"...whatever your politics, every second you spend on Twitter is making you pettier, stupider, and worse. It is poison, and if you have an account, you should stop reading and delete it this instant." Best advice I have read in quite some time.
Re-upping a recent Damir Marusic tweet on how writing would become better if Twitter disappeared: he says that without Twitter's bad influence, opinion writers would have "fewer vituperative hot takes forged in low-stakes Twitter one-upmanship." -- twitter.com/dmarusic/status/1590928165995950080
Although Lanier seems to be arguing for some censorship on Twitter, which I don't agree with, I also see him as saying something good and important. Lanier is right that with or without censorship, sites like Twitter steer people into spewing hate as an important part of their fun. I think even without social media, almost any political viewpoint would find itself using and generating the emotion of hate, and it's cheap to speak as if only viewpoints you disagree with employ hate. Feeling hate may be part of almost any politically active person's feelings, whether it's acknowledged or not, but it generally makes political activity worse: it tends to misdirect your own political efforts as well as others'. Perhaps there are times when hate is a relatively harmless source of politically energy but it's hard to know when, and usually hate messes things up both through its effect on your allies and on those you don't see as allies, while causing people to overhastily treat someone else as their foe.
Although I've never succumbed to signing up for social media myself, I do enjoy reading people who are pretty skilled at Twitter, including Greenwald who has often done good things with it. But it's c;lear enough that Greenwald, like others, sometimes goes too far.
Twitter taught me how to write concise, carefully worded sentences. There is very good writing on Twitter.
Long form writing has it's place, but so does "the Tweet".
Tweets are aphorisms - at least the ones are.
Your are correct about how the format tends to simplify, divide and it does engender hate. One of the worst things it did to me, was to encourage me to BLOCK people and thereby dismiss them utterly. Oftentimes for the smallest of 'offences'.
It's on the more censored side by the overall standards of Western venues, but definitely not by "on the planet" standards. I realize they banned a number of people here, including you, and I don't agree with them doing that -- but if you say it's one of the most heavily censored venues on the planet, it's just hyperbole. Most large non-Western countries are so heavily into censorship that they block Twitter, sometimes entirely.
Twitter is nowhere near as censored as Letters to the Editor sections in newspapers and magazines, which also continue to censor the articles they publish. It is much less censored than TV or mainstream movies. On the whole, the Internet has generated an expansion of the range of views that can be easily published in a permanently recorded, widely accessible way at little or no cost to the speaker, and Twitter is part of that.
What troubles me about Twitter is not only the partial censorship but, more generally, that it's more or less failed as a town square. For a platform to be successful as a town square, it needs to be more friendly toward ethical conversations and the development of civic communities that are inspired from various parts of the political spectrum, while encouraging resistance to the kinds of authoritarianism and abuses that are found in almost all political movements. Twitter does a bit of that, but more often it suppresses people's best side and encourages groupthink, while leaving the most ethically sensitive voices in political movements to exist in small niches that usually get drowned out. Twitter is owned engagement-business social media pretending to be civic media, because we don't have a civic media yet. And even if you claim Substack is social media, it still hasn't gotten civic media right, though it's better than Twitter.
By demanding special pleading and by insisting that anyone not ready to write Israel a blank check for anything it ever does, did or shall do is indistinguishable from Goebbels or Himmler, Zionists have created more genuine anti-Semites than anything Stormfront could have done on its own.
So, by defending themselves against inveterate armed enemies whose stated, published intention is to "drive the Jews into the sea", the Zionists have created "more genuine anti-Semites than blah blah blah". Got it. So, the Jews should not have even gone to historical Israel at all, even after the devastating pogroms of the 1880s-90s in Ukraine. Not even after 6 million of them were efficiently fried or gassed to death by Hitler's minions. And despite the fact that Jews have been living in Israel continuously since pre-Roman times, including a plurality or majority of Jews in Jerusalem for over 2000 years. And despite the fact that the Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1920s-30s was a close ally of Hitler's, volunteering to wipe out the Jews in his little corner of the world, inciting his followers in 1927 to brutally rape and murder an ancient community of Jews in Hebron in one of the most heinous, barbaric events in Middle Eastern history.
Now despite all of that, the Jews are, as usual, expected to just shut up and take it. Luckily for the Jews, however, they no longer will just take it, but will fight back, will chauvinistically declare ancient Israel stolen from them by the Romans and subsequent Arab and Christian conquerors, and they will take it back by force, including ancient Judea and Samaria, the historical birthplace of the Jewish people and the spiritual home of Judaism and Christianity.
I understand your frustration. Being Jewish, growing up in LA's borscht belt, being the grandson of immigrants fleeing Europe, I grew up with hatred all around me for being Jewish.
But I am not a Zionist.
And it is this distinction that must be made.
Read John Loftus's book The Secret Wars against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People for a more historical and nuanced look.
Christians in Jerusalem Want Jews to Stop Spitting on Them
A few weeks ago, a senior Greek Orthodox clergyman in Israel attended a meeting at a government office in Jerusalem's Givat Shaul quarter. When he returned to his car, an elderly man wearing a skullcap came and knocked on the window.
Nobody here is denying the reality of antisemitism or engaging in denial of historical anti-Semitic atrocities, nor is anyone saying that "Jews are, as usual, expected to just shut up and take it."
Strawman arguments and special pleading abound. That said, I have noticed that most proponents of "might makes right" such as yourself, don't seem to like being on the receiving end themselves, as your recitation of historical atrocities indicates.
So much hasbara here today. Of course there is. Megaphone was shuttered when they realised how obvious it was, but the call still goes out to the sayanim nonetheless.
Funny, since your own words indicate that you sure are in favor of force and right when you are the one deploying them, but not when those whom you favor are the victims.
Funny, since the Jews in Israel have been open to negotiating a peaceful settlement since the 1800s. They bought land, they settled barren wastelands, they tried to have peaceful relations with the British and the Arabs, and every step of the way encountered hatred and violence.
Parallel to Zionist inflow into Palestine, by the way, was a concerted effort by Arab regimes to populate the area before it was "overrun" by Jews. Most of the Arabs currently living in what is now called Palestine are themselves migrants from elsewhere in the Levant. Notorious Arab leader Yassir Arafat, himself, was from Egypt -- and spoke Egyptian dialect of Arabic. He played you people for fools.
The Zionist settlers, later the Israelis, were forced to take up arms. It was not their choice; they wanted to just live and farm and build. Ultimately they had to build a mighty war machine to fend off massive Arab neighbors like Egypt with 10x the population, as well as Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi, etc.
Why do you pick on Israel, anyway? All they do is try to defend themselves. It seems the Left has decided that Israel is the equivalent of Hitlerian Germany because of religious Jews settling in the West Bank and taking umbrage at Arabs shooting babies. Or are you okay with Arabs shooting babies? Leftist morality is so shallow and relativistic that one can't always tell what they believe in.
I think Israel is a good thing. I think Jews living in the ancient home of the Jews is a good thing. Israel has made great contributions to the world in the sciences, in medicine, in art, in technology. Probably you don't know 90% of it. The chips inside the device you're typing on likely were designed in Israel or contain Israeli patents and mathematical algorithms. The fruits and vegetables on your dinner table likely were grown using Israeli agricultural innovations like drip irrigation. The medical technologies which may save your life, if God forbid you should become very ill, very likely owe a lot to Israeli research.
Show me one thing developed in the Arab world in the last 1,000 years, other than suicide belts.
The Arabs are free to use force. I don't say they don't have that right. But they know better than you, obviously, that if they do use force against Israel, it will blow back in their faces ten times harder. That's why Israel continues to exist, and not because of some petty legalities and moralities that are not recognized by craven dictatorships and frothing-at-the-mouth Jew-hating mullahs.
Let’s say you were meeting up with an old friend you hadn’t seen in a while in a city where they reside. You asked them to take you out on the town and catch up, but every place you suggested your friend was no longer welcome. You suggested another...not welcome. Another...more of the same.
At what point would you ask your friend what have they done to wear out their welcome and if they have reflected upon that?
> "by defending themselves against inveterate armed enemies whose stated, published intention is to 'drive the Jews into the sea' "
First, what enemies do not arm themsleves?
Second, why would Israel have any enemies? It's not like it's ever killed native Arabs, right?
Third, entering the sea doesn't mean drowning. Many Jews came to the Levant by boat. They can leave that way, too. Are Jews terrified of being driven to airports, too?
Fourth, did millions of Russians die when the USSR disappeared?
>"So, the Jews should not have even gone to historical Israel at all"
As visitors, sure. Or to apply for citizenship.
>"devastating pogroms of the 1880s-90s in Ukraine"
Ten-twenty years. What about the devastating pogroms Jews have inflicted on Palestinians 1948-2022
> "Not even after 6 million of them were efficiently fried or gassed to death"
Proof? Where are the annual conferences to debate the existence/extent of the Shoah? Repetition of claims isn't proof. Why are debates about Bigfoot, the Earth being flat, Jesus arising from death permitted...but not the Holocaust?
>"Jews have been living in Israel continuously since pre-Roman times"
Poor folks have been living in NYC since its founding, too. That doesn't give them keys to condos. If you sell your home in Manhattan, moving to LA, you can't return decades later and say the house if still yours.
