You're a racist if you criticise Israel.

[SeVeR]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idU...lBrandChannel=0

 

 

"Anti-Semitism, including government-promoted hatred toward Jews and prejudice couched as criticism of Israel, has risen globally over the last decade, the State Department said on Thursday."

 

...

 

"The distinguishing feature of the new anti-Semitism is criticism of Zionism or Israeli policy that -- whether intentionally or unintentionally -- has the effect of promoting prejudice against all Jews by demonizing Israel and Israelis and attributing Israel's perceived faults to its Jewish character,"

 

...

 

"Such unremitting criticism of Israel "intentionally or not encourages anti-Semitism." This hostility can translate into physical violence, as in the surge in anti-Semitic incidents worldwide during the 2006 war between Israel and the Shi'ite Muslim group Hezbollah, the report said."

 

...

 

"It cited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has questioned whether the murder of millions of Jews by the Nazis took place, and Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez, who the State Department said had "publicly demonized" Israel."

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Is anyone else sick to their stomach after reading this? For starters Iran has the largest population of Jews anywhere in the Middle East, those Jews have a reserved place in the Iranian parliament, and the Supreme Leader of Iran has declared that "Jews are a religious minority that require our protection". Iran is not racist, they are anti-Zionist and are a prime example of how one must distinguish between anti-Zionism and racism (anti-semitism).

 

The main point though, is they are strongly linking criticism of a political regime with racism. This is utterly deplorable. Will the day come when criticising Israel will be deemed a race-crime?

 

Lastly, i'm not surprised this has come out of Washington. Is anyone else?

[Aileron]

For starters Iran has the largest population of Jews anywhere in the Middle East

 

Israel is in the Middle East and has a larger Jewish population than Iran.

 

 

If you notice the details of the statements, the accusation isn't that Iran itself is racist; it is that they are promoting racism by their policies. I'd still bet the idiot suicide-bomber blowing himself up on Israel's streets is anti-semitic, but I'd say the big-shots in Iran are more worldly and a more fair label for them would be 'anti-democratic'. By their anti-Israel policies, Iran is funding Hamas and Hezbollah. Those two organizations are racist, as they have repeatedly carried out attacks which would only serve the purpose of killing as many Jews as possible. Though not necessarily anti-semitic themselves, Iran is promoting racism because they are funding racist organizations.

 

 

 

As a conservative, I'd say that at most this is a taste of what Republicans have been putting up with for the past 20 years. Republican politicians are routinely being branded as "racists" and "fascists" for every strong conservative stance they make. Take a strong stance against Affirmative Action of Inner City Crime and you hate black people. Take a strong stance against Abortion and you are a sexist. It seems to be far easier to brand somebody as a racist than it is to actually beat their arguments in a logical manner.

 

Additionally Republicans are not given kudos for advancing racial rights either. For instance, President Bush appointed the first female African American Secretary of State. Because he is Republican, that isn't considered a 'big deal', but if it were a Democrat doing that, they would milk that for all it is worth.

 

To be sure I am not surprised to see these statements come out of Washington. It seems to be a popular label for the muckrakers to sling on to each other nowadays.

[Dav]

to be critical of the politics of a nation is not rasist. This is the sort of weapon people use to convert people quickly to a point fo view.

 

If this was the case i would be rasist against:

 

Isreail

Americans

Russians

...

even my own nation

 

I just hope this sly tactic works on few people

[SeVeR]

Dav, you're right, it's a method of conversion to pro-Israeli thought. No-one wants to be labelled racist, and no-one wants to be a cause of racism. This article is saying that criticising Israel "intentionally or not encourages anti-Semitism." This hostility can translate into physical violence...", and with that one sentence they blame violent acts on a harmless political view.

 

Good point about being racist against your own people. When it becomes possible to be racist against yourself, something is obviously wrong with the definition.

