How does this Anti Semite Bitch still have a job?

[Simon W. Moon]

As a general fyi before I leave the thread,

For the most part, argument by analogy only works when your audience already agrees with you. So, if you're debating, bringing extraneous situations and trying to make the debate about these other situations doesn't really create any progress. If you can't make a case w/o resorting to argument by analogy and bringing in other situations besides the one at hand, you should re-examine your case.

ps
Don't forget the other people in this thread are real people, and have fun

 

[Tucker Case]

Tucker, once more, the absolute majority of the Israeli Jews were born and live in the land known as the land of Israel.

I'm not disagreeing with that. I agree with it, in fact. That's one of the reasons why this bulldog's statemnt is so unbelieveably stupid.

When you're telling a specific ethnicity to get up and leave a region, you're making one of the most racist statements there are, you're promoting ethnic cleansing, there's no other way to dodge it, it's pure idiocy to claim otherwise.

I see it as one of the most ignorant statemnts one can make, but I don't see it as racism per se. I would say it borders dangerously close to racism, though.

 

[Apocalypse]

I'm asuming you mean this one:




I think it's an amazingly ignorant statement, but I disagree with it being labelled as racism.

In the endd, I don't think it needs to be labelled as racism for it's inherent stupidity and ignorance to be exposed (which I'd say you've done a excellent job at with your "nigeria" analogy).

Basically, stating that someone should leave the place he is living (and was most likely born) at, simply because he was born to the Jewish race, is pure racism.
I do not feel a need to have a debate over this, I find it to be as clear as the sun and as decisive as George W. Bush.

 

[Apocalypse]

I'm not disagreeing with that. I agree with it, in fact. That's one of the reasons why this bulldog's statemnt is so unbelieveably stupid.



I see it as one of the most ignorant statemnts one can make, but I don't see it as racism per se. I would say it borders dangerously close to racism, though.

It discriminates people based on their races.
It's outright racism.

 

[Gardener]

I see it as one of the most ignorant statemnts one can make, but I don't see it as racism per se. I would say it borders dangerously close to racism, though.

Antisemitism may have become normalized in the last decade, and the the barage of intimidation offered by the antisemites attempting to disgrace the very word that describes them repeated so often that the word might seem anathema, but it is still racism.

 

[pbrauer]

"You n*ggers should go back to Africa!"

Where in that statement did I explicitly state that I hate black people? Nowhere. So that means it's not a racist remark, right?

You used a racial slur, so yes I would say it's a racist statement and you would hate black people. It's a stretch to say Helen Thomas came close to this.

I find the implication (by the video) that if the Jewish people were sent to Germany and Poland they would be killed, highly offensive. - "Six Million Jews were killed at Home", "In Germany and Poland" If I were a citizen of either of those countries, I would be outraged at the implication - it's sick.

 

[washunut]

You used a racial slur, so yes I would say it's a racist statement and you would hate black people. It's a stretch to say Helen Thomas came close to this.

I find the implication (by the video) that if the Jewish people were sent to Germany and Poland they would be killed, highly offensive. - "Six Million Jews were killed at Home", "In Germany and Poland" If I were a citizen of either of those countries, I would be outraged at the implication - it's sick.

It is sad what poses for "liberal" thought these days. Perhaps that is why stations like MSNBC have to call their heros progressives.

 

[Cochise]

Why the political correctness, texmaster? Can't Ms. Thomas be free to share her opinions without you playing the race card, racist? :lol:

Which is anti-Semitic. Just as saying that blacks should go back to Africa, and Mexicans should go back to Mexico, would be racist.

How would saying that Mexicans should go back to Mexico be "racist"? Would saying that Canadians should go back to Canada be racist?

 

[pbrauer]

It is sad what poses for "liberal" thought these days. Perhaps that is why stations like MSNBC have to call their heros progressives.

Is there a point to your rhetoric? :roll:

 

[washunut]

Is there a point to your rhetoric? :roll:

That you are too biased to see hatred when you see it. That is the point spelled out.

 

[Cochise]

Not really. It would be stupid since Mexicans have a much greater ancestral right (due to indigenous ancestry) to the US than most Americans do.

