman censuses. Here is a very good summary of the history of Judea/Palestine after Roman rule: http://www.adespicabletruce.org.uk/page61.html I'd paste some excerpts, but Arroyo will ignore them, while I know that you will actually read the site.

Arroyo_Doble
01-27-2012, 10:23 AM
The Jews have one country on this planet to call their ancestral home. IS it too much to ask for them to have a tiny piece of dirt?

I don't give a fuck what their religion is; there is enough room in Hell for all of us. Either they are a sovereign nation or they aren't. Which is it?

Arroyo_Doble
01-27-2012, 10:24 AM
Criticism of Israeli policies? Sure it's allowed. But accusing Israel of genocide? Spreading lies about the history of Israel and the Arab Middle East? Not so much.

So no, it isn't.

I disagree.

Lanie
01-27-2012, 11:24 AM
Ah, then he's just like those Jews who genuinely thought that the cattle cars were taking them for resettlement, who believed that Hitler just couldn't be serious. Quite a few of them even saw the sign at the gates of Auschwitz that said "Arbeit Macht Frei", and said, "You see? It's just a labor camp. They'd never kill this many workers in wartime. We're a strategic resource. I told you that there was nothing to worry about." They thought that everything was fine right up until the showers started spewing gas.



Seriously Ody, that's just disgusting on your part.

BTW, who are you to be saying what Jews should be doing or how they should react to stuff? Seriously, this is offensive.

Lanie
01-27-2012, 11:26 AM
Oh, Lanie...

You are equating the Jewish "incursion" into Palestine with our incursions into the New World, but you've got it backwards. The Jews of Judea were the indians. The various conquerors were the cowboys, and nobody ever did a finer job of reducing a region to ruin than the Arabs, Abbassids, Turks and other Muslims who governed the property. And even so, despite being scattered by the Romans and tortured, impoverished and humiliated by the Muslims for centuries, Jews have always remained there. Prior to the first Zionist congress in Europe, before a single Jew had left to settle there, Jerusalem had a Jewish majority, according to the Ottoman censuses. Here is a very good summary of the history of Judea/Palestine after Roman rule: http://www.adespicabletruce.org.uk/page61.html I'd paste some excerpts, but Arroyo will ignore them, while I know that you will actually read the site.

The Romans scattered the Jews, and that was very wrong. The Muslims were not existing yet. You can't say the Muslims did it. Maybe Arabs, but this was more of a Roman thing. You have to remember they've all been living in that area for centuries.

I'll read your link soon. I'm still mad at you for your other comment. Have to work.

Odysseus
01-27-2012, 11:32 AM
I don't give a fuck what their religion is; there is enough room in Hell for all of us. Either they are a sovereign nation or they aren't. Which is it?
They are. But for some reason, which you don't think is antisemitism, nobody will treat them like any other sovereign nation. The Arab states refuse to even recognize its existence or right to exist. Do you?

So no, it isn't.
That isn't what I said, and you know it. Criticism of Israel as a nation is perfectly legitimate. However, slanders, libels and attacks that cross the line into singling Israel out and treating it unequally, which the OWS protestors routinely do, and which you are trying very hard to ignore, are not.


I disagree.
Hey, everybody! Arroyo disagrees! Well, that settles it. It's open season on Israel, and anyone who points out the obvious antisemitic comments is just trying to tar him. :rolleyes:

I don't blame you for taking your position, as it's much easier than trying to prove the case for the Palestinians, whose claim to any part of the land in question is tenuous, at best. In fact, I've never even seen you try. It's part of your general tactic of attacking the positions of others without ever presenting your own.

So, what is your position on the solution to the Palestinian issue? Who do you think is in the right? Who is in the wrong? What evidence do you cite to support your claims?

We await our enlightenment with baited breath.

Lanie
01-27-2012, 01:21 PM
I just want to add a few things.

While I don't like the way Israel got restarted in 1948 (as I often don't like the beginnings of different countries) and while I don't agree with everything they do, I'm still pro-Israel and pro-human rights.

I remember standing up for fringe leftists years ago on this issue. I remember contacting my leftist professor and expressing concern of anti-semitism in a book by Du Bois. I went to a synogogue to show my support for Israel. I'm not anti-Israel and I sure am not anti-semite.

Odysseus
01-27-2012, 02:20 PM
The Jews have one country on this planet to call their ancestral home. IS it too much to ask for them to have a tiny piece of dirt?
Apparently so. Hence the crematoria.

It was NOT okay to buy up land from Britain to take from the Palestinians. Europe has always had this perspective about what land ownership means and they love to force it on the rest of the world. That you all don't see that boggles me.
I missed this before because I focused on the indian issue. The Jews who began buying the land didn't buy it from Britain. Britain's mandate didn't begin until 1920 or so, and even then, they didn't own the land. Most of Palestine was owned by Muslims who leased it out to tenant farmers, when there were farmers available, but by the mid-1800s, most of the land lay fallow and there was no population to speak of outside of a few towns. Jerusalem was one of the few cities that had a population beyond a few thousand. The land between the towns was held by absentees, who charged the Jewish buyers astronomical prices for properties that had been allowed to turn to swamp or desert through centuries of neglect.

I just want to add a few things.

While I don't like the way Israel got restarted in 1948 (as I often don't like the beginnings of different countries) and while I don't agree with everything they do, I'm still pro-Israel and pro-human rights.

I remember standing up for fringe leftists years ago on this issue. I remember contacting my leftist professor and expressing concern of anti-semitism in a book by Du Bois. I went to a synogogue to show my support for Israel. I'm not anti-Israel and I sure am not anti-semite.

Never said that you were.