 

Ail:

If you notice the details of the statements, the accusation isn't that Iran itself is racist; it is that they are promoting racism by their policies. I'd still bet the idiot suicide-bomber blowing himself up on Israel's streets is anti-semitic, but I'd say the big-shots in Iran are more worldly and a more fair label for them would be 'anti-democratic'. By their anti-Israel policies, Iran is funding Hamas and Hezbollah. Those two organizations are racist, as they have repeatedly carried out attacks which would only serve the purpose of killing as many Jews as possible. Though not necessarily anti-semitic themselves, Iran is promoting racism because they are funding racist organizations.

Hezbollah and Hamas seek the dissolution of Israel, not the extermination of all Jews. These people, deemed terrorists, may be extreme enough to want to kill as many Israelis as they can (such is the hatred generated by both sides in the region), but it's not because their victims are Jewish, it's because they're Israeli.

 

Now i'm not speaking for all members of Hamas and Hezbollah, but i'm pretty sure that if one of these "terrorists" met a Jewish anti-Zionist, they wouldn't want to kill that person for being Jewish. My reason for saying this is clear: That Jews and Muslims have lived peacefully in the Middle East for millenia, and only since Israel's creation has there been violence. The cause of Muslim hatred is obviously Zionism and not Judaism.

 

Israel is in the Middle East and has a larger Jewish population than Iran.

Yes, i meant to say "other than Israel"; i usually do say it when i mention this fact, but forgot it this time, my bad.

[Aileron]

Okay, how would suicide bombing a movie theater prevent imperialistic expansion?

[SeVeR]

ROFL, i'm not saying suicide bombers are rational. I'm saying they're irrationally killing people for being Israeli (Zionist) and not for being jewish.

[NBVegita]

As a conservative, I'd say that at most this is a taste of what Republicans have been putting up with for the past 20 years. Republican politicians are routinely being branded as "racists" and "fascists" for every strong conservative stance they make. Take a strong stance against Affirmative Action of Inner City Crime and you hate black people. Take a strong stance against Abortion and you are a sexist. It seems to be far easier to brand somebody as a racist than it is to actually beat their arguments in a logical manner.

 

That is terribly true.

 

That is what is so funny about being "liberal" today, the number 1 advocates of "Freedom of speech as long as you don't disagree with me".

[Bak]

branding you an idiot and taking away your free speech are two separate things.

[NBVegita]

So tell Don Imus that no one infringed on his free speech.

 

Tell every celebrity, whom has to give a formal public apology else no one will work with them again, when something they say upsets a minority group.

 

Tell me how its right to preach that the cons!@#$%^&*ution protects a womans right to have an abortion (which I support) and that it is uncons!@#$%^&*utional to overturn that right and then turn around and say that it's not uncons!@#$%^&*utional to ban our right to bear arms.

 

How do we have free speech when you have to watch every word that comes out of your mouth otherwise you're labeled sexist/racists/bigot.

 

How is it that for a country that is supposed to be the United States of America the so called "liberals" are constantly fighting to seperate/distinguish each group from one another.

 

How is it right that if 4 white males jump 1 black male it's instantly a hate crime, yet if 4 black males jump 1 white male its just a plain mugging?

 

How is it that a black male can call a white male any name he wants, yet there is a large list of things the white male cannot call the black male else he is racist?

 

How is it that a person can spill hot coffee on themselves and sue a company for millions of dollars because they sold her coffee that was too hot?

 

How can a company due everything short of physically subduing a drunk employee from leaving a company party, and then have the employee turn around and win $300,000 because she hit a pole driving home drunk.

 

I mean I could really go on for hours here.

[The Real Picard]

Okay, how would suicide bombing a movie theater prevent imperialistic expansion?

 

Well, all those people killed, massacred as it were, wouldn't be able to go see the movies advertised before their movie (or bomb) started. Thus preventing their influence on imperialistic expansion.

[Bak]

no one infringed on don imus' free speech. he worked for a company that would lose money if they let him stay on. The company chose to fire him/force him to resign. He can still go out on the street and say whatever he wants and he won't get thrown in jail. Is the government supposed to tell companies how they can and can't run their business? It's certainly not don imus' right to have a radio show that thousands of people listen to, if that's what you were saying.

 

In some european countries you get put in prison for denying the holocaust. That's a violation of free speech. It's much worse in middle-east countries. Being labeled a "sexist/racists/bigot" is not a violation of free speech.