>"the Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1920s-30s was a close ally of Hitler's"
Jews minted a coin with both the star-of-David and swastika on it to commemorate joint Jew-German collaborations. Your point?
> "brutally rape and murder an ancient community of Jews in Hebron"
Like the IDF routinely does in Gaza? Take the dreidel out of your own eye, mein dude.
>"Jews are, as usual, expected to just shut up"
On what planet? Can you say ADL, ACLU, Google, YouTube, Facebook, SPLC, Snopes, B'nai B'rith, etc.?
>"will chauvinistically declare ancient Israel stolen from them by the Romans"
HINT: if your land gets conquered it thereafter belongs to the conqueror.
I only recently discovered Kriss when he started his Substack. Absolutely brilliant. When I read his essays I don’t even think about whether I agree or disagree with his views. That to me is totally beside the point. I just go along for the ride, wherever it may lead. And it’s always fascinating and enthralling.
I highly recommend reading everything on his Substack for those who haven’t yet done so. And, no, I don’t know him and he didn’t put me up to this. He’s just the most interesting writer I’ve encountered in a long time.
It's weird the anti-Ye hate. A guy known for his lack of stability tweets some crazy stuff and he must be destroyed. The sign of a tyrant is the beating of a fool.
As far as Irving goes, we are not talking about a deep, philosophical thinker planning a pogrom but a babbling athlete and the response to his babbling is only going to make a lot of people who had been ignoring it start going hmmmm.
Regarding Chappelle, every sane Jew should shake his hand and thank him. His monologue was criticism from kindness.
BTW, has Farrakhan or Sharpton ever been "cancelled"? Has a corporation ever publicly rebuked them? These guys actually want to get Jews killed. In Sharpton's case he has.
Exactly. Every time this is called out, the point is further proved. I remember when I was younger and watched Mel Gibson go through an episode. He knew what was going on and almost had the career death penalty, but groveled his way back. The point is, if these people want the "conspiracy theory" to go away, stop fucking proving it at every turn.
After completing his visit, the Canadian government gives the Pope a chauffeur-driven car to see the natural beauty of Canada. After 20 kilometers through Canada, he says to the driver:
"Oh, let me get behind the wheel. I'm from the narrow Papal States, and I always have to sit in the back of the popemobile. even though I am such a passionate driver!" So the chauffeur swaps seats with the Pope.
After a few kilometers, the Pope is stopped by a police officer. The Pope winds the window down and the policeman immediately runs back to his car. From there he calls his superior:
"Lieutenant , i have a problem. I have a speeder here."
And in the universities. I don’t understand why it’s considered anti-Semitic to say so. But then, saying anything negative about Islam is called Islamophobia.
ZIONISTS: "Israel is Ellen's sister, Sui (de)Generis. Ergo, pilpul dictates that one can only compare Jaffa oranges to oranges. And then only by describing both as 'orangey.' Thus spake Schneerson."
Step up that hasbara, ye once-and-mighty shills. Goyim are starting to know.
This whole things is a friggin’ mess. Being a white trailer-trash Southerner that has faced plenty of bigotry and assumptions of my politics the past 20 years in New York City. The biggest defense I have employed against the stereotypes hurled at me is to not live up to them.
I’ve got no dog in this hunt, but the way Ye and Kyrie have been treated only enforces some of the stereotypes against Jews in the eyes of many; especially black folks.
The commissioner of the NBA, Adam Silver, is jewish as was the previous commissioner all the way back to the days of Michael Jordan. Not many jews playing in the NBA, but plenty of blacks play and never a black commissioner. Sorry, but that is bad look. Especially, the list of six demands of Kyrie before he can play again. I mean, does he have to have the $500,000 converted to shekels before playing again?
Plenty of scholarship on the jewish role in the Civll Rights movement in the 1960s, but dare mention the role in hip-hop, the NBA, and guard-railing black culture and you’re screwed
Facts are under attack all over because many Western countries are still quasi-democratic and as such opinion control is still critical to maintain the necessary illusions.
Needless to say, it's an anti-Catholic stereotype to jump into saying that Catholic justices "presumably believe" their duty is more to the Pope than to the US and the Constitution.
It's obvious that all nine SCOTUS justices are heavily indoctrinated with the idea that upholding the Constitution is the first duty of their job; it's obvious that hardly any US Catholics take seriously the maximalist view that the Pope's authority overrides secular legal documents like the Constitution; and it's obvious that even the rare US Catholics who believe their duty is more to the Pope than to the Constitution have never gotten anywhere near being able to take the oath of a SCOTUS justice. A person would have to have their eyes shut tight not to see these things. You're just taking clichéd cheap shots without any due diligence about the truth.
>"Catholic justices...first duty is to their god and representative here on Earth, the Pope."
Like the first duty of justices Breyer, Fortas, Brandeis, Cardozo, Frankfurter, Ginsburg, Goldberg, and Kagan (plus all Jewish members of Congress) was/is to worship Yahweh's representation on Earth: Israel?
Dogma and doctrine change over time, usually around the edges. The fundamentals tend to apply as time goes by. Or else the entire building shifts. Which can...and has..happened. But often over eons after much infighting.
Al Smith's presidency was felled by anti-Catholicism. JFK won despite being Catholic.
Not so long ago Catholics were called "mackerel snappers" for eating fish on Fridays. Then meat was permitted. Soon after came guitar playing priests.
So it goes.
Jews aren't supposed to get tattoos or eat bacon. Yet they often do.
So...are Democrat judges expected to be party absolutists, too?
Hmm. Well here is my POV as a non-organized US Jew whose mother was British. First, I find most of what is happening in Britain and increasingly here in the US with the constant blaming and outrage and victim hood on display from what I think of as the organized Jewish community embarrassing. It is not a good look and is, moreover, I believe, 'bad for the Jews'. We should not be in the censorship game. Period. We who were stripped and sent naked to the gas chambers have zero business publicly stripping (metaphorically) and shaming anyone, and that includes Kanye and Kyrie. Having said that. I have seen a lot on line from progressives including mutuals that blurs the line when it comes to Israel as they argue rightly against the oppression of the Palestinians. I have been told by people I really like and respect that there should point blank be no Israel and no Jewish state. I have been told that the Jews have no connection to the land of Israel. I have been sent pics of shetl-style Hasidic Jews as examples of how un-Middle Eastern the Jews are. These are the same progressives who support immigration from the Middle East to the UK and to the US because in part it is the West who has caused the wars and climate change spurring much of it. These are after all not 'migrants' but refugees. We should welcome them. These same progressives support indigenous rights in the US but never suggest with any seriousness giving it back. These same progressives, including the friend who sent me the pic on twitter of the shetl- style Jew as part of his argument that the Jews have zero claim to Palestine, do not count the Jewish refugees who in the 19th century ended up in what became Israel. They are not refugees, no, they were never refugees, they were always settlers and colonizers. if they were persecuted, raped and murdered in Ukraine (as an example) and fled to Palestine or what is today Israel that doesn't count and never did. The fact that many in the region who were Jews were strongly encouraged to convert to Islam by the Ottoman Empire doesn't count either. Because the only history that counts is since 1948. The Hebron Massacre doesn't count. There were no suicide bombers, or if there were, they were justified. There was Munich, but hey, just settler colonizers. I support the Palestinian people. Yet, I want Israel to exist, in part because there is a long history going back millennia of Jews being systematically killed and if not killed, dispossessed. I want Israel to be better. I want it to stop oppressing Palestinians. Finally, as a graduate student i studied ancient Middle Eastern archaeology. The Jews were there. In what is today Israel. From the beginning. They were enslaved and sent away. Their temples were destroyed. Where is the line? The third millennium? The second? The first? The expulsions in the middle ages? Are the Sephardic Jews allowed to be in a new Palestine as long as they keep their heads down? Are they too Western settler colonizers? Is there a way to talk about Palestine and Israel that is not all or none?
You make many good points, but I would mention that the Jews not only were there in ancient times, they were there continuously down to the present day. Jerusalem has been a majority or plurality Jewish population since pre-Roman times. I mean, if you go back far enough, the city was thought to have been built by the ancient Canaanites but the Jews have held it since around 700 B.C. or earlier. Hebron as you point out was massacred; it's important to note that Hebron was an ancient Jewish community dating back to Roman times, which is why religious/nationalist settlers have made a special point of re-settling Hebron at great risk and expense because of the half million or so hostile Arabs surrounding it.
I would disagree on one point: the "Palestinians" so-called do not deserve any special treatment. Though individually they can be friendly and decent people (I've known some in Israel and elsewhere), they are are dominated by violent, undemocratic, ignorant, and hateful ideology which has caused them great damage. Why should they just be kissed up to, as though they are innocent of any wrongdoing? Except for a handful of incidents perpetrated by lunatics, nearly every violent interaction between the Jews and Arabs in Israel and the territories has been instigated by the Arabs. At what point should we just admit the obvious -- if they don't want a bloody nose, quit picking on the toughest kid on the block?
"At what point should we just admit the obvious -- if they don't want a bloody nose, quit picking on the toughest kid on the block?"
More "might is right" talk. At the same time, you also claim Special Historical Victim Status. Not only do you produce two bad arguments, you try to have it both ways. Either "We stole it fair and square via armed robbery so come take it!" or "we deserve it because victims poor me!"
