The Proof About Jews

[Rat Faced]

No....it says a lot about Israel and its governments, not Jews.

[J'Pol]

It's Friday night where I am. I can't be bothered ploughing through everything, so I have read the first page and jumped ahead. Sorry, but at least I admit it.

If the Jewish people control all of the money, then I assume the oil wells in the middle East are controlled by the Jews. Since they generate a shed load of serious money.

I assume the Aga Khan is Jewish, he is a seriously wealthy man.The people who control Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran etc - all Jewish. All of the oil billionaire Arab Princes, Jewish.

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by ilw@24 October 2003 - 10:11
Well theres nothing I can suggest that wouldn't go against your religion. Cliquishness (thanks AS) is a result of various religious laws as is the nepotism.

ilw, I should have mentioned before, I&#39;m not orthodox. Most Jews aren&#39;t, and you can quote me on that. The orthodox are a minority within a minority. I don&#39;t have any statistics off hand, but I know their numbers are under a majority(<50%) of the general jewish population. The laws that you are refering to that make it difficult for Jews to interact with non-jews don&#39;t really apply to the majority of jews, besides a few exceptions, mostly with conservative jews. So what I&#39;m saying is the generalized awkwardness that Jews feel when trying to interact with non-jews and the suspicion and awkwardness that non-Jews feel when trying to interact with Jews is some product of society.

Being attacked on all sides at the moment is a result of geography and the high value you place on objectively worthless religious land.

I didn&#39;t mean it literally. Now that it has been mentioned though, is that land "objectively worthless" when compared to the surrounding countries? Even the arabs want it becomes of Mohammed.

@Ratfaced-maybe you missed the Fox News Channel thread and the link I gave there. At any rate, I have only one question, "Even if there was a "jewish slant" to the media, would it last forever?"

[Rat Faced]

Media Slayer...I didnt say a "Jewish Slant", I said an Israeli slant.

I really must be assertive in, what I agree, may sound like semantics.

The reason being...

The way Israel has been settled etc.....

It started off with Freedom Fighters, followed by an influx of displaced Jews, and a couple of wars to harden attitudes of the people there.

Since then, mainly Orthodox/Ultra Orthodox Jews have emmigrated there.

This means that the whole way the creation and settlement of Israel has come about means that the country is basically controlled by Right Wing/Religious people.

This is not a problem that would only have happened to Jews...

Any country settled in this way, by any religion, I suspect would be just as bad.


I really cant think of an example that would fit, to describe the way i feel.

However if Christians and Jews (as an example) were reversed, and it was Christians that had been butchered in the Hollocaust, given "The Holy Land", had to fight the wars with the neighbours, and then most emmigrants had been Fundamentalist Christians.... Im sure the politics of the region would be similar.


As to "will it last forever"...... I suspect, sadly, that it may last for the rest of my lifetime. The Israeli&#39;s would have to give up more than they are willing to (back to 1967 Borders), and not all Pallestinians will rest at that (although thats all 99% of them want).

I&#39;ve said before, both peoples deserve to live in peace, and i believe they both want this (the majority).....however, until the Far Right/Religion stops controlling the policies in Israel, there will be no peace there...I mean, they are still settling the land that is in dispute. The more that is settled, the less likely it is to happen, and even though the PLO denounced Terrorism in the mid 70s, and has as the Pallestinian Authority....people still shout "Terrorist" at them. Hamas are, and a few other groups....but not them, at least not for a long time, all this achieves is to undermine the main Pallestinian group that wants peace and recognises Israels right to exist...dont figure.

I think that Israel will leave it too long, Palestinian Authority loses all control of the Pallestinians (they are close to that already), and Sharon will create the "Greater Israel" he&#39;s been after all his life..... I think this will be make the last 50 years look like kindergarten.


I have to admit that if I was around at the time of the creation of Israel, I would have been against it&#39;s creation. This trouble was always on the horizon, even then...taking someone elses land and "Giving It" to someone else is wrong, pure and simple, they are gonna be upset.

By the same token however, Israel does exist now, and 90%+ of the people there had nothing to do with the creation of the country. They were born there, they moved there etc etc etc. No one has the right to take Israel away now, it has as much right to exist as anyone else...

The Palestinians have recognised this, however the current Government there does not recognise the Palestinians rights.

[J'Pol]

Since this thread is comfortable with history let&#39;s mention the Norman Conquests. That had a fairly dramatic effect on England and Ireland.

Ask the native Americans what happened to their lands. Or the Australians. Or the New Zealanders. Or the South Africans

The partitioning of Ireland didn&#39;t go down particularly well, but the situation is improving. Two steps forward and one step back, granted, but moving forward.

History is full of examples of people taking the land from others and "settling" it.

I don&#39;t see how this type of evidence supports the Jewish Conspiracy Theorists.