 

"4 white males jump 1 black male it's instantly a hate crime, yet if 4 black males jump 1 white male its just a plain mugging". muggings are an expression of speech? no.

 

If you want to live in a world where you can call anyone anything and they're not going to label you an idiot for doing it then you're dreaming. Such a world will never exist. free speech means no state punishment for what you say, and that is what we have.

[Aileron]

Complaining about muggings are though.

 

 

 

Back to SeVeR's point, if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, its a duck.

 

Hamas and Hezbollah are fundamentalist, fanatic, irrational, violent, and carry out attacks on a civilian population which happens to be primarily Jewish. Those adjectives can all be applied to any historical racist organization you can name.

 

Obviously neither of us have the telepathic powers necessary to read their minds and prove the argument one way or another. We can only make inferences based upon observed behavior and previous examples. Based upon those observations, organizations like Hamas and particularly Hezbollah* fit the pattern of a racist movement such as the KKK.

 

*Hamas has the excuse of being Palestinian. Hezbollah does not. They are based in Lebanon, and thus are meddling in the affairs of a distinctly foreign conflict that does not directly concern their country, adding the 'imperialistic' adjective as well.

[SeVeR]

Aileron, you can't pick and choose the victims characteristics that you want to use as motive for the attacks. For example, when a black person feels they're being discriminated against, they often say "It's because i'm black isn't it", but alot of the time it's just because they're an idiot. The victims of suicide bombers in Israel have two major characteristics: 1. They're Israeli, and 2. They're Jewish.

 

All the evidence points to No. 1. being the motive for attacks.

 

Firstly, Jews have lived with Muslims peacefully for centuries in the Middle East, and still do in all places other than in Israel.

Secondly, Hamas and Hezbollah don't ask "Are you a Jew?", they simply bomb indiscriminately killing Christians and Jews alike. This is because it doesn't matter to them; they are killing Israelis.

Thirdly, they have every reason to want to kill Israelis and no reason to kill Jews just for being Jewish. Again, this comes back to the first point, does this happen outside Israel? No.

 

I think it's sad that people are being indoctrinated to believe that these groups, no matter how irrational and wrong they may be, are racists. I don't think there is much wrong with the consequences of our beliefs, since i don't condone the actions of these groups. I do think there is plenty wrong with our understanding of why they do it. How can we ever understand their actions when we are being led to believe they are racists (evil) with no motive other than irrational prejudice.

 

The fact is, Hamas and Hezbollah might get a few more supporters in the West if we understood why they make their attacks. By dismissing them as racists the public is deceived but will fall into line.

 

As for saying Hezbollah have no excuse for bombing Israel, i assume you are joking or just haven't read about Israel's decades long occupation of Lebanon? Do you think the Lebanese just forgive the 17,000 left dead after the conflicts? No, they present Israel with Hezbollah.

Edited March 17, 2008 by SeVeR

[NBVegita]

Bak, we don't have freedom of speech. Even Don Imus, after being fired, was "forced" to give a national apology because of the NAACP. The NAACP said they wouldn't stop, they would even go as far as a lawsuit, if Imus wasn't fired.

 

There have been mul!@#$%^&*udes of suits because someone used a racial slur against another person. !@#$%^&* just google it. Aparently if you prove that it caused you "emotional distress" you can sue for punitive damages and aparently it can be a claim for violating your civil liberties too.

 

No the FBI won't knock on your door over using this language, but as long as they hold you responsible in a court of law, that infringes on your right to free speech.

 

Bak, you also keep talking about people being idiots for using "racial/gender/orientation" slurs, well whats the difference between me calling someone a !@#$%^&* and you calling them an !@#$%^&* hole? What if I take extreme offence to the word !@#$%^&*, does that make you an idiot for using it?

 

"4 white males jump 1 black male it's instantly a hate crime, yet if 4 black males jump 1 white male its just a plain mugging". muggings are an expression of speech? no.