Because you want me to waste my time. Because you think that you can out argue me, because in the end, after collecting your 'evidence', you will declare me an antisemite.
The point of addressing hasbara (and I'm not saying YOU, personally, should: it IS emotionally draining): informing the undecided and bolstering your side's troops.
Never-ever-EVAH attempt to convert Zionists. Doing so is like teaching a pig to sing. You'll just frustrate yourself...and annoy the pig.
It's like going on talk shows: NEVER try to sway the host or any opposing guest. Go on only to address audience members who (1) might be open to suasion and/or (2) are supporters in need of a morale boost.
> "We who were stripped and sent naked to the gas chambers..."
...to get deloused.
Unless and until Jews sponsor annual, ongoing, open, and honest examinations of the Holocaust, there is no reason to believe death camps existed. Or to keep justifying Israel's endless crimes via Shoah Absolution.
>"I have been told...that there should point blank be no Israel and no Jewish state."
Not on stolen Palestinian land. Move Israel to Antarctica and let Zionists oppress penguins.
>"I have been told that the Jews have no connection to the land of Israel."
You can have a six-degree connection to Kevin Bacon. That does not allow you to rob his bank accounts, steal his propery, rape his wife, and imprison his kids.
>"progressives who support immigration from the Middle East to the UK"
Do they encourage the arrivals to take over England, fill it with nukes, and imprison natives in camps?
>"refugees. We should welcome them."
Like Israel does?
>"These same progressives support indigenous rights in the US but never suggest with any seriousness giving it back."
Do Palestinians have similar equal rights in Israel? Own casinos? Get affirmative action in schools and jobs? Live on reservations with their own laws if they so choose?
Also, were Palestinians driven into reservations in the 1800s? Are American Indians forced to live in walled reservations today? Does the US military routinely kill Apaches, Iroquois, Sioux, etc. with impunity? Do Americans drink beer and eat popcorn when Indians are murdered during regular invasions?
> Jews...if they were persecuted, raped and murdered in Ukraine
Were they? Or is that more Shoah-business hasbara? Why, after 20 years, do Jews still oppose an English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 YEARS TOGETHER?
>"the only history that counts is since 1948."
Because ever since then supposedly peace-seeking Jews have made their state into the Fourth Reich, emulating Hitlerian ways via Zionazism.
>"I support the Palestinian people."
How? Do you encourage them to rise up like Jews in 1943 Warsaw?
>"a long history going back millennia of Jews being systematically killed and if not killed, dispossessed."
Er, you omit Jews killing others. Jew Sicarii murdered Romans and ended up committing suicide at Masada. Do they never learn lessons?
>"I want Israel to be better. I want it to stop oppressing Palestinians."
And I want to be a millionaire. So?
> "i studied ancient Middle Eastern archaeology. The Jews were there."
So what? If my ancestors once lived in China does that mean I can create a khanate there now?
>" They were enslaved and sent away."
Like every other group on Earth. Yet no other group consistently whines while murdering others.
Nor has any other group been expelled sooooo many times.
If you're bounced from 109 bars, maybe YOU are the problem.
HINT: no one likes the brat in school who brags about how superior s/he is.
>"Where is the line?"
1917. Void the Balfour Declaration. Make Israel pay reparations. Let all Arab refugees return. Create Palestrael. One citizen, one vote. And force Jews to finally play nice with others. Amen.
"Unless and until Jews sponsor annual, ongoing, open, and honest examinations of the Holocaust, there is no reason to believe death camps existed."
wtf?
By that logic, must the French host annual, ongoing reexaminations of whether France was really occupied by the Nazis? Must the Russians host annual, ongoing reexaminations of whether the Germans really broke the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact? Must the US host annual ongoing reexaminations of whether Pearl Harbor was really attacked by the Japanese? Should there be an ongoing reexamination of whether WWII even happened at all?
There is abundant evidence of the existence of the death camps, from survivors, from the families of those executed, from the soldiers that liberated them, from footage, from administrative documents, from the writings of the Nazis themselves, and from testimony made, not only by their accusers, but in the Nazis' own defense at trial.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious Bernard. There's a lot of fairly reasonable back-and-forth on this page, but then one suddenly runs into a claim that the existence of the Holocaust needs to be debated and "proved" and you go "Come again? Where did I just land?".
20 year Afghan’s gravy train was promptly replaced by Ukraine gravy train – to immense joy of both party and media “elites” happily grunting together at SAME donor feeding through
"Anti-Semitism" always follows bad Jewish group behavior. For almost eight decades Jews have been waging genocide against Palestine , and Sam plays the eternal victim card. "Fuck the Jews" seems appropriate, and Sam can circle the wagons crying "anti-Semite!", or actually address the problem.
For such a highly capable people, the Israelis have sure fallen down on the job when it comes to genociding Arabs. You'd think after 8 decades (oops I mean "ALMOST" eight decades) they'd have figured it out. Especially considering that the Jews have some direct experience in holocaustism.
But yes, by all means, Henry, please do "actually address the problem" and let us know "the final solution" as you see it.
>"For such a highly capable people, the Israelis have sure fallen down on the job when it comes to genociding Arabs."
They would if they could. The Internet and iPhones make it harder to do now.
>"Jews have some direct experience in holocaustism."
You mean Holycosteria. It's a con. Zionists punish any who ask uncomfortable questions about Shoal Biz. Such Jews act like the stolen valor grifter who "pretends" to be combat veteran. He cons the VA and Gofundme naifs to give him millions of sympathy dollars. He then refuses to present his military records, saying to do so would further traumatize him.
>"let us know 'the final solution' "
Sure...
"Move Juden en masse beyond the Urals. They're a drain on the Reich. Send the healthy ones to work camps to help the war effort. Delouse inmates on arrival, too, to stop the spread of typhus. Remember: time and effort must solely focus on killing Allied forces. " ~A.H. 1942
Where is this alleged A.H. 1942 quote from? I've searched for it on three major search engines and got zero results except directing me back to this page and this comment.
Always good to have someone like you here to illustrate the pitiful logic of anti-Semitism, even though anti-Semitism is far from being the world's biggest problem.
The rise in hatred of Jews is part and parcel of both Israel's conduct as well as the constant psyops.
As J. P. Morgan put it:
“By dividing the people, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd.”
1. For Jews of conscience: abandon the "faith"; hatred of the other is imbedded ... free yourself and others will accept you
2. For Non-Jews: Expose the corrosive effects of Jewish Power. Let them know we're onto them: expose their control of our country ... Hollywood indoctrination, media, banking, government, etc. Don't stop: convince Americans that having their sons die for Israel isn't in their best interests. Ask why we are bankrupting America for some Jewish tinpot dictator in Ukraine. Reveal Jews as massive manipulators and disseminators of mendacity: challenge the 6 million, gas chamber, extermination hoax. Do it loudly.
And when you're successful and Jews are on the defensive, tell them you'll stop ... when they get the hell out of Palestine
The leader of the Green Party in Canada was ousted a while back, partly because of her unconditional love and support for "Israel", a small middle-Eastern country.
In response to a CBC article on that topic I posted, "I guess that Zionism isn't that popular in the Green Party." (full comment)
It was instantly removed. "Your content has been deactivated as it was found to violate CBC commenting policies".
CBC should be defunded. Years ago, I made a comment they didn’t appreciate in an article about a gun registry in Quebec. I suggested that they might save more lives using the money in a different way. They disabled the comment and I was never allowed to comment again. A disgraceful organization!
I think we need an unbiased national broadcaster that does not have an agenda. An org that strictly adheres to the well elucidated and delineated practices and principles of actual journalism. There was a time was CBC was close to those ideals. Those days are gone.
I was a great fan at one time. They say the BBC is just as bad. They’re no longer journalists, they’re activists. I counted the number of pieces CBC online posted on the Trump-Russia connection. It was around 5577 articles. I’m no particular Trump fan. I just want him to be treated fairly. It’s their job to do that as a public broadcaster.
I didn’t know that. I haven’t watched CBC online or listened to them for a few years. although they pop up here and there in my feeds. So I see they’re up to their old tricks. I think the last time I really watched them was when Wendy Mesley interviewed Jordan Peterson and tried to make him look evil because he happened to be photographed with some guys holding a Pepe the Frog flag. It was juvenile! I asked myself, “Is this how my tax dollars are being spent?
I have not watched their *TV service since the dawn of the millenium when I threw away my TV.
I stopped listening on the radio when The Current did a hit piece on Assange called , "How to be a good house guest? Don't be like Julian Assange, says this master butler". I called the guest host Piya Chattopadhyay on it on Twitter, but she totally blew me off.
It's worth listening to the segment as an object lesson in state hate propaganda directed at an Australian journalist who is being targeted for destruction by the United States. Our good friends and literal allies.
"According to The Guardian, conditions for Assange's continued stay at the embassy were contingent on him staying out of activity that would be "considered as political or interfering with the internal affairs of other states."
The memo also included basic housekeeping rules, like keeping his bathroom clean, doing his own laundry and taking proper care of his cat by keeping up with his hygiene."
