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 ...
Unfornicatingbelievable.
First, you demand people use the dictionary definition. Then, when you're confronted with the fact that the dictionary -- your dictionary -- defines the word the way everyone but you uses it, you then put on your spinmeister hat and claim that even the dictionary is wrong? Good grief!
And you have the chutzpah to compare others to Clinton? You take the cake! I doubt I've seen a better clintonizin' spin doctor since the impeachment!
Major governments in the Middle East aren't satisfied with recycling Goebbel's methods. Now they're recycling his material. What should the US do?
If I were President, every transmitter and TV studio that show came out of would get hit with a cluster bomb. But then, if I were President, Mecca and Medina would be smoking radioactive holes in the ground by now, so it's probably a good thing I'm not.
Anyone have any ideas how the US should respond? Any ideas on how we should freep the White House and our Congresscritters over this? Threaten Egypt with an aid cuttoff if it gets shown there? Do we have aid or military cooperation with Abu Dhabi we could cut off?
He might have meant the people who live in the Caucus mountains in Russia.
You’re wrong, though it puzzles me why this is such an issue.
You said, “Besides, I happen to have studied history,…”. Pull out your history books and read them. Or do a google search (try Wilhelm Marr & anti-semite). You will discover that the term “anti-semite” has nothing to do with race. Wilhelm need to coin a friendlier word than Judenhass (Jew-hatred, even sounded evil in German) for his political beliefs. He thought anti-semite sounded snappy, and named his political party the Anit-Semite Party, its objective the expulsion of Jews from western Europe. The term is correctly applied historically for hatred of Jews, but never refers to hatred of “semites”..
Your argument is often used in the Arab world as cover for anit-semitic statements. The idea is to turn the argument, discuss semitic rather than Jedenhass. It is improper usage of the word.
Just trying to keep up with the constant barrage of propaganda, horsefly. See Lumberjack, veronica's checking her label-list.
Apparently saying that a group of 19th century racists who incorrectly used a reference to Semites are wrong is offensive. Evidently this places me in the "brownshirt" category, according to these posts. I meant the original post as a small barb to the media, in passing as it were. I'm completely in agreement that many Arabs are anti-Jewish and that this is a bad thing.
Some people seemed to take that remark personally, as if noting the fact that both Arabs and Jews are Semites is wrong, somehow.
You're a real piece of work. First, you insist we're all misusing the word, and you insist on a dictionary definition. Then, when you're confronted by the fact that your dictionary's definition of the word agrees with us, you go into a mega-pout and refuse to acknowledge that the f'n meaning of the word is what we said it was, and then you go on this royal snit like a spoiled little schoolgirl who didn't get her way.
"Now please, go about your business proudly. I'll stop asking that the media use words correctly, especially since this concept offends you so much. You win, get it?"
Before you cry yourself to death, could you crack open your dictionary one more time, and give us the definition of "drama queen"?
It was just a quip in passing at the media, but thanks for making it your crusade, man.. You da' man, you win!
Well, no, actually; you're wrong.
The word "antisemite" was "invented by German racists".
Think of it as a precursor to "kwanzaa", OK? The people who make-up a word are generally conceded to be the ones with the definitive definition.
Major governments in the Middle East aren't satisfied with recycling Goebbel's methods. Now they're recycling his material. What should the US do?If I were President, every transmitter and TV studio that show came out of would get hit with a cluster bomb. But then, if I were President, Mecca and Medina would be smoking radioactive holes in the ground by now, so it's probably a good thing I'm not.
Anyone have any ideas how the US should respond? Any ideas on how we should freep the White House and our Congresscritters over this? Threaten Egypt with an aid cuttoff if it gets shown there? Do we have aid or military cooperation with Abu Dhabi we could cut off?
Frankly, I'm sufficiently cynical to think that it's gonna have to run its course. IOW, I don't really think there's a damned thing that "we" (The US/Western Civilization) can do to about it.
Maybe I'm just disheartened by the recent spate of cluster-posts by neo-nazi types here on several FR threads, but maybe it's something more than that. Maybe there's enough chaos brewing in the world that -- for lack of a better term -- "the forces of darkness" are feeling their oats, and coming out of the woodwork.
I hope any naziboyz reading this don't break into grins, interpreting my words as something tantamount to "Excellent! Der juden are prepared to accept their fate!"
That is to say, it won't be like the last time. I've heard the heroin dealers say "the first one's for free". Well, if the "moral" descendents of schicklegruber think the "second one" will be free, they're in for a rude awakening.
Hopefully, I'm wrong. It's happened before. Cynics can't be right all the time, can they?
Not at all. It is merely irrelevant, like Arafat.
I’m not accusing you of being a “brownshirt”. It sounds to me as though you simply made a comment based on the word semite. You should understand though, that your argument is an old one. It is frequently used by those in the Arab world. It was coined deliberately to cause this type of confusion.
When earlier this year Syrian President Assad made a virulently anti-semitic speech in the presence of the Pope, his defense mirrored your comments, “"How could he be an anti-Semite, when Arabs are Semites?". The next day, his defense minister, made his famous "When I see a Jew before me, I kill him. If every Arab did this, it would be the end of the Jews."
I’m not attributing these feelings to you, simply pointing out why people might react harshly to what you may have meant as an light, innocent comment. The point of the term, the reason it was coined, was to engender confusion, and make Judenhass politically acceptable.
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.