Posted on 12/17/2001 6:01:47 AM PST by veronica
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:48 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
-SNIP-Ominously, the Abu Dhabi series reflects the mainstreaming of anti-Semitism across the Arab world. Saudi Arabian and Egyptian TV are debating whether to air a 30-part miniseries, "Horseman Without a Horse," which is based on the debunked canard "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," an early 20th century hoax by the Russian czar's secret police that purported to reveal a Jewish plan to dominate the world. The book, a virtual prescription for genocide, has been invoked by every Jew hater from Adolf Hitler to Louis Farrakhan. THE REST HERE ...
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
No it is a living, breathing word, not a document or a law. Words change in meaning. The Bill of Rights says that Freedom of the Press shall not be infringed. Would you like it if the courts would say, heck it says the press, we can censor the TV, radio, and internet all we want?
sargoniv, meet LumberJack. LumberJack, meet sargoniv. By the way sargoniv, what kind of Italian word is sargoniv? Sounds Persian to me.
To all:
BTW - "Anti-Zionism = Anti-Semitism" - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Many orthodox Jews consider the proclamation of a Jewish State without the Messiah to be a sin. They could hardly be classified as anti-semitic as a result.
Now, people who mean no harm to Israel are clinging to the very word that allows others (the specific Arabs in this case)to make goofy claims about how they are not 'antisemitic' when in fact they would rather kill a Jew than look at him/her. Why enable the enemy by using a fabricated word that incorrectly represents a thought you are trying to convey? When one accepts the propagandist's definition of words, who gains and who suffers? Are Arabs today NOT claiming anything different when you use this word? That is their cheap little syntax word weapon, and people here have bought it hook, line and sinker.
I completely understand and have no problem with the "over time evolution" of language. I completely disagree with words designed to obfuscate meaning and allow dangerous assumptions to be smuggled into a political discussion. Policy is often the result of discussions of this nature (albeit not ours here on FR, to my knowledge, but political servants have the same discussions with the same base assumptions I'm sure).
Now do you and others see why I have a problem with this?
if you are not Italian , from the proper region, you should not use one of our names sargoniv, meet LumberJack. LumberJack, meet sargoniv. By the way sargoniv, what kind of Italian word is sargoniv? Sounds Persian to me.
Well, until this post I had thought that you were attempting to have polite debate. Why is it wrong to question an assumption, to the point people consider questioning intolerant? Perhaps you may want to read *all* of my prior posts on this thread, and others in the forum, before you make these kinds of assummptions.
Remember, I suggested that the media should not use imprecise words, that was all. No commandments, not "thou shalt nots", nothing, just a suggestion.
Do whatever you wish, its not my business, never has been. To question the root meaning of a word doesn't mean that I somehow "forbid" its use, any more than you could forbid me from speaking. You'll find, if you bother, that I'm very, very tolerant of others. But thank you for implying otherwise.
If that book is not anti-semitic, what the devil IS anti-semitic? (from your post, #101)
If it was the RUSSIANS who purportedly revealed this plan, why are you screaming at Americans instead of Russians.
Amazing, isn't it. Somehow your people managed to tick off the Germans and the Russians, and now somehow it seems that you're terrified that Americans might also become ticked off, but none of you are willing to openly and honestly debate what it WAS that so ticked off these other nations.
I, for one, do NOT believe it was the regular, average German or Russian Jew that created these 'pograms', it was the Zionist idiology behind the scenes, vigorously supported by the average Jewish guy and gal on the street, that turned these people against ALL things Jewish. Kneejerk, backlash ... And yes, it IS happening here too because of the deep denial, name calling and hatred being displayed by Israel's powerful Amen corner here in America toward people who dare to question Israels expansionist policies, who dare to resent Israel's spying on her 'allies', and who dare to question Israel's incredible pre-eminence in determining US policies. Sometimes people are their own worst enemy. That's sad.
Excellent find!
You are correct. Now name me a non-Jewish anti-Zionist who is not anti-semitic.
No, they are simply following their father, the dragon as he persecutes the woman. They are blind or deluded, sputtering hatred and denial against the seed of Jacob whom they hate because they have never loved the God of Jacob. You cannot hate the one and love the other. It is spiritually impossible.
If, by any chance, you are serious about this, and really mean that as a member of Western Civilization I can't refer to the founders of that Civilization, LOL. I will pay this the same heed as I will Russel Means, when he says I can't cheer for the Atlanta Braves. (Actually I'd never root for the Braves, but not because an American Indian tells me not to do so.)
The ole "The slut was asking for it" mentality. Geez, you folks will believe anything.
Because, for better or for worse, that is, by ordinary usage, the meaning of the word. This is not 1984 and we do not speak Newspeak. Neither the government, individuals, or groups can control the meaning of a word. It evolves over time, out of rational control.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.