 

I'm sorry that I was posting many issues that went beyond the realm of my original statement about freedom of speech in an effort to exemplify what the so called "liberals" have done to our society. I'm sorry if you didn't quite grasp that from my statements, next time I'll use footnotes so it is easier for you to understand.

[Bak]

you can sue anyone for anything. That doesn't mean you're going to win. Show me a case where someone won for a violation of civil liberties caused only by what someone else said (and not any discriminatory actions).

 

"What if I take extreme offense to the word !@#$%^&*, does that make you an idiot for using it?"

It doesn't make me an idiot, but you certainly can call me one if you want. Just like people can call Don Imus a racist. Is he actually a racist? Who knows.

 

 

"I'm sorry that I was posting many issues that went beyond the realm of my original statement about freedom of speech in an effort to exemplify what the so called "liberals" have done to our society."

Stay on topic please. If I wanted to argue against you for affirmative action, I wouldn't bring up that there were no WMDs found in Iraq to prove my point that conservatives are bad for America. That line of reasoning doesn't make sense! Similarly bringing up that someone sued McDonalds for spilling hot coffee on herself is unrelated to anything free speech.

 

We seem to draw these rigid boundaries of conservative or liberal but honestly we should look at it on an issue by issue basis. On some issues I agree with the conservatives and on others I think the liberals are right. I think most people are like this too.

[Aileron]

I think Penn State had to give a big payout to the black caucus a few years back because some kid shouted "n----" out of a dorm window. That wasn't technically a lawsuit but was still pretty ridiculous given how it was in response to a single word of speech.

[darkhosis]

[»D1st0rt]

How the !@#$%^&* do you spin that into him being anti-semitic?

[SeVeR]

[Aileron]

Yes, but the consequences of letting attacks on civilians go is worse. If we don't, we send the message that attacks on civilians are okay as long as the west doesn't feel up for a war at the moment.

[SeVeR]

Then we should bomb or condemn Israel as well.

[darkhosis]

How the !@#$%^&* do you spin that into him being anti-semitic?

!@#$%^&* if I know. You can google "Ron Paul" and "anti-semite" (or "anti-semitic") and find a whole bunch of material though.

 

I wouldn't vote for any of the 3 left, maybe Ralph Nader... but it's OK anyway, since I can't vote for another 23 months.. The one person I wouldn't want in office is John McCain.. that's like asking for a green-light on war in Iran & Syria...

 

LoL, found this whilst perusing the news:

 

Full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8031702440.html

 

To that, Lewis retorted (note: hilary clinton's rep at this meeting): "The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that are made by the people of Israel. It is not up to us to pick and choose from among the political parties (of Israel)." The audience members applauded.

 

Read the whole article. Pretty funny (or scary) stuff. I never knew that the role of the President of the USA was to blindly support Israel.. well, wait... OK, I just didn't know they'd put it out in the open like that.

Edited March 21, 2008 by darkhosis

[Aileron]

Look, maybe while we are at it, Europe should demand that Constantinople be returned to Christian hands.

 

This at!@#$%^&*ude that 'Israel is occupying Palestine' is plain ridiculous. Its been half a century since Israel was formed. Occupations always fail. If this were an occupation, it would have failed within at MOST 20 years

[Bak]

the usa isn't occupying the native American lands because we've been here for more than 20 years

[SeVeR]

That is pretty shocking darkhosis. I guess we know where Hillary Clinton takes her bribes, er, campaign contributions from.

 

It's funny that the whole article is set out to attack Obama, while the most shocking point gets no further discussion.

 

Aileron, occupations don't always fail, you've been thinking too much about Iraq. Even in Iraq the Americans could remain there indefinately.

 

You can't use the "it's been half a century" excuse. For Palestinians the war never ended, they are still fighting to get their land back. It's half a century since the start of the war, but there hasn't been half a century of peace.

 

I wonder how a Palestinian would feel if you said "You've taken more than 20 years to get your land back, therefore we think you're happy with the way things are, and won't support you".

 

If the American Indians had been fighting for 200 years, or the Christians for 500 years (or however long it's been), then it would still be an open conflict and we would need to decide on a resolution. There is no-one fighting though, it's obviously not that important to the majority of these peoples.