Anti Semitism Uk

[Rog]

Some of you don't like me?

 

But 100% not because you're Jewish.

 

Just because you post such self righteous clap trap to fuel your inferiority complex.

 

Clap trap, or opinion based on wider knowledge and far more experience of the world?

[hboy]

Clap trap, or opinion based on wider knowledge and far more experience of the world?

 

No just virtiolic clap trap spewed by one old gimmer with a massive (non Jewish) chip on his shoulder.

[LoneWolf]

Setting aside the manner in which he promotes his point of view Rog is correct in that anti semitism does exist and, indeed, it is here on the Isle of Man.

Take a look at this link to an unashamedly offensive anti Jewish / anti semitic statement posted on this forum sometime ago.

 

http://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php...ndpost&p=143185

 

The Island is no worst and no better than elsewhere but lets not pretend these sentiments dont exist on the Island. They do.

[Chinahand]

I'll never forget when I was made to realize I'd been unconciously racist and anti-jewish through most of my teenage years ... I was at university and trying to raise money for charity ... most people were friendly and gave cash, but one student refused point blank to give me money ... I was a little annoyed by this tightness and used the phrase used throughout my school years to name call someone who is stingy ... "don't be jewish."

 

The person involved wasn't jewish, but he accused me of being racist and for a few seconds I was absolutely clueless what he meant ... I then realized ... I had never assosciated this phrase with the jewish race before ... I realize this sounds ridiculous, the only analogue I can think of is someone who has drunk scotch for years and is surprised when he's told that it comes from Scotland.

 

As far as I'm aware no one in my school was jewish, there was no anti-jewish bating or similar, but this anti-jewish sentiment was everywhere in the school. An underlying assumption about money and attitudes towards it.

 

I am certain that attitude still exists on the Isle of Man and the cliche about Jews controlling the banks and the newspapers to control the world. Its an evil and pernicious attitude which links into holocaust denial and jews keeping Arabs poor etc.

 

I was brought up on the Island and this attitude was unconciously put into me and it took a bloke in a student bar to make me realize it. I'll never forget that moment and I'm afraid I find the comments about how this doesn't exist on the Isle of Man far off the mark ... it may not be violent or agressive, but I think its passively unconciously there and it needs to be brought into the open and challenged.

[hboy]

Take a look at this link to an unashamedly offensive anti Jewish / anti semitic statement posted on this forum sometime ago.

 

http://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php...ndpost&p=143185

 

I'm sorry you found ONE post out of the thousands here. There was more racist stuff daily on the BNP threads a while back. Non anti Semetic.

 

I'm sorry but Rog tends to be the author of his own misfortune ... he gets the responses he does not because he is a Jewish man but because of the way he is and the world view he has.

 

All these accusations of anti semetism are always such a big deal, and are generally in response to something else. It is no coincidence that this report is being published now, as it extends from the fact that Israel thinks its being hard done by from the way the international community is not fully endorsing its wish to take the Lebanon.

 

Chinahand subliminally makes a great comment above in that in general terms - how do you even know people are Jewish so how can you even be accused of being anti semetic? In day to day life I don't ask questions about people's religions because its always a sufe fire way of either getting grief or opening up issues that you don't want to. Unless somebody turns up in full Hasidic dress I have no idea whether they are Jewish or not so I cannot be anti semetic, because to be anti semetic would would rely on me knowing they were semetic in the first place and to treat them differently because of it. Its a non issue.

 

Its a conspiracy to garner public support (or at least deflect public criticism) for unattractive policies being pursued in the Middle East.

 

When comments that are political in nature are construed as being anti semetic it gets me ... a good deal of what Israel has done as a state is indefensible. Rog would I am sure regard that statement as anti semetic but its not - its just saying that your government is acting in an appalling way, its no reflection on you or your religion. But to claim that is an anti-semetic statement is a reflection on you and your religion.

 

Finally - I have never met a person of any nationallity that is not subliminary racist in some way or other. Fear of "outsiders" is a basic human survival instinct and is hard wired into us. People of any nationality will tend to trust someone of another nationality in a different way to one of their "own".