The Mexican immigrants that come to the U.S. are typically indigenous, yes. It's funny, since I'm usually the one accused of promoting this doctrine, but I have to contradict you and say that since they come from southern Mexico, quite geographically removed from U.S. territory, they don't have ancestral rights to any U.S. lands and resources any more than Sicilians have ancestral rights to Bavaria. They have a much closer genetic relationship with U.S. Indians than Europeans do, but they aren't U.S. Indians. The exceptions are those in the Mexican north, who are grouped into the same "Southwestern" category as the Navajo or Pueblo ethnic groups. The Apache are a "bi-national" ethnic group, for example.

That's not to say that a justification can't be derived from their indigenous heritage. The reason that impoverished Indians need to migrate from Mesoamerica is caused by their lower class statuses in Mexican and Central American societies as a result of racial attributes. There are very few whites that migrate, despite the fact that there are millions of them in Mexico, Guatemala, and El Salvador. And the European-established governments have made treaties with each other that have adversely affected the indigenous population and caused those migration patterns.

Back to the topic, there are immigrant groups that were involuntarily transported, such as African-Americans, and immigrant groups that established a presence in a region at the expense of the prior inhabitants. The majority of Israeli Jews may not be immigrants, but they are anchor babies, to use some xenophobic terminology. They're occupying the territory seized through the encroachment of their forbears. As long as that adversely affects an indigenous population, there's a property rights problem.

Incidentally, Jews are not a race. There are probably greater genetic differences between Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews than between Mizrahim and some groups of "Arabs," since Arabs also aren't a race, and they're all Semitic peoples with Middle East origins.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Seriously, if this was a republican saying the blacks should go back to Africa it would br front page news.

But this Jew hating bitch displays her racism for all to see and its a free ride from the media

Breitbart.tv

I watched the video, and your characterization of it is entirely dishonest.

She expressed no hatred for the Jewish people, nor wish that Israel be destroyed. It is her belief that what the Jews call Israel is in fact Palestine, and that the Jews should set up shop in any of the many places in which they resided prior to their return to Israel.

I'm sure she hasn't forgotten about the Holocaust. She certainly didn't deny that it happened. I think her perspective is more that the Jews had no right to displace the people inhabiting the territory the Jews wished to claim as their own.

It is a reasonable perspective that one can arrive at without any hatred, ignorance, or prejudice. It is hatred, ignorance and prejudice which has been directed at her.

Irony much?

 

[pbrauer]

That you are too biased to see hatred when you see it. That is the point spelled out.

What am I too biased about and what does MSNBC have to do with this discussion?

 

[Cochise]

Actually, a better example than Native Americans telling European-Americans to go to Europe now, 518 years after the first historically documented major contact, would have been a suggestion that they go to Europe in 1554, 62 years later, to correspond with declaration of Israeli statehood in 1948. It's akin to suggestions that Afrikaners and Boers leave South Africa and return to Europe during the apartheid era because of the racial discrimination that the establishment of their regime entailed. Not entirely justifiable, but intuitively understandable.

 

[Cold Highway]

Jews are in a special category of their own who do not receive the same considerations as other poeple, both in the international spotlight, and in the workings of websites. With the Islamist collaborating, illiberal European left hating them, the old guard neonazi right hating them, and the Ron Paul type "libertarians" hating them, they have few real friends, especially considering that some of their American supporters, such as the more weirded out evangelicals, only support them because they think it fulfills some sort of biblical prophesy.

Links?

Since when does criticism of Israel equal antisemitism?
.

Since the neocons adopted Al Sharpton-esque tactics.

 

[Cochise]

Links?

He's referring to the fear of "ZOG" and "NWO" conspiracies that are in some elements of paleocon circles. Arguably being a paleocon myself, I suppose it's something to be resented, but I do see facets of racist white populism in the more hardcore extremist fringes.

 

[Dav]

Back to the topic, there are immigrant groups that were involuntarily transported, such as African-Americans, and immigrant groups that established a presence in a region at the expense of the prior inhabitants. The majority of Israeli Jews may not be immigrants, but they are anchor babies, to use some xenophobic terminology. They're occupying the territory seized through the encroachment of their forbears. As long as that adversely affects an indigenous population, there's a property rights problem.