I am curious about what you dislike about Israel's origins, though.

txradioguy
01-28-2012, 03:06 AM
I wonder if our pro Palestinian apologists in here realize that they were offered their own homeland back in 1948 as well but turned it down?

You DID know that right?

If not...then you're gonna be really shocked about Arafat.

Lanie
01-28-2012, 08:56 AM
Apparently so. Hence the crematoria.

I missed this before because I focused on the indian issue. The Jews who began buying the land didn't buy it from Britain. Britain's mandate didn't begin until 1920 or so, and even then, they didn't own the land. Most of Palestine was owned by Muslims who leased it out to tenant farmers, when there were farmers available, but by the mid-1800s, most of the land lay fallow and there was no population to speak of outside of a few towns. Jerusalem was one of the few cities that had a population beyond a few thousand. The land between the towns was held by absentees, who charged the Jewish buyers astronomical prices for properties that had been allowed to turn to swamp or desert through centuries of neglect.


Never said that you were.

I am curious about what you dislike about Israel's origins, though.

You name the country, and I can probably criticize their origins. I'm not a fan of the fact that we pushed Indians off their own land and committed genocide. I'm ashamed of that fact. Israel has nothing on us. I'm not happy about the fact that Europeans went to Africa like crazy as they did N. America. I'm not happy about the fact that S. Africa now acts like it's okay to exclude whites now. I can make a big gripe list of different countries if you like.


I wonder if our pro Palestinian apologists in here realize that they were offered their own homeland back in 1948 as well but turned it down?

You DID know that right?

If not...then you're gonna be really shocked about Arafat.

They should have taken the offer in 1948.

The offer offered to Arafat (if I understand correctly) was a land offer where IDF would be surrounding areas around it and in between it. I would have turned that down too. That said, it's since came out that Arafat really was part of the terrorism.

I can't support giving the Palestinians their own state as long as Hamas or another terrorist group/single is their leader. If that ever changes, then I would be for giving them their own state.

txradioguy
01-28-2012, 10:01 AM
I'm not a fan of the fact that we pushed Indians off their own land and committed genocide.

the Indians were doing much worse to each otehr long before we settled here.

Your point?



They should have taken the offer in 1948.

They didn't because of their hatred of Jews and the fact Israel was being formed at the same time.



The offer offered to Arafat (if I understand correctly) was a land offer where IDF would be surrounding areas around it and in between it. I would have turned that down too. That said, it's since came out that Arafat really was part of the terrorism.

My point was that Arafat wasn't even a Palestinian. He was an Egyptian with a degree in electrical engineering...who was raised for at least part of his life in Jerusalem.



I can't support giving the Palestinians their own state as long as Hamas or another terrorist group/single is their leader. If that ever changes, then I would be for giving them their own state.

Hamas has been legally elected to Parliment...and they have the majority.

Palestinians...the mutts of the Middle East that no country wants...will continue to be stateless because their hatred of Jews and of Israel is greater than their desire to have their own state.

Lanie
01-28-2012, 11:19 AM
the Indians were doing much worse to each otehr long before we settled here.

Your point?

Two wrongs don't make a right, so what's your point? I don't think what you said speaks for all tribes. Just like all the tribes we pushed off were not innocent people. Some of them did attack first when we got on land. My point was that we don't have an innocent beginning either, so it's not like I'm singling Israel out.



They didn't because of their hatred of Jews and the fact Israel was being formed at the same time.

I think they did feel a threat regarding so many Jews coming to the land wanting to make it their own. Beforehand, Jews did live on the land (as Ody pointed out), it's just that Muslims ruled. They were actually better to the Jews than Christians were on their land. However, they were still second class citizens. Zionists wanted a land for Jews where they didn't have to worry about persecution anymore. It wasn't a religious issue as I don't think Hertzl was religious.

And Islam appears to have an idea in their head that once a land is declared theirs, they are to fight for it. That would include against Christians, Jews, or anybody else.

I do think anti-semitism rose while Zionists were coming because there were riots against Jews and some of the leaders were friends with Hitler. Of course it's far worse now because they (and other ME countries) spread ridiculous rumors about Jews killing children, ruling the world, etc.



My point was that Arafat wasn't even a Palestinian. He was an Egyptian with a degree in electrical engineering...who was raised for at least part of his life in Jerusalem.





Hamas has been legally elected to Parliment...and they have the majority.

Palestinians...the mutts of the Middle East that no country wants...will continue to be stateless because their hatred of Jews and of Israel is greater than their desire to have their own state.

At this point, you're right.

Novaheart
01-28-2012, 01:13 PM
I am curious about what you dislike about Israel's origins, though.

Well, as a son of Magog myself, it would have been nice if we had skipped that whole Great Flood thing. Oh sure, we could have done worse than to end up in the British Isles, but would it have been too much to ask to be on Cyprus, Crete, or Mykonos instead?

Odysseus
01-29-2012, 12:23 AM
Well, as a son of Magog myself, it would have been nice if we had skipped that whole Great Flood thing. Oh sure, we could have done worse than to end up in the British Isles, but would it have been too much to ask to be on Cyprus, Crete, or Mykonos instead?

If you'd ended up on Cyprus, you'd most likely have ended up under Turkish rule. As for the rest, do you really want to open yourself up to Greek jokes?

Novaheart
01-29-2012, 01:30 AM
If you'd ended up on Cyprus, you'd most likely have ended up under Turkish rule. As for the rest, do you really want to open yourself up to Greek jokes?

Ampat and rockintractor don't seem to require a segue .

Odysseus
01-29-2012, 02:23 AM
Ampat and rockintractor don't seem to require a segue .

Yes, but do you really need to provide one anyway?

joecu
02-28-2012, 10:11 AM
www.notwikipediahere.blogspot.com