 

That counts for all creeds, and colours. We should accept that this is human nature. Chinahand mentions that some people might inappropriately say something about a Jew being tight. So what. In the same way I've had people tell me my ancestors were sheep worriers and alcoholics. Again so what. I don't find it insulting. There is always some minor ethnic joke made at your expense that is what people do. Its hard wired into us. You don't go running to the nearest policeman and claim you're being racially abused.

 

If they try to set your house on fire thats a different matter.

[John Wright]

It is so difficult isn't it. I have experienced quite nasty discrimination and treatment because of my sexuality.

 

I know the Jews were very badly treated not just under Hitler but under the Czars, the Communists and under the English. After all England was made "Jew Free" in the middle ages.

 

All sorts of minority groups face nasty discrimination. It cannot be justified by anything. But soemtimes we have to be sensible, the jewish (or scotsman) joke about tight or mean may be a symptom of lack of thought or education or of soemthing more sinister. But when Jackie Mason, NY rabbi and stand up, tells the same jokes, and much worse, to a full house of yiddisher mommas and their princess daughters, and food and holocaust jokes as well it's OK. I felt uncomfortable. The rest of the audience, I suspect I was the only gentile, roared with laughter.

 

Then when I went to see an Australian stand up who had cerebral palsy and told cripple jokes there was a frisson of shame when I laughed, was it with or at. I had to admit it was funny though. It would have been funnier still if he hadn't been the only crip.

 

Its OK to laugh with, but not at or so it appears to me.

 

That being said and done I cried at Aushwitz and Birkenau. It was not just Jews, but Christians, Slavs, Poles, gypsies, the mentally ill and the mentally and physically handicapped, the gays. you name it.

 

I was also hopping mad. There were memeorials to and books about all the groups apart from the homosexuals. Catholic Poland did not then recognise them as victims.

 

So what is the point of the post and why did I say its difficult to start with.

 

Ah yes back to my thread, none of us, the Jewish race included, can use the treatment of the evil Nazi regime forever to try and justify the way Israel treats ordianary Palestinians. It has to stop, Israel has to get out of the occupied teritories and soon, and the West has to pile in aid like Marshall Aid after WWll quick to try and stop the spread of fundamentalism.

 

There isn't much separates the BNP, Muslim fundamentalism, the Nazis or the Israelis who support the occupation and deny the Palestinians their rights.

 

Does that make me anti jewish or an anti semite?

[Politician]

"Does that make me anti jewish or an anti semite?"

 

I think it makes you anti-zionist, which is completely different to the two concepts you mentioned.

[LoneWolf]

Take a look at this link to an unashamedly offensive anti Jewish / anti semitic statement posted on this forum sometime ago.

 

http://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php...ndpost&p=143185

 

All these accusations of anti semetism are always such a big deal, and are generally in response to something else. It is no coincidence that this report is being published now, as it extends from the fact that Israel thinks its being hard done by from the way the international community is not fully endorsing its wish to take the Lebanon.

 

That requires a swift and accurate rebuttal because it is an outright untruth and in my opinion deliberately so. Israel's foreign policy does not include a desire "to take the Lebanon". It does include a desire to defend its citizens from attack. the report, as I am sure you are aware contains hard statistics. There is no doubt at all that anti semitism is in the ascendancy. With all due respect it seems to me you are trying to deny facts which you know to be true. Why?

 

Chinahand subliminally makes a great comment above in that in general terms - how do you even know people are Jewish so how can you even be accused of being anti semetic? In day to day life I don't ask questions about people's religions because its always a sufe fire way of either getting grief or opening up issues that you don't want to. Unless somebody turns up in full Hasidic dress I have no idea whether they are Jewish or not so I cannot be anti semetic, because to be anti semetic would would rely on me knowing they were semetic in the first place and to treat them differently because of it. Its a non issue.

