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 ...
Are you insinuating that I cannot think for myself?
Or whatever they call themselves now?
That would be the American Free Pree , available online for any who would like to see it. BTW, thanks for another segwae.
By the way is our President, who fully supports Israel, on your list of the wrongheaded?
I don't know Veronica, do you think Clinton was incapable of being 'wrongheaded' merely because he carried the title of President?
*Segue* - Einstein.
So yes, you read the new Spotlight (a virulently anti-Semitic publication) and yes, you think Bush is wrong to support Israel.
It would be easier if you know the conventions, rules if you will, of using FR. The words you objected to were in a quote which I was responding to, from a post which had been sent by the primary postee. I flagged you, because I thought it rather humourous that he was trying to define how names SHOULD be used, as you were trying to define how words SHOULD be used. Thus, I was not talking to you, but to sargoniv, primarily. So before you get huffy about something which is posted, MAKE SURE IT WAS AIMED AT YOU.
It would be easier if you know the conventions, rules if you will, of using FR. The words you objected to were in a quote which I was responding to, from a post which had been sent by the primary postee. I flagged you, because I thought it rather humourous that he was trying to define how names SHOULD be used, as you were trying to define how words SHOULD be used. Thus, I was not talking to you, but to sargoniv, primarily. So before you get huffy about something which is posted, MAKE SURE IT WAS AIMED AT YOU.
AppyPappy: "The slut was asking for it" mentality. ... and I used the word 'slut' where ....?
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.
Then you've missed the point of the reply you pulled my quote from.
It did *NOT* evolve, it means exactly what it was intended to mean, and it is intentionally two sided. I'm not saying people can't use it, don't have that power, don't want it. I won't stop pointing out that the word, by its origin and meaning, is incorrect.
IOW, if we were debating the meaning of the word "cool", or whatever, I would wholeheartedly agree with you. The word change would come from social use of millions of people over time. This word, antisemitism, was created to confuse the issue of racism/genocide, and is still being used to confuse the issue today by those who are attempting to perpetrate these acts.
But you know what? It just doesn't matter. I've been called everything under the sun but a nice guy for daring to suggest that some Jew hating German propagandist is the wrong source to garner one's definitions from. Whatever.
I believe that you have just stepped off the deep end, buddy. You have suddenly exposed yourself as a clear anti-semite, when you refer to 'openly and honestly debate what it WAS that so ticked off these other nations'. This is not holocaust denial, it is holocaust JUSTIFICATION. There is no place in any decent society for people like you. Not out of prison that is.
So now Jesus and Mary, two Jews are the children of Satan, and this from a pretend Christian! Despicable.
BTW, I noticed that you are now starting to qualify your demand by asking for an example of an anti-Zionist who isn't Jewish, so you've just conceded the point that the two aren't one and the same, even though anti-Zionist Jews seem to have their own specific reason for it.
Whose political system and media DO they control?
Did you expect him to? There's nothing decent about him. How should he manage to dredge up something decent from old Spotlight files? Only thing he hasn't posted is an analysis on ol' Carto's snot being a sharp competitor for Viagra. Or maybe he has. I should learn to check my spam instead of piping it to dev null.
Can I have a multiple choice?
You misunderstood that remark. That person was equating non-support of Israel with being against Jesus. That person was saying that if you're against Israel, you're against God, and therefore you are following your spiritual father, who, if it isn't God, it must be Satan.
It is conceivable that we have been misreading each other. You do know that President Bush has been referring to certain Muslims, anti-semites, as the evil ones, and that I have been attacking the anti-semites here, not playing with them. If you are not one of them, my mistake, and my sincere apologies. If you are one of them, you are most disgenuous.
Since so many on this thread have their dictionary out, maybe someone can help you with the word "many".
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.