"Well, it’s a trick, we always use it. When from Europe somebody is criticising Israel, then we bring up the Holocaust. When in this country [the US] people are criticising Israel, then they are antisemitic." -- Shulamit Aloni
An opinion piece on medium.com by Steve Cooke (https://medium.com/@Steve_Cooke/is-antisemitism-a-trick-a-closer-look-at-that-shulamit-aloni-meme-295fde27b0a8) points out that this was not a confession that Aloni herself has used the trick. He claims that when Aloni used the pronoun "we," she was referring to Israel. I'm not sure how Cooke in 2019 was able to read the mind of a person who died in 2014. Perhaps he's right, or perhaps Aloni was referring to "we" Zionists. Mr. Kriss cites Stephen Pollard as an example of a Jew, not necessarily an Israeli citizen or a Zionist, who assumed that a person who didn't like him was an antisemite and gloated that he got that person fired from his job. So, perhaps Aloni was in fact referring to Jews in general, though one would hope tacitly excepting some individuals, especially herself.
This is a phenomenon prevalent in almost all minority groups, especially those who have faced actual discrimination in the past, which Jews definitely have even here in the US. If I criticize an African American or BLM, I risk being called a racist even though my criticism is valid. If I opposed puberty blockers and life-altering surgery on a minor, I may be called "trans-phobic."
With minorities who are not in a position of power or are not organized, this is not so much of a problem. However, when a minority enjoys enhanced power for whatever reason, it can become a method of marginalizing the majority. Ron Unz has pointed out that if Jewish admissions to elite universities fall even a small amount as a result of preferences for Blacks or Latinos, the university administration may be accused of antisemitism. As a result, the entire burden of "diversity" has been born by Asians and Whites, particularly males. This is ironic because so many Jews are vocal backers of "diversity."
Mr. Kriss goes on to point out that use of the "trick" is not even limited to Jews (with exceptions), but was weaponized by gentile elites to destroy Jeremy Corbyn. He furthermore explains how the use of the "trick" is detrimental to Jews themselves. He points out how "offensive is it to raise the spectre of the Final Solution because someone on Twitter called you a dickhead."
Amen. Offense is in the mind of the offended, and we are rapidly banishing words like "midget," which distinguish a person as not being a "dwarf." Our language loses precision when we replace both words with "little person," which arguably can convey just as many pejoratives as the first two. I'm reminded of the incident in "Cry the Beloved Country" when a black South African chooses not to be offended because an Afrikaner use the word "kafir."
>"This is a phenomenon prevalent in almost all minority groups, especially those who have faced actual discrimination in the past, which Jews definitely have even here in the US."
How much "discrimination"? More than NINA Irish? Germans? Italians? Japanese?
Methinks Jews, via Hollywood, exaggerate Jew sufferings, downplaying successes. Where are the blockbusters about the Holodomor and Nakba?
Plus note: Irish-Americans don't demand endless reparations from England; construct Potato Famine museums around the world; demand $5B annually for Eeire from America; mandate "Begosh and Begorra" lessons be taught in every school; and blame all their problems on antileprechaunism.
Jews are the only group that:
* brags about being the smartest, richest, most blessed-by-God superior beings on Earth;
* demands endless guilt-gelt for 1942-45 events that it won't let be examined;
* endlessly moans and groans for money while killing Palestinians;
* constantly wages war on weaker nations around Israel;
* presses for wars against nations not harming/threatening the USA;
* winks whenever Israelis kill American sailors, reporters, or citizens;
* demands that US military men die for Israel-shilled wars; and
* pressures Congress to pay for all Zionists projects, Occupations, and failures.
I'm a bit puzzled. Where did I say that Irish, Germans, Italians or Japanese were NOT discriminated against IN THE PAST? What gave you the impression I was excusing this behavior? I was not, nor do I excuse it in African Americans, who apparently are following the Jewish example. Your diatribe about the CURRENT success of Jews does not contradict my allegation that they were discriminated against IN THE PAST, as were Blacks who are reacting similarly and Japanese who are not.
Kriss makes some very good points about the overuse of antisemitism as an accusation meant to defame or cancel those guilty of it, but doesn't address the main reason that antisemitism is such a big issue today, which is of course the behaviour of the Israeli government. Most Jews want to defend the right of Israel to exist and many on the left want it destroyed, that is, they want Israel as a country where Jews are a majority eliminated. "From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free" is fully supported by much of the left that I know. Associated with this conflict is the transformation of the word Zionism to a curse, rather than the desire for a Jewish homeland. Clearly much of the left does not think that the idea of a Jewish homeland has any moral merit.
Another reason I think there is antisemitism in this desire to destroy Israel is the incredible focus on Israel in the West compared to any other countries that have genocidal histories and presents. For example, virtually nobody talks about Tibet anymore, attacked by the Chinese around the same time Israel was founded. A million Tibetans have died since 1949 because of the Chinese invasion, far more than Palestinians, and the Tibetan population decimated; in comparison, there are now more Palestinians than ever before. The left never talks about Tibet. Why? Maybe the focus on Israel is because it's sort of allied with the West , but does this explain all of the focus on it? I wonder. Similarly, Kriss isn't sure that comparing Netanyahu to Hitler is problematic, even though the Jewish population was systematically slaughtered during WWII compared to a Palestinian population that is growing. Scale matters when making comparisons.
One way to understand the rise of accusations of antisemitism that does make sense to me is the ongoing, nauseating desire of people to be seen as victims. If I misgender a trans person, I'm erasing them, wishing for their death; if I say racism isn't that much of a problem today, I might be called a white supremacist or bigot, that my words are violence. And this kind of thinking can be seen in the sensitivity to anything at all that vaguely feels like anti-semitism.
No one talks about Tibet, because it's Russia who is America's target country today. When the time comes to bomb China, it will be all Uighurs all day, because, you know, Americans just LOVE Muslims.
In fact, America loves Muslims so much in fact that they killed four million of them, just since 1992.
Boring, biased, pointless. Starts really well: "Last May, Israel fought a brief war in the Gaza strip..." and then the account of atrocities Israel committed. Oh, wait, that is the one where Hamas attacked population centers... And mean tweets are, of course, just mean tweets, no big deal. Except that the pregnant MP is told that THEY know where she lives and what schools her kids go to. You might make an exception and have a bit of compassion, no? And no, this is not a figment of our imagination. Here in the US, remember, when some guy took hostages in a Synagogue in Texas, and the President can't get himself to say 'anti-Semitic'. The cause of the incident was under investigation. Now, that really worries me. Fish rots from the head.
"...whatever your politics, every second you spend on Twitter is making you pettier, stupider, and worse. It is poison, and if you have an account, you should stop reading and delete it this instant." Best advice I have read in quite some time.
Re-upping a recent Damir Marusic tweet on how writing would become better if Twitter disappeared: he says that without Twitter's bad influence, opinion writers would have "fewer vituperative hot takes forged in low-stakes Twitter one-upmanship." -- twitter.com/dmarusic/status/1590928165995950080
Or as Jaron Lanier put it in a Friday op-ed: "A Twitter-poisoned soul will often complain of a loss of fun when someone succeeds in moderating the spew of hate" -- https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/11/opinion/trump-musk-kanye-twitter.html
Although Lanier seems to be arguing for some censorship on Twitter, which I don't agree with, I also see him as saying something good and important. Lanier is right that with or without censorship, sites like Twitter steer people into spewing hate as an important part of their fun. I think even without social media, almost any political viewpoint would find itself using and generating the emotion of hate, and it's cheap to speak as if only viewpoints you disagree with employ hate. Feeling hate may be part of almost any politically active person's feelings, whether it's acknowledged or not, but it generally makes political activity worse: it tends to misdirect your own political efforts as well as others'. Perhaps there are times when hate is a relatively harmless source of politically energy but it's hard to know when, and usually hate messes things up both through its effect on your allies and on those you don't see as allies, while causing people to overhastily treat someone else as their foe.
Although I've never succumbed to signing up for social media myself, I do enjoy reading people who are pretty skilled at Twitter, including Greenwald who has often done good things with it. But it's c;lear enough that Greenwald, like others, sometimes goes too far.
Twitter taught me how to write concise, carefully worded sentences. There is very good writing on Twitter.
Long form writing has it's place, but so does "the Tweet".
Tweets are aphorisms - at least the ones are.
Your are correct about how the format tends to simplify, divide and it does engender hate. One of the worst things it did to me, was to encourage me to BLOCK people and thereby dismiss them utterly. Oftentimes for the smallest of 'offences'.
Substack is social media.
Twitter is one of the most heavily censored venues on the planet.
It's on the more censored side by the overall standards of Western venues, but definitely not by "on the planet" standards. I realize they banned a number of people here, including you, and I don't agree with them doing that -- but if you say it's one of the most heavily censored venues on the planet, it's just hyperbole. Most large non-Western countries are so heavily into censorship that they block Twitter, sometimes entirely.
Twitter is nowhere near as censored as Letters to the Editor sections in newspapers and magazines, which also continue to censor the articles they publish. It is much less censored than TV or mainstream movies. On the whole, the Internet has generated an expansion of the range of views that can be easily published in a permanently recorded, widely accessible way at little or no cost to the speaker, and Twitter is part of that.