 

What nonsense. How do you think odious organisations such as the BNP have managed to identify people in order to send hate mail to their homes? Do you really imagine daubing a synagogue with offensive grafitti requires the ability of a Scotland Yard detective to determine if the building is a synagogue or not? Do you think it is impossible or difficult to identify graves in a Jewish part of a cemetery as being Jewish graves, prior to vandalising them?

Whether or not you personally are anti semetic I wouldnt know. It isnt an issue here. The issue is that you seem determined to deny any anti semitism exists and, of course, you are clearly wrong.

 

Its a conspiracy to garner public support (or at least deflect public criticism) for unattractive policies being pursued in the Middle East.

Rubbish. Who is involved in this conspiracy? Where do they meet to conspire? Is this a similar conspiracy to the ones identified by the Nazis?

 

When comments that are political in nature are construed as being anti semetic it gets me ... a good deal of what Israel has done as a state is indefensible. Rog would I am sure regard that statement as anti semetic but its not - its just saying that your government is acting in an appalling way, its no reflection on you or your religion. But to claim that is an anti-semetic statement is a reflection on you and your religion.

A good deal of what Israel has done as a State has been construed by skilfull propoganda as being indefensible. We are a little handicapped in the British area when it comes to making a reasonable judgement on these things because, unfortunately, the main British News Agency, the BBC, is openly supportive of the "Palestinian" cause. For the avoidance of doubt here almost all of Israel's actions have been limited to defending the well being and security of its citizens.

 

Finally - I have never met a person of any nationallity that is not subliminary racist in some way or other.

 

You have met one now. I could introduce you to many more.

[hboy]

That requires a swift and accurate rebuttal because it is an outright untruth and in my opinion deliberately so. Israel's foreign policy does not include a desire "to take the Lebanon". It does include a desire to defend its citizens from attack. the report, as I am sure you are aware contains hard statistics. There is no doubt at all that anti semitism is in the ascendancy. With all due respect it seems to me you are trying to deny facts which you know to be true. Why?

 

Yes I am a fact denier. Nothing I have seen smacks of a desire to secure. You do not built housing estates on desputed territory in order to secure. You do it to expand. Its simple. We can all look at this situation with rose-tinted glasses but nothing that has happened in recent years smacks of security. Certainly it seems to me like the typical US excuse of "terrorism" being used to pursue goals that have nothing to do with the iradication of terrorism.

 

What nonsense. How do you think odious organisations such as the BNP have managed to identify people in order to send hate mail to their homes? Do you really imagine daubing a synagogue with offensive grafitti requires the ability of a Scotland Yard detective to determine if the building is a synagogue or not? Do you think it is impossible or difficult to identify graves in a Jewish part of a cemetery as being Jewish graves, prior to vandalising them? Whether or not you personally are anti semetic I wouldnt know. It isnt an issue here. The issue is that you seem determined to deny any anti semitism exists and, of course, you are clearly wrong.

 

I was talking in respect of Rog's comments. Yes daubing a synagogue is a clear act of anti semetism. Same way as dauding a mosque is. These are criminal acts (like burning down a house which I referred to). Rog claimed with a little too much vigor that the way people deal with him and threats that he has had are down to the fact he is Jewish. I said they were not. They were down to his views being objectionable and forcebly put.

 

Rubbish. Who is involved in this conspiracy? Where do they meet to conspire? Is this a similar conspiracy to the ones identified by the Nazis?

 

We live in a world where public opinion is manipulated all the time in response to world events. To suggest that sections of the community (Jewish or otherwise) do not conspire to garner a positive image in the press when negative public perception may exist is naive in the extreme. You mentioned the Nazi's not me. I would never, ever, go there.

 

A good deal of what Israel has done as a State has been construed by skilfull propoganda as being indefensible. We are a little handicapped in the British area when it comes to making a reasonable judgement on these things because, unfortunately, the main British News Agency, the BBC, is openly supportive of the "Palestinian" cause. For the avoidance of doubt here almost all of Israel's actions have been limited to defending the well being and security of its citizens.