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@24 October 2003 - 19:00
No....it says a lot about Israel and its governments, not Jews.

I fail to see the difference. What is the correct way to address the people of Israel?
you call British a Brit, i don&#39;t mind, do the Americans not like being called Yanks
i don&#39;t know i have not known an american personally. i&#39;m not taking the piss here i really don&#39;t know.

[Rat Faced]

Not all Jews are Israeli&#39;s... just like not all Christians are Yanks or Brits.

I would have thought the difference between a Religion and a Nationality self evident.

JPaul,

Im not trying to "support" Jewish Conspiracy theorists....I have already said there is no such thing

I also said that the way the country was settled, it doesnt matter what Religion....there would have been a similar political climate.

Keep up dear chap

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@24 October 2003 - 23:40
Not all Jews are Israeli&#39;s... just like not all Christians are Yanks or Brits.

I would have thought the difference between a Religion and a Nationality self evident.

JPaul,

Im not trying to "support" Jewish Conspiracy theorists....I have already said there is no such thing

I also said that the way the country was settled, it doesnt matter what Religion....there would have been a similar political climate.

Keep up dear chap

Don&#39;t u know i&#39;m a thick Brit trying to keep up with u clever ppl&#39;s

[Biggles]

The concept of a Zionist conspiracy was being discussed in the thread dealing with the comments by the Malaysian President. However, it seems to have drifted over here.

There seems little point in repeating what I said in the other thread but I was intrigued by the references to the Magna Carta.

Jews are indeed heavily involved in banking and the historical figure of the Jew, be it in Walter Scotts Ivanhoe or Shakespere&#39;s Merchant of Venice, is usually a negative connotation. The reason for this is simple. Money lending with interest is explicitly forbidden in the Bible (in fact it is mentioned more times than most of the other dos and don&#39;ts put together - which is rather interesting considering much of modern capitalism is based purely on interest earned). Jews are not allowed to lend to other Jews and Christians could not lend to other Christians. However, it was all right to lend with interest to unbelievers. Christian to Jew and vice versa. Jews were the bankers of medieval Europe and one never likes those one owes money to. One of the best ways of dealing with mounting debts was to have a purge and throw all the Jews out of a region - being a banker in medieval times was a dangerous business. Because Jews were not Christian they were barred from most trades and crafts and only had a few lines of business open to them. Banker, a prestigious job today, was vile and un-Christian in medieval times and therefore open to Jews.

Consequently, Rat Face is absolutely right, there never was a conspiracy.

The mistakes of the current Israeli cabinet represent just that - the mistakes of the current administration. The majority of the Israeli population are decent people who earnestly would like to see the illegal settlements removed and a lasting peace with their neighbours. A surprisingly large number of Palestinians would settle happily for the same. At the moment, however, it those who believe in the sword who hold these majorities in their thrall.

[MediaSlayer]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@24 October 2003 - 21:47
Media Slayer...I didnt say a "Jewish Slant", I said an Israeli slant.

I really must be assertive in, what I agree, may sound like semantics.

The reason being...

The way Israel has been settled etc.....

It started off with Freedom Fighters, followed by an influx of displaced Jews, and a couple of wars to harden attitudes of the people there.

Since then, mainly Orthodox/Ultra Orthodox Jews have emmigrated there.

Do you realize that the majority of Israelis are Jewish? In other words, if a person is born in England but moves to America, does that person lose his "Englishness"? After a while, I&#39;m guessing the person would, but all that time inbetween I would still classify that person as English. Let&#39;s not forget, Ratfaced, modern day Israel is not hundreds of years old. There are many new immigrants in Israel who were "Jewish" in their homeland. So when they move to Israel, does that make them "Israeli"? After a while, yes, but please remember it is a fairly new nation. So what I&#39;m getting at is this: to say the media has a "Israeli" slant is nearly the same as saying the media has a "Jewish" slant. It&#39;s not as if the nation of Israel was created by rebellious Jews who didn&#39;t like the Judiasm of their home countries. It was founded to keep the Jewish traditions alive in a place where they wouldn&#39;t be bothered, which mostly wasn&#39;t worked so far . There are differences between "non-Israeli" Jews and Israeli Jews, but they are mostly irrelevant to a discussion about any media slant. While we&#39;re on the subject though, I would like to point out that whoever told you that its mostly orthodox Jews settling in Israel is wrong. As luck would have it, Israel is fairly secular. Often, Jews who were very observant in their home countries drop some ways and traditions when they move to Israel, resulting in a general drift towards being non-observant, secular Jews.
One last thing, JPaul brought up THE strongest argument for the Israeli state. What makes those settlements any more illegal than an English "settlement" on Irish land? Isn&#39;t that illegal too? In reality, the ownership of land is a social black hole. There is only "claiming" of land, not true ownership. If Russia took all the British Isles, you would no longer "own" that land, no matter what a piece of paper says.