What troubles me about Twitter is not only the partial censorship but, more generally, that it's more or less failed as a town square. For a platform to be successful as a town square, it needs to be more friendly toward ethical conversations and the development of civic communities that are inspired from various parts of the political spectrum, while encouraging resistance to the kinds of authoritarianism and abuses that are found in almost all political movements. Twitter does a bit of that, but more often it suppresses people's best side and encourages groupthink, while leaving the most ethically sensitive voices in political movements to exist in small niches that usually get drowned out. Twitter is owned engagement-business social media pretending to be civic media, because we don't have a civic media yet. And even if you claim Substack is social media, it still hasn't gotten civic media right, though it's better than Twitter.
You just said that you were never on Twitter, but you claim to be an expert.
Substack is social media.
Twitter is one of the most heavily censored, shaped and manipulated platforms on the planet.
America is China, just slicker about it.
That’s all I need…another pompous fingerwag.
By demanding special pleading and by insisting that anyone not ready to write Israel a blank check for anything it ever does, did or shall do is indistinguishable from Goebbels or Himmler, Zionists have created more genuine anti-Semites than anything Stormfront could have done on its own.
So, by defending themselves against inveterate armed enemies whose stated, published intention is to "drive the Jews into the sea", the Zionists have created "more genuine anti-Semites than blah blah blah". Got it. So, the Jews should not have even gone to historical Israel at all, even after the devastating pogroms of the 1880s-90s in Ukraine. Not even after 6 million of them were efficiently fried or gassed to death by Hitler's minions. And despite the fact that Jews have been living in Israel continuously since pre-Roman times, including a plurality or majority of Jews in Jerusalem for over 2000 years. And despite the fact that the Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1920s-30s was a close ally of Hitler's, volunteering to wipe out the Jews in his little corner of the world, inciting his followers in 1927 to brutally rape and murder an ancient community of Jews in Hebron in one of the most heinous, barbaric events in Middle Eastern history.
Now despite all of that, the Jews are, as usual, expected to just shut up and take it. Luckily for the Jews, however, they no longer will just take it, but will fight back, will chauvinistically declare ancient Israel stolen from them by the Romans and subsequent Arab and Christian conquerors, and they will take it back by force, including ancient Judea and Samaria, the historical birthplace of the Jewish people and the spiritual home of Judaism and Christianity.
So stuff it up your nose.
You just proved his point.
No, he proved my point.
Make peace Avi.
I understand your frustration. Being Jewish, growing up in LA's borscht belt, being the grandson of immigrants fleeing Europe, I grew up with hatred all around me for being Jewish.
But I am not a Zionist.
And it is this distinction that must be made.
Read John Loftus's book The Secret Wars against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People for a more historical and nuanced look.
Israel is a clero fascist state.
We must admit this.
No, I do not admit any such thing. If Israel were "clero-fascist", they'd ban Muslims and Christians.
They did.
Christians in Jerusalem Want Jews to Stop Spitting on Them
A few weeks ago, a senior Greek Orthodox clergyman in Israel attended a meeting at a government office in Jerusalem's Givat Shaul quarter. When he returned to his car, an elderly man wearing a skullcap came and knocked on the window.
https://www.haaretz.com/2004-10-12/ty-article/christians-in-jerusalem-want-jews-to-stop-spitting-on-them/0000017f-e8fe-df2c-a1ff-fefff36f0000
NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nobody here is denying the reality of antisemitism or engaging in denial of historical anti-Semitic atrocities, nor is anyone saying that "Jews are, as usual, expected to just shut up and take it."
Strawman arguments and special pleading abound. That said, I have noticed that most proponents of "might makes right" such as yourself, don't seem to like being on the receiving end themselves, as your recitation of historical atrocities indicates.
So much hasbara here today. Of course there is. Megaphone was shuttered when they realised how obvious it was, but the call still goes out to the sayanim nonetheless.
https://electronicintifada.net/content/israels-foreign-ministry-provides-free-internet-tool-online-activists/6211
Might doesn't make right.
But sometimes, right makes might.
Funny, since your own words indicate that you sure are in favor of force and right when you are the one deploying them, but not when those whom you favor are the victims.
Funny, since the Jews in Israel have been open to negotiating a peaceful settlement since the 1800s. They bought land, they settled barren wastelands, they tried to have peaceful relations with the British and the Arabs, and every step of the way encountered hatred and violence.
Parallel to Zionist inflow into Palestine, by the way, was a concerted effort by Arab regimes to populate the area before it was "overrun" by Jews. Most of the Arabs currently living in what is now called Palestine are themselves migrants from elsewhere in the Levant. Notorious Arab leader Yassir Arafat, himself, was from Egypt -- and spoke Egyptian dialect of Arabic. He played you people for fools.
The Zionist settlers, later the Israelis, were forced to take up arms. It was not their choice; they wanted to just live and farm and build. Ultimately they had to build a mighty war machine to fend off massive Arab neighbors like Egypt with 10x the population, as well as Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi, etc.
Why do you pick on Israel, anyway? All they do is try to defend themselves. It seems the Left has decided that Israel is the equivalent of Hitlerian Germany because of religious Jews settling in the West Bank and taking umbrage at Arabs shooting babies. Or are you okay with Arabs shooting babies? Leftist morality is so shallow and relativistic that one can't always tell what they believe in.
I think Israel is a good thing. I think Jews living in the ancient home of the Jews is a good thing. Israel has made great contributions to the world in the sciences, in medicine, in art, in technology. Probably you don't know 90% of it. The chips inside the device you're typing on likely were designed in Israel or contain Israeli patents and mathematical algorithms. The fruits and vegetables on your dinner table likely were grown using Israeli agricultural innovations like drip irrigation. The medical technologies which may save your life, if God forbid you should become very ill, very likely owe a lot to Israeli research.
Show me one thing developed in the Arab world in the last 1,000 years, other than suicide belts.
The Arabs are free to use force. I don't say they don't have that right. But they know better than you, obviously, that if they do use force against Israel, it will blow back in their faces ten times harder. That's why Israel continues to exist, and not because of some petty legalities and moralities that are not recognized by craven dictatorships and frothing-at-the-mouth Jew-hating mullahs.
You keep proving my point for me.
Terry,
Let’s say you were meeting up with an old friend you hadn’t seen in a while in a city where they reside. You asked them to take you out on the town and catch up, but every place you suggested your friend was no longer welcome. You suggested another...not welcome. Another...more of the same.
At what point would you ask your friend what have they done to wear out their welcome and if they have reflected upon that?
Would you??
> "by defending themselves against inveterate armed enemies whose stated, published intention is to 'drive the Jews into the sea' "
First, what enemies do not arm themsleves?
Second, why would Israel have any enemies? It's not like it's ever killed native Arabs, right?
Third, entering the sea doesn't mean drowning. Many Jews came to the Levant by boat. They can leave that way, too. Are Jews terrified of being driven to airports, too?
Fourth, did millions of Russians die when the USSR disappeared?
>"So, the Jews should not have even gone to historical Israel at all"
As visitors, sure. Or to apply for citizenship.
>"devastating pogroms of the 1880s-90s in Ukraine"
Ten-twenty years. What about the devastating pogroms Jews have inflicted on Palestinians 1948-2022
> "Not even after 6 million of them were efficiently fried or gassed to death"
Proof? Where are the annual conferences to debate the existence/extent of the Shoah? Repetition of claims isn't proof. Why are debates about Bigfoot, the Earth being flat, Jesus arising from death permitted...but not the Holocaust?
>"Jews have been living in Israel continuously since pre-Roman times"
Poor folks have been living in NYC since its founding, too. That doesn't give them keys to condos. If you sell your home in Manhattan, moving to LA, you can't return decades later and say the house if still yours.
>"the Mufti of Jerusalem in the 1920s-30s was a close ally of Hitler's"
Jews minted a coin with both the star-of-David and swastika on it to commemorate joint Jew-German collaborations. Your point?
> "brutally rape and murder an ancient community of Jews in Hebron"
Like the IDF routinely does in Gaza? Take the dreidel out of your own eye, mein dude.
>"Jews are, as usual, expected to just shut up"
On what planet? Can you say ADL, ACLU, Google, YouTube, Facebook, SPLC, Snopes, B'nai B'rith, etc.?
>"will chauvinistically declare ancient Israel stolen from them by the Romans"
HINT: if your land gets conquered it thereafter belongs to the conqueror.
>"the spiritual home of Judaism and Christianity"
Remind us how Christianity came to be.
We'll wait.
> So stuff it up your nose.
You first, Rabbi Schnozzington
Another textbook hasbara post. Keep em coming!
Really, how so?
I only recently discovered Kriss when he started his Substack. Absolutely brilliant. When I read his essays I don’t even think about whether I agree or disagree with his views. That to me is totally beside the point. I just go along for the ride, wherever it may lead. And it’s always fascinating and enthralling.
I highly recommend reading everything on his Substack for those who haven’t yet done so. And, no, I don’t know him and he didn’t put me up to this. He’s just the most interesting writer I’ve encountered in a long time.
Seconding this
I think he sums it up.
It's weird the anti-Ye hate. A guy known for his lack of stability tweets some crazy stuff and he must be destroyed. The sign of a tyrant is the beating of a fool.