And there's your anti-Semitism: assuming that the very presence of Jews is adversely affecting an indigenous population. Discriminating based on ethnicity who is having an "adverse effect". There are probably plenty of Arabs who have moved to the region since 1948; are they "occupiers"? Do they have an adverse effect on the Arabs who were there previously, simply by coming later?

 

[Tucker Case]

It discriminates people based on their races.
It's outright racism.

Antisemitism may have become normalized in the last decade, and the the barage of intimidation offered by the antisemites attempting to disgrace the very word that describes them repeated so often that the word might seem anathema, but it is still racism.

The more I've thought about it, the more I'm seeing your position. The fact that she's lumping every Israeli Jew into the "GTFO" category is the key to it being racist.

Jews have always been present in the region, well before the creation of the Israeli state.

 

[Dav]

I watched the video, and your characterization of it is entirely dishonest.

She expressed no hatred for the Jewish people

Does a racist have to come out and say that they are racist before anyone can admit it?
She said that Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine". She sees the very PRESENCE of Jews in the region - not just the establishment of a Jewish state - as a menace that needs correcting. Hell yes she showed hatred.

, nor wish that Israel be destroyed.

Erm, she was pretty clear in not wanting a Jewish state of Isreal to exist anymore, if that's what you're saying. Besides calling it "Palestine", it's pretty hard for their to be a Jewish stae without, you know, Jews.
That's not what makes her anti-Semitic though.

It is her belief that what the Jews call Israel is in fact Palestine, and that the Jews should set up shop in any of the many places in which they resided prior to their return to Israel.

And for most Jews, that would be Israel, where they were born. Not that it matters, she basically supports the ethnic cleansing of Jews there, or something close to it.

I'm sure she hasn't forgotten about the Holocaust. She certainly didn't deny that it happened. I think her perspective is more that the Jews had no right to displace the people inhabiting the territory the Jews wished to claim as their own.

Then she should be against displacing Jews from land that they now live in.

It is a reasonable perspective that one can arrive at without any hatred, ignorance, or prejudice. It is hatred, ignorance and prejudice which has been directed at her.

It's not reasonable, and it can't be arrived at without viewing the very presence of Jews in an area as a problem that needs to be solved. In other words, anti-Semitism.

 

[pbrauer]

It's not reasonable, and it can't be arrived at without viewing the very presence of Jews in an area as a problem that needs to be solved. In other words, anti-Semitism.

I am sorry, but I don't think a reasonable person would call Helen Thomas anti-Semitic by listening to the words she said on the video. Among other places, she says they should go back to America, which is where she lives. In order to show anti-Semitism you would need to observe her for a period of time.

 

[Gardener]

Does a racist have to come out and say that they are racist before anyone can admit it?

.

The more that people agree with her, the more strongly they defend her.

It's as simple as that.

 

[Agent Ferris]

Since when does criticism of Israel equal antisemitism?
I guess saying "antisemite" has more of a ring to it than saying "someone-who-has-criticism-for-Israel".
But, substituting the catchier "antisemite" for the more awkward "someone-who-is-critical-of-Israel" tars some people who are Jewish with the smear of antisemite. Which seems inherently ... um ... unusual.
To me, the fact that it end up tarring some Jewish folks with the smear antisemite limits the usefulness and accuracy of the term "antisemite" in these contexts.
Obviously, ymmv. You are not alone though It apparently makes sense to many folks to call Jewish folks antisemites.

"Jews go home" is not anti-semitic? :roll: Wow.

 

[Agent Ferris]

I think she was referring to Israeli settlers/occupiers.

So the Jews.

 

[Agent Ferris]

The differentiation was there from the very beginning of the video, which makes it clear that she was talking about Israeli settlers/occupiers.

Or in other words all Israeli Jews.

 

[Agent Ferris]

How is it sensible to say that opposition the establishment of Israel means someone is an anti-semite when that category includes people who are Jewish?
What sense is it to call Jewish people antsemites?
Perhaps there are further criteria that should be used to determine who/what is and is not antisemitic. If more criteria were included, it would be possible to avoid nonsensically labelling Jewish folks as antsemites.

If "Jews go home" isn't anti-semitic than "Mexicans go home" isn't anti-Mexican, or "blacks go home" isn't anti-black.