 

Yes lets blame BBC bias again. Why do some people resort to this accusation when the media pick up on things from a perspective that is not your own? Personally I think the BBC are reporting responsibly, in view of problems in other areas in the Middle East. Again you probably think this is anti semetic.

 

You have met one now. I could introduce you to many more.

 

From what you have posted above that is the biggest untruth I have seen in a long time. You are clearly bias, and clearly writing from a certain perspective. My world view and your world view do not align. That means that my background, religion, and upbringing were likely very different to your own. I think that proves my point. Putting "Palestinian" in parenthesis certainly conveys a racially bias message whether you believe you are or not.

[LoneWolf]

Yes I am a fact denier.

 

I think you have said it all. Thanks.

 

We live in a world where public opinion is manipulated all the time in response to world events. To suggest that sections of the community (Jewish or otherwise) do not conspire to garner a positive image in the press when negative public perception may exist is naive in the extreme. You mentioned the Nazi's not me. I would never, ever, go there.

 

To put this into perspective for you, belief in a world wide Jewish conspiracy is the hallmark of anti semitic sentiments. It is entirely appropriate to point out the Nazis used the notion of such conspiracies as a propoganda tool and as a justification of their actions.

 

Yes lets blame BBC bias again. Why do some people resort to this accusation when the media pick up on things from a perspective that is not your own? Personally I think the BBC are reporting responsibly, in view of problems in other areas in the Middle East. Again you probably think this is anti semetic.

 

I have not claimed the BBC are anti semitic. I have stated the BBC are openly supportive of the "Palestinian" cause. My point being the BBC are the main news agency in the British area and their one sided, biased, reporting makes it difficult for people to make an informed judgement.

 

You have met one now. I could introduce you to many more.

From what you have posted above that is the biggest untruth I have seen in a long time. You are clearly bias, and clearly writing from a certain perspective. My world view and your world view do not align. That means that my background, religion, and upbringing were likely very different to your own. I think that proves my point. Putting "Palestinian" in parenthesis certainly conveys a racially bias message whether you believe you are or not.

First of all, placing "Palestinian" in quotation marks,[not parentheses] is meant, correctly, to convey the word Palestinian is being used as, and should be understood as, a phrase with a specific meaning. This is a grammatically correct use of quotation marks. I would suggest the use of quotation marks does nothing to prove your point but your misunderstanding might go some way to proving something about you.

You are correct in your assertion that our respective "world views" differ. I am grateful for that.

[hboy]

You are correct in your assertion that our respective "world views" differ. I am grateful for that.

 

I'm glad it does. What your responses show is that you can criticise anything, BUT anything that involves the way the state of Israel operates. It never ceases to amaze me that in this crazy screwed up world, where many states are using "terrorism" as an excuse to pursue agendas that they could not normally get away with, that if you criticise the Bush administration you are purely being "anti American" whereas if you criticise Israel your "anti semetic". It is absolutely ludicrous to link politics and religion in this way. You would not say that being "anti American" is being "anti far right Christian"

 

Just because I do not think that what Israel has done is in anyway defensible does not mean that I or anyone else believes that Jewish people deserve to be abused, or ridiculed in anyway.

 

Also I am sorry but using "Palestinian" in messages to me conveys the fact that you believe that they have no right to palestine. Thay are "palestinian" in terms of geography only. I think your inferrance was quite clear. I also think that other people reading your post will think the same.

[Tugger]

How the ILLEGAL settlements equate to "actions ... limited to defending the well being and security of its citizens" defeats me

[LoneWolf]

You are correct in your assertion that our respective "world views" differ. I am grateful for that.

I'm glad it does. What your responses show is that you can criticise anything, BUT anything that involves the way the state of Israel operates. It never ceases to amaze me that in this crazy screwed up world, where many states are using "terrorism" as an excuse to pursue agendas that they could not normally get away with, that if you criticise the Bush administration you are purely being "anti American" whereas if you criticise Israel your "anti semetic". It is absolutely ludicrous to link politics and religion in this way. You would not say that being "anti American" is being "anti far right Christian"

This totally contradicts your previous argument in which you make an attempt to link the publication of a report with a Jewish conspiracy to deflect criticism from Israel.