As far as Irving goes, we are not talking about a deep, philosophical thinker planning a pogrom but a babbling athlete and the response to his babbling is only going to make a lot of people who had been ignoring it start going hmmmm.
Regarding Chappelle, every sane Jew should shake his hand and thank him. His monologue was criticism from kindness.
BTW, has Farrakhan or Sharpton ever been "cancelled"? Has a corporation ever publicly rebuked them? These guys actually want to get Jews killed. In Sharpton's case he has.
"Mental illness doesn't do that" is simply a way of saying that some sacred cows trump other sacred cows.
This stood out for me: “a howling void at the core of their being demanding to be filled with someone else’s suffering” wow
Jews have massive power and influence in the media and in our popular films.
That's just a fact.
Exactly. Every time this is called out, the point is further proved. I remember when I was younger and watched Mel Gibson go through an episode. He knew what was going on and almost had the career death penalty, but groveled his way back. The point is, if these people want the "conspiracy theory" to go away, stop fucking proving it at every turn.
The Vatican has hated the Jews for centuries. Mel Gibson loves The Vatican.
The Pope's visit to Canada.
After completing his visit, the Canadian government gives the Pope a chauffeur-driven car to see the natural beauty of Canada. After 20 kilometers through Canada, he says to the driver:
"Oh, let me get behind the wheel. I'm from the narrow Papal States, and I always have to sit in the back of the popemobile. even though I am such a passionate driver!" So the chauffeur swaps seats with the Pope.
After a few kilometers, the Pope is stopped by a police officer. The Pope winds the window down and the policeman immediately runs back to his car. From there he calls his superior:
"Lieutenant , i have a problem. I have a speeder here."
"What is the problem? Just fine him!"
"I think he is a big shot though."
"Is he higher ranked than me?"
"Lieutenant, i believe that is the case."
"Is he higher ranked than the prime minister?"
"Lieutenant, i am afraid that is the case."
"Who is he then?"
"I don't know, but the Pope is his chauffeur."
And in the universities. I don’t understand why it’s considered anti-Semitic to say so. But then, saying anything negative about Islam is called Islamophobia.
>"saying anything negative about Islam is called Islamophobia"
How many standing ovations do heads of Muslim countries get when they address the US Congress?
How much clout do Muslim groups have?
How many US banks are owned by Muslims?
Do we give $5B annually to each and every Muslim State?
How many nukes does each Muslim state have?
Asking for a friend....
Oranges and apples.
ZIONISTS: "Israel is Ellen's sister, Sui (de)Generis. Ergo, pilpul dictates that one can only compare Jaffa oranges to oranges. And then only by describing both as 'orangey.' Thus spake Schneerson."
Step up that hasbara, ye once-and-mighty shills. Goyim are starting to know.
If you doubt what I just said copy and paste my comment into the comments at CBC. It will go poof in seconds. CBC, many other sites.
*If you can find one that still 'allows' comments.
This whole things is a friggin’ mess. Being a white trailer-trash Southerner that has faced plenty of bigotry and assumptions of my politics the past 20 years in New York City. The biggest defense I have employed against the stereotypes hurled at me is to not live up to them.
I’ve got no dog in this hunt, but the way Ye and Kyrie have been treated only enforces some of the stereotypes against Jews in the eyes of many; especially black folks.
The commissioner of the NBA, Adam Silver, is jewish as was the previous commissioner all the way back to the days of Michael Jordan. Not many jews playing in the NBA, but plenty of blacks play and never a black commissioner. Sorry, but that is bad look. Especially, the list of six demands of Kyrie before he can play again. I mean, does he have to have the $500,000 converted to shekels before playing again?
Plenty of scholarship on the jewish role in the Civll Rights movement in the 1960s, but dare mention the role in hip-hop, the NBA, and guard-railing black culture and you’re screwed
…with no Vaseline.
I am a converted jew.
Stating a fact - that CEO's of the entertainment industry are overwhelmingly members of the Jewish religion - is not anti-semitism.
The real question is why facts are now being labeled as anti-semitic.
Facts are under attack all over because many Western countries are still quasi-democratic and as such opinion control is still critical to maintain the necessary illusions.
Very true. And the majority of the SCOTUS kow-tow to a foreign nation…The Vatican.
They do? This is news to me. Can you explain further?
https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/391649/religion-supreme-court-justices.aspx
There are SIX Catholic justices, all of whom presumably believe that their first duty is to their god and representative here on Earth, the Pope.
Needless to say, it's an anti-Catholic stereotype to jump into saying that Catholic justices "presumably believe" their duty is more to the Pope than to the US and the Constitution.
It's obvious that all nine SCOTUS justices are heavily indoctrinated with the idea that upholding the Constitution is the first duty of their job; it's obvious that hardly any US Catholics take seriously the maximalist view that the Pope's authority overrides secular legal documents like the Constitution; and it's obvious that even the rare US Catholics who believe their duty is more to the Pope than to the Constitution have never gotten anywhere near being able to take the oath of a SCOTUS justice. A person would have to have their eyes shut tight not to see these things. You're just taking clichéd cheap shots without any due diligence about the truth.
>"Catholic justices...first duty is to their god and representative here on Earth, the Pope."
Like the first duty of justices Breyer, Fortas, Brandeis, Cardozo, Frankfurter, Ginsburg, Goldberg, and Kagan (plus all Jewish members of Congress) was/is to worship Yahweh's representation on Earth: Israel?
I am just referencing Catholic dogma in which the Pope has plenitudo potestatis, or 'fullness of power'. His authority is direct from Christ. https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5578&context=lawreview&httpsredir=1&referer=
As for the others, you'd have to ask them.
>" Pope...His authority is direct from Christ"
The same Christ who rendered unto Caesar?
Dogma and doctrine change over time, usually around the edges. The fundamentals tend to apply as time goes by. Or else the entire building shifts. Which can...and has..happened. But often over eons after much infighting.
Al Smith's presidency was felled by anti-Catholicism. JFK won despite being Catholic.
Not so long ago Catholics were called "mackerel snappers" for eating fish on Fridays. Then meat was permitted. Soon after came guitar playing priests.
So it goes.
Jews aren't supposed to get tattoos or eat bacon. Yet they often do.
So...are Democrat judges expected to be party absolutists, too?
Hmm. Well here is my POV as a non-organized US Jew whose mother was British. First, I find most of what is happening in Britain and increasingly here in the US with the constant blaming and outrage and victim hood on display from what I think of as the organized Jewish community embarrassing. It is not a good look and is, moreover, I believe, 'bad for the Jews'. We should not be in the censorship game. Period. We who were stripped and sent naked to the gas chambers have zero business publicly stripping (metaphorically) and shaming anyone, and that includes Kanye and Kyrie. Having said that. I have seen a lot on line from progressives including mutuals that blurs the line when it comes to Israel as they argue rightly against the oppression of the Palestinians. I have been told by people I really like and respect that there should point blank be no Israel and no Jewish state. I have been told that the Jews have no connection to the land of Israel. I have been sent pics of shetl-style Hasidic Jews as examples of how un-Middle Eastern the Jews are. These are the same progressives who support immigration from the Middle East to the UK and to the US because in part it is the West who has caused the wars and climate change spurring much of it. These are after all not 'migrants' but refugees. We should welcome them. These same progressives support indigenous rights in the US but never suggest with any seriousness giving it back. These same progressives, including the friend who sent me the pic on twitter of the shetl- style Jew as part of his argument that the Jews have zero claim to Palestine, do not count the Jewish refugees who in the 19th century ended up in what became Israel. They are not refugees, no, they were never refugees, they were always settlers and colonizers. if they were persecuted, raped and murdered in Ukraine (as an example) and fled to Palestine or what is today Israel that doesn't count and never did. The fact that many in the region who were Jews were strongly encouraged to convert to Islam by the Ottoman Empire doesn't count either. Because the only history that counts is since 1948. The Hebron Massacre doesn't count. There were no suicide bombers, or if there were, they were justified. There was Munich, but hey, just settler colonizers. I support the Palestinian people. Yet, I want Israel to exist, in part because there is a long history going back millennia of Jews being systematically killed and if not killed, dispossessed. I want Israel to be better. I want it to stop oppressing Palestinians. Finally, as a graduate student i studied ancient Middle Eastern archaeology. The Jews were there. In what is today Israel. From the beginning. They were enslaved and sent away. Their temples were destroyed. Where is the line? The third millennium? The second? The first? The expulsions in the middle ages? Are the Sephardic Jews allowed to be in a new Palestine as long as they keep their heads down? Are they too Western settler colonizers? Is there a way to talk about Palestine and Israel that is not all or none?
You make many good points, but I would mention that the Jews not only were there in ancient times, they were there continuously down to the present day. Jerusalem has been a majority or plurality Jewish population since pre-Roman times. I mean, if you go back far enough, the city was thought to have been built by the ancient Canaanites but the Jews have held it since around 700 B.C. or earlier. Hebron as you point out was massacred; it's important to note that Hebron was an ancient Jewish community dating back to Roman times, which is why religious/nationalist settlers have made a special point of re-settling Hebron at great risk and expense because of the half million or so hostile Arabs surrounding it.
I would disagree on one point: the "Palestinians" so-called do not deserve any special treatment. Though individually they can be friendly and decent people (I've known some in Israel and elsewhere), they are are dominated by violent, undemocratic, ignorant, and hateful ideology which has caused them great damage. Why should they just be kissed up to, as though they are innocent of any wrongdoing? Except for a handful of incidents perpetrated by lunatics, nearly every violent interaction between the Jews and Arabs in Israel and the territories has been instigated by the Arabs. At what point should we just admit the obvious -- if they don't want a bloody nose, quit picking on the toughest kid on the block?
"At what point should we just admit the obvious -- if they don't want a bloody nose, quit picking on the toughest kid on the block?"
More "might is right" talk. At the same time, you also claim Special Historical Victim Status. Not only do you produce two bad arguments, you try to have it both ways. Either "We stole it fair and square via armed robbery so come take it!" or "we deserve it because victims poor me!"
Thanks for the hasbara.
It's all off the shelf and the usual bullshit, but thanks for trying.
Not a single point addressed. Why even post?
Because you want me to waste my time. Because you think that you can out argue me, because in the end, after collecting your 'evidence', you will declare me an antisemite.
I am tired of that game.
There is no point in addressing hasbara.
Responding to a hasbarist is like sticking your head into a bucket of contact cement.
You already have an answer, and a clever one, for everything.
Now go make peace.
The point of addressing hasbara (and I'm not saying YOU, personally, should: it IS emotionally draining): informing the undecided and bolstering your side's troops.
Never-ever-EVAH attempt to convert Zionists. Doing so is like teaching a pig to sing. You'll just frustrate yourself...and annoy the pig.
It's like going on talk shows: NEVER try to sway the host or any opposing guest. Go on only to address audience members who (1) might be open to suasion and/or (2) are supporters in need of a morale boost.
Thanks for this.
> "We who were stripped and sent naked to the gas chambers..."
...to get deloused.
Unless and until Jews sponsor annual, ongoing, open, and honest examinations of the Holocaust, there is no reason to believe death camps existed. Or to keep justifying Israel's endless crimes via Shoah Absolution.
>"I have been told...that there should point blank be no Israel and no Jewish state."
Not on stolen Palestinian land. Move Israel to Antarctica and let Zionists oppress penguins.
>"I have been told that the Jews have no connection to the land of Israel."
You can have a six-degree connection to Kevin Bacon. That does not allow you to rob his bank accounts, steal his propery, rape his wife, and imprison his kids.
>"progressives who support immigration from the Middle East to the UK"
Do they encourage the arrivals to take over England, fill it with nukes, and imprison natives in camps?
>"refugees. We should welcome them."
Like Israel does?
>"These same progressives support indigenous rights in the US but never suggest with any seriousness giving it back."
Do Palestinians have similar equal rights in Israel? Own casinos? Get affirmative action in schools and jobs? Live on reservations with their own laws if they so choose?
Also, were Palestinians driven into reservations in the 1800s? Are American Indians forced to live in walled reservations today? Does the US military routinely kill Apaches, Iroquois, Sioux, etc. with impunity? Do Americans drink beer and eat popcorn when Indians are murdered during regular invasions?
> Jews...if they were persecuted, raped and murdered in Ukraine
Were they? Or is that more Shoah-business hasbara? Why, after 20 years, do Jews still oppose an English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 YEARS TOGETHER?
>"the only history that counts is since 1948."
Because ever since then supposedly peace-seeking Jews have made their state into the Fourth Reich, emulating Hitlerian ways via Zionazism.
>"I support the Palestinian people."
How? Do you encourage them to rise up like Jews in 1943 Warsaw?
>"a long history going back millennia of Jews being systematically killed and if not killed, dispossessed."
Er, you omit Jews killing others. Jew Sicarii murdered Romans and ended up committing suicide at Masada. Do they never learn lessons?
>"I want Israel to be better. I want it to stop oppressing Palestinians."
And I want to be a millionaire. So?
> "i studied ancient Middle Eastern archaeology. The Jews were there."
So what? If my ancestors once lived in China does that mean I can create a khanate there now?
>" They were enslaved and sent away."
Like every other group on Earth. Yet no other group consistently whines while murdering others.
Nor has any other group been expelled sooooo many times.
If you're bounced from 109 bars, maybe YOU are the problem.
HINT: no one likes the brat in school who brags about how superior s/he is.
>"Where is the line?"
1917. Void the Balfour Declaration. Make Israel pay reparations. Let all Arab refugees return. Create Palestrael. One citizen, one vote. And force Jews to finally play nice with others. Amen.
"Unless and until Jews sponsor annual, ongoing, open, and honest examinations of the Holocaust, there is no reason to believe death camps existed."
wtf?
By that logic, must the French host annual, ongoing reexaminations of whether France was really occupied by the Nazis? Must the Russians host annual, ongoing reexaminations of whether the Germans really broke the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact? Must the US host annual ongoing reexaminations of whether Pearl Harbor was really attacked by the Japanese? Should there be an ongoing reexamination of whether WWII even happened at all?
There is abundant evidence of the existence of the death camps, from survivors, from the families of those executed, from the soldiers that liberated them, from footage, from administrative documents, from the writings of the Nazis themselves, and from testimony made, not only by their accusers, but in the Nazis' own defense at trial.
Thanks for pointing out the obvious Bernard. There's a lot of fairly reasonable back-and-forth on this page, but then one suddenly runs into a claim that the existence of the Holocaust needs to be debated and "proved" and you go "Come again? Where did I just land?".
Great comment. Thanks!
They Keep Us Focused On Decoy Dichotomies -- https://substack.com/inbox/post/84405554
20 year Afghan’s gravy train was promptly replaced by Ukraine gravy train – to immense joy of both party and media “elites” happily grunting together at SAME donor feeding through
"Anti-Semitism" always follows bad Jewish group behavior. For almost eight decades Jews have been waging genocide against Palestine , and Sam plays the eternal victim card. "Fuck the Jews" seems appropriate, and Sam can circle the wagons crying "anti-Semite!", or actually address the problem.
Seems likely to me that those yelling “f**k the Jews” were plants.
For such a highly capable people, the Israelis have sure fallen down on the job when it comes to genociding Arabs. You'd think after 8 decades (oops I mean "ALMOST" eight decades) they'd have figured it out. Especially considering that the Jews have some direct experience in holocaustism.
But yes, by all means, Henry, please do "actually address the problem" and let us know "the final solution" as you see it.
Stop viewing jews as a chosen race by God. Y’all can just be like the rest of humanity. How is that for a final solution?
That just might work.
If they did.
Which they will not.
>"For such a highly capable people, the Israelis have sure fallen down on the job when it comes to genociding Arabs."
They would if they could. The Internet and iPhones make it harder to do now.
>"Jews have some direct experience in holocaustism."
You mean Holycosteria. It's a con. Zionists punish any who ask uncomfortable questions about Shoal Biz. Such Jews act like the stolen valor grifter who "pretends" to be combat veteran. He cons the VA and Gofundme naifs to give him millions of sympathy dollars. He then refuses to present his military records, saying to do so would further traumatize him.
>"let us know 'the final solution' "
Sure...
"Move Juden en masse beyond the Urals. They're a drain on the Reich. Send the healthy ones to work camps to help the war effort. Delouse inmates on arrival, too, to stop the spread of typhus. Remember: time and effort must solely focus on killing Allied forces. " ~A.H. 1942
Where is this alleged A.H. 1942 quote from? I've searched for it on three major search engines and got zero results except directing me back to this page and this comment.
Always good to have someone like you here to illustrate the pitiful logic of anti-Semitism, even though anti-Semitism is far from being the world's biggest problem.
The rise in hatred of Jews is part and parcel of both Israel's conduct as well as the constant psyops.
As J. P. Morgan put it:
“By dividing the people, we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd.”
And he wasn't even Jewish.
Here's the "final solution:
1. For Jews of conscience: abandon the "faith"; hatred of the other is imbedded ... free yourself and others will accept you
2. For Non-Jews: Expose the corrosive effects of Jewish Power. Let them know we're onto them: expose their control of our country ... Hollywood indoctrination, media, banking, government, etc. Don't stop: convince Americans that having their sons die for Israel isn't in their best interests. Ask why we are bankrupting America for some Jewish tinpot dictator in Ukraine. Reveal Jews as massive manipulators and disseminators of mendacity: challenge the 6 million, gas chamber, extermination hoax. Do it loudly.
And when you're successful and Jews are on the defensive, tell them you'll stop ... when they get the hell out of Palestine
You got it.
Thanks.
Is there a rise in hatred for Jews?
Do you have some evidence for that claim?
The leader of the Green Party in Canada was ousted a while back, partly because of her unconditional love and support for "Israel", a small middle-Eastern country.
In response to a CBC article on that topic I posted, "I guess that Zionism isn't that popular in the Green Party." (full comment)
It was instantly removed. "Your content has been deactivated as it was found to violate CBC commenting policies".
CBC should be defunded. Years ago, I made a comment they didn’t appreciate in an article about a gun registry in Quebec. I suggested that they might save more lives using the money in a different way. They disabled the comment and I was never allowed to comment again. A disgraceful organization!
I think we need an unbiased national broadcaster that does not have an agenda. An org that strictly adheres to the well elucidated and delineated practices and principles of actual journalism. There was a time was CBC was close to those ideals. Those days are gone.