Its a conspiracy to garner public support (or at least deflect public criticism) for unattractive policies being pursued in the Middle East.

You cant expect to argue both sides of an argument to suit the moment.

Also I am sorry but using "Palestinian" in messages to me conveys the fact that you believe that they have no right to palestine. Thay are "palestinian" in terms of geography only. I think your inferrance was quite clear. I also think that other people reading your post will think the same.

Well lets be grateful you are no longer referring to parentheses!

Quotation marks can be and are utilised for a number of purposes. They can be used to enclose a direct quotation. They can be used as a means of emphasis. They can be used to surround words and phrases under discussion. More recently they have also been used as a means of conveying irony. The latter usage is generally discouraged.

I have only ever used quotation marks as an enclosure for a direct quotation or to surround words and phrases under discussion. Both are grammatically correct uses of quotation marks.

Neither should be taken as indicators to my beliefs and with all due respect you are in no position to determine what you describe as "the fact that you believe that they have no right to palestine."

[hboy]

Well lets be grateful you are no longer referring to parentheses!

Quotation marks can be and are utilised for a number of purposes. They can be used to enclose a direct quotation. They can be used as a means of emphasis. They can be used to surround words and phrases under discussion. More recently they have also been used as a means of conveying irony. The latter usage is generally discouraged.

I have only ever used quotation marks as an enclosure for a direct quotation or to surround words and phrases under discussion. Both are grammatically correct uses of quotation marks.

Neither should be taken as indicators to my beliefs and with all due respect you are in no position to determine what you describe as "the fact that you believe that they have no right to palestine."

 

Referring to grammar and accusations of contradictions just show your argument firmly disappeared up its own arse. Religion and politics do not mix. That is a basic rule of life.

 

I don't see any statement above that adds anything to the debate, or deflects from what you have posted.

 

Your posts are plain for everyone else to see. Lets see if they are interpreted in the same way.

[LoneWolf]

Well lets be grateful you are no longer referring to parentheses!

Quotation marks can be and are utilised for a number of purposes. They can be used to enclose a direct quotation. They can be used as a means of emphasis. They can be used to surround words and phrases under discussion. More recently they have also been used as a means of conveying irony. The latter usage is generally discouraged.

I have only ever used quotation marks as an enclosure for a direct quotation or to surround words and phrases under discussion. Both are grammatically correct uses of quotation marks.

Neither should be taken as indicators to my beliefs and with all due respect you are in no position to determine what you describe as "the fact that you believe that they have no right to palestine."

 

Referring to grammar and accusations of contradictions just show your argument firmly disappeared up its own arse. Religion and politics do not mix. That is a basic rule of life.

 

I don't see any statement above that adds anything to the debate, or deflects from what you have posted.

 

Your posts are plain for everyone else to see. Lets see if they are interpreted in the same way.

 

I think the issue here is the substance of your posts not mine.

You have claimed the existence of a Jewish conspiracy. You should be under no illusions this claim is at the kernel of anti semitic sentiment.

You have claimed everyone you have ever met is racist. Presumably you have a motive for making such a claim.

Finally - I have never met a person of any nationallity that is not subliminary racist in some way or other. Fear of "outsiders" is a basic human survival instinct and is hard wired into us. People of any nationality will tend to trust someone of another nationality in a different way to one of their "own".

You have rubbished Rog's claim he was the victim of a racist assault. In the absence of any evidence I am assuming you have no grounds or substance for making this claim and with all due respect I would argue the victim of an assault would be likely to know why he was assaulted.

 

To be honest with you I suspect you have an unpleasant agenda here and I am distinctly unimpressed by your crass claim "just show your argument firmly disappeared up its own arse."

As to your ridiculous assertion that religion and politics do not mix I can only recommend you do a little reading. The two are inextricably interconnected.