I was a great fan at one time. They say the BBC is just as bad. They’re no longer journalists, they’re activists. I counted the number of pieces CBC online posted on the Trump-Russia connection. It was around 5577 articles. I’m no particular Trump fan. I just want him to be treated fairly. It’s their job to do that as a public broadcaster.
You DO realize that the CBC and the National Post…both use the same vile content moderation bunch?
I didn’t know that. I haven’t watched CBC online or listened to them for a few years. although they pop up here and there in my feeds. So I see they’re up to their old tricks. I think the last time I really watched them was when Wendy Mesley interviewed Jordan Peterson and tried to make him look evil because he happened to be photographed with some guys holding a Pepe the Frog flag. It was juvenile! I asked myself, “Is this how my tax dollars are being spent?
I have not watched their *TV service since the dawn of the millenium when I threw away my TV.
I stopped listening on the radio when The Current did a hit piece on Assange called , "How to be a good house guest? Don't be like Julian Assange, says this master butler". I called the guest host Piya Chattopadhyay on it on Twitter, but she totally blew me off.
It's worth listening to the segment as an object lesson in state hate propaganda directed at an Australian journalist who is being targeted for destruction by the United States. Our good friends and literal allies.
"According to The Guardian, conditions for Assange's continued stay at the embassy were contingent on him staying out of activity that would be "considered as political or interfering with the internal affairs of other states."
The memo also included basic housekeeping rules, like keeping his bathroom clean, doing his own laundry and taking proper care of his cat by keeping up with his hygiene."
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-october-19-2018-1.4869693/how-to-be-a-good-house-guest-don-t-be-like-julian-assange-says-this-master-butler-1.4869764
"Well, it’s a trick, we always use it. When from Europe somebody is criticising Israel, then we bring up the Holocaust. When in this country [the US] people are criticising Israel, then they are antisemitic." -- Shulamit Aloni
An opinion piece on medium.com by Steve Cooke (https://medium.com/@Steve_Cooke/is-antisemitism-a-trick-a-closer-look-at-that-shulamit-aloni-meme-295fde27b0a8) points out that this was not a confession that Aloni herself has used the trick. He claims that when Aloni used the pronoun "we," she was referring to Israel. I'm not sure how Cooke in 2019 was able to read the mind of a person who died in 2014. Perhaps he's right, or perhaps Aloni was referring to "we" Zionists. Mr. Kriss cites Stephen Pollard as an example of a Jew, not necessarily an Israeli citizen or a Zionist, who assumed that a person who didn't like him was an antisemite and gloated that he got that person fired from his job. So, perhaps Aloni was in fact referring to Jews in general, though one would hope tacitly excepting some individuals, especially herself.
This is a phenomenon prevalent in almost all minority groups, especially those who have faced actual discrimination in the past, which Jews definitely have even here in the US. If I criticize an African American or BLM, I risk being called a racist even though my criticism is valid. If I opposed puberty blockers and life-altering surgery on a minor, I may be called "trans-phobic."
With minorities who are not in a position of power or are not organized, this is not so much of a problem. However, when a minority enjoys enhanced power for whatever reason, it can become a method of marginalizing the majority. Ron Unz has pointed out that if Jewish admissions to elite universities fall even a small amount as a result of preferences for Blacks or Latinos, the university administration may be accused of antisemitism. As a result, the entire burden of "diversity" has been born by Asians and Whites, particularly males. This is ironic because so many Jews are vocal backers of "diversity."
Mr. Kriss goes on to point out that use of the "trick" is not even limited to Jews (with exceptions), but was weaponized by gentile elites to destroy Jeremy Corbyn. He furthermore explains how the use of the "trick" is detrimental to Jews themselves. He points out how "offensive is it to raise the spectre of the Final Solution because someone on Twitter called you a dickhead."
Amen. Offense is in the mind of the offended, and we are rapidly banishing words like "midget," which distinguish a person as not being a "dwarf." Our language loses precision when we replace both words with "little person," which arguably can convey just as many pejoratives as the first two. I'm reminded of the incident in "Cry the Beloved Country" when a black South African chooses not to be offended because an Afrikaner use the word "kafir."
>"This is a phenomenon prevalent in almost all minority groups, especially those who have faced actual discrimination in the past, which Jews definitely have even here in the US."
How much "discrimination"? More than NINA Irish? Germans? Italians? Japanese?
Methinks Jews, via Hollywood, exaggerate Jew sufferings, downplaying successes. Where are the blockbusters about the Holodomor and Nakba?
Plus note: Irish-Americans don't demand endless reparations from England; construct Potato Famine museums around the world; demand $5B annually for Eeire from America; mandate "Begosh and Begorra" lessons be taught in every school; and blame all their problems on antileprechaunism.
Jews are the only group that:
* brags about being the smartest, richest, most blessed-by-God superior beings on Earth;
* demands endless guilt-gelt for 1942-45 events that it won't let be examined;
* endlessly moans and groans for money while killing Palestinians;
* constantly wages war on weaker nations around Israel;
* presses for wars against nations not harming/threatening the USA;
* winks whenever Israelis kill American sailors, reporters, or citizens;
* demands that US military men die for Israel-shilled wars; and
* pressures Congress to pay for all Zionists projects, Occupations, and failures.
I'm a bit puzzled. Where did I say that Irish, Germans, Italians or Japanese were NOT discriminated against IN THE PAST? What gave you the impression I was excusing this behavior? I was not, nor do I excuse it in African Americans, who apparently are following the Jewish example. Your diatribe about the CURRENT success of Jews does not contradict my allegation that they were discriminated against IN THE PAST, as were Blacks who are reacting similarly and Japanese who are not.
Gizmodo, a gadget site, just posted detailed instructions to show people how to stop Kanye from showing up on their music feed.
Make of that what you will.
Virtue signaling cancel culture. It’s feels so good to some humans to ostracize others. Righteous indignation is a kind of drug.
Kriss makes some very good points about the overuse of antisemitism as an accusation meant to defame or cancel those guilty of it, but doesn't address the main reason that antisemitism is such a big issue today, which is of course the behaviour of the Israeli government. Most Jews want to defend the right of Israel to exist and many on the left want it destroyed, that is, they want Israel as a country where Jews are a majority eliminated. "From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free" is fully supported by much of the left that I know. Associated with this conflict is the transformation of the word Zionism to a curse, rather than the desire for a Jewish homeland. Clearly much of the left does not think that the idea of a Jewish homeland has any moral merit.
Another reason I think there is antisemitism in this desire to destroy Israel is the incredible focus on Israel in the West compared to any other countries that have genocidal histories and presents. For example, virtually nobody talks about Tibet anymore, attacked by the Chinese around the same time Israel was founded. A million Tibetans have died since 1949 because of the Chinese invasion, far more than Palestinians, and the Tibetan population decimated; in comparison, there are now more Palestinians than ever before. The left never talks about Tibet. Why? Maybe the focus on Israel is because it's sort of allied with the West , but does this explain all of the focus on it? I wonder. Similarly, Kriss isn't sure that comparing Netanyahu to Hitler is problematic, even though the Jewish population was systematically slaughtered during WWII compared to a Palestinian population that is growing. Scale matters when making comparisons.
One way to understand the rise of accusations of antisemitism that does make sense to me is the ongoing, nauseating desire of people to be seen as victims. If I misgender a trans person, I'm erasing them, wishing for their death; if I say racism isn't that much of a problem today, I might be called a white supremacist or bigot, that my words are violence. And this kind of thinking can be seen in the sensitivity to anything at all that vaguely feels like anti-semitism.
The Palestinians are not claiming to be victims. They are victims.
And your point is? I never suggested otherwise. It was people looking for anti-semitism everywhere that I said were calling themselves victims.
No one talks about Tibet, because it's Russia who is America's target country today. When the time comes to bomb China, it will be all Uighurs all day, because, you know, Americans just LOVE Muslims.
In fact, America loves Muslims so much in fact that they killed four million of them, just since 1992.
No-one has been talking about Tibet for decades. It's been part of China on most maps.
No one talks about the annexation of Puerto Rico, Hawaii, or vast swathes of Mexico either.
Or the millions killed in Laos and Cambodia.
America has a homeless problem. Should China get involved?
America has 2.3 people in cages, most of them minorities, and 5 million more on parole or probation. China needs to "do something!".
Why is "Tibet" America's business?
Boring, biased, pointless. Starts really well: "Last May, Israel fought a brief war in the Gaza strip..." and then the account of atrocities Israel committed. Oh, wait, that is the one where Hamas attacked population centers... And mean tweets are, of course, just mean tweets, no big deal. Except that the pregnant MP is told that THEY know where she lives and what schools her kids go to. You might make an exception and have a bit of compassion, no? And no, this is not a figment of our imagination. Here in the US, remember, when some guy took hostages in a Synagogue in Texas, and the President can't get himself to say 'anti-Semitic'. The cause of the incident was under investigation. Now, that really worries me. Fish rots from the head.
I have read your post hundreds times in dozens of venues. It's a good script, but it's all bullshit.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2020-03-06/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/42-knees-in-one-day-israeli-snipers-open-up-about-shooting-gaza-protesters/0000017f-f2da-d497-a1ff-f2dab2520000