Anti-Semitism Lives

But don't make the contemptible suggestion that Jews "forced" taxpayers to build these museums.

There was, still is and never will be a justification on your part for making this comment. Therefore there are only five actions left for you. Appologize like a man, blame me, blame something or someone else, make pitiful exuses like a child or run from the issue.

As for being enraged, you do have a way of makeing an ___ out of yourself don't you. You slander me then cast me as the faulty party for calling on your outrageous comments.

If you don't have the tools to understand what you did and why I'm making an issue of it, so be it.

Option five. I figured as much.

Southern Federalist;

Since you're having a hard time understanding the elemental nature of the problem you created, let me explain why I wouldn't let you get away with what you tried to pull off. I saw HiTech RedNeck's comment and wanted to respond to it. I did so because I live in a community of Armenian Christians. In the last twenty years they have increased from a few percent of our city's populace to around 60% today. These are very nice people for the most part. But over time some of them have become very active trying to influence our city to recognize the Armenian Genocide. Therefore I've had to confront this issue, and develop an opinion that fits with all genocides and or holocausts.

If an act of genocide occurs on our soil, our govenment should recognize it, and help to resolve issues related to it. In this nation there are a number of such places related to slavery. National monuments have been created to commemorate some of the sordid aspect of slavery. Some have even documented successful blacks and their contribution to our society. I fully support this. Howevery, as stated to you several times before, I do not support taxpayer dollars going to pay for events that did not occur on our soil. In order for us to commemorate them all in a manner that our whole populace could be near a commemorative for each of them, it would be cost prohibitive.

Now, let's review, for the slow of mind.

To: LarryLied

sick of having Holocaust museums shoved down their throats

What if Jews built a million such museums? Why should anyone else care. Nobody's being marched into the museums. Jewish whining exists, yes, but it pales against the whining of environuts, liberalwhacks, and similar cuckoo cases. And most of the whining issues from a very small self-aggrandizing fraction of the whole, that are often despised even by other Jews.

29 posted on 4/17/02 4:33 PM Pacific by HiTech RedNeck

This is the thread I responded to. In it HiTeck RedNeck is defending this idea of Holocaust museums. My first comment coming up does what? See if you can figure it out. Why yes, it states that I agree with him. Duh!

To: HiTech RedNeck

I have no problem with Holocaust museums where ever they pop up. What I do have a problem with is even one tax dollar being used to develop them.

As with the Armenian holocaust and other acts of genocide, it's not the duty of our government to errect rememberances to something that took place on foreign soil, for which we had no responsibility.

I personally acknowledge the holocaust and am appauled by it's grim reality. But forcing the US taxpayer to foot the bill for museums is wrong.

38 posted on 4/17/02 4:48 PM Pacific by DoughtyOne

Notice I did not use a slur to indicate a Jewish concern. Note that I did not use the term Jews, Israel or any other term to denote people of Jewish descent. Therefore there is no possible way for you to misinterpret my comments. Any intimation that I was talking about Jewish people forcing something is wholely a fabrication of your feeble mind.

To: DoughtyOne

Who the hell ever "forced" the US taxpayer to pay for a Holocaust museum? I don't remember the Stern Gang holding hostages to demand it. These dollars were appropriated by elected representatives of the people, and I bet that the American people largely approved and still approve of it. If you don't like it, write your congressman. But don't make the contemptible suggestion that Jews "forced" taxpayers to build these museums.

90 posted on 4/17/02 11:25 PM Pacific by Southern Federalist

In this response you did several things that were totally wrong. In it you refer to the Stern Gang, a euphemism clearly designed to impugn my character as if I had slandered people of Jewish descent. I didn't do any such thing. Secondly, you instruct me not to make a contemptible suggestion that Jews "forced" taxpayers to build these mueums. Once again, I never did this.

In this one short paragraph you made two dishonest implications that I had essentially made racist comments. You refered to people of Jewish descent as "the Stern Gang", implying that my comments had inferred such a slur. Then you implied that I had suggested that Jews "forced" taxpayers to build these museums. I didn't do either one of these things.

In your response you correctly lay out who appropriates funding. Obviously you were aware of who appropriates, so why did you seek to infer that I had intimated anything different than you yourself did when I hadn't?

In one of your feeble replies you blamed the tone of the thread for your initial contemptable response. Evidently you didn't read this additional comment of mine that appeared before you made your first reply to me.

To: Goldsters

But I also have a problem with those who choose to focus on the shortcomings of Jews disproportially to those of others who may or may not comprise an easily-identified group.

Well, that is one of my main beefs with the Bush administration. I find myself constantly wondering why he can't see the double standard he is applying to Israel vs the Palestinians. Bush and Powell hardly ever made comments regarding the murdering bombers before Israel reacted. Then when Israel reacted they'd make a muted off hand condemnation on the way to a strident condemnation of Israel. This really stuck in my craw!

Then I had to hold my tongue when Laden was labeled a terrorist, something the Arafat still hasn't been called. I'm at a total loss on this one!

Bush's double standard regarding the war on terrorism, Israel vs the US, has completely undone my respect for him on this issue.

59 posted on 4/17/02 5:21 PM Pacific by DoughtyOne

Is this the tone of the thread to which you refered? In it I support Israel aginst our own President and his Secretary of State. I do so on four different issues. Double standards in general, murderous bombers vs Israeli retaliation, labeling Laden a terrorist but not Arafat and the issue of the War on Terrorism vs Israeli actions against terrorists. Even if you were stupid enough to think that my first comment inferred something that it didn't, you had ample evidence to figure out for yourself, that I was not a person that would slander people of Jewish descent. So even your own feeble attempts to deflect guilt away from you, are as infantile as your first scurilous attack.

I pointed out your errors and asked you nicely to appologize. When you didn't I escalated my comments, at which point you made light of my supposed outrage. I'm not outraged. I don't need to get outraged with an individual that has no more character or intellect than you do. I'm just going to make sure that it's crystal clear what you did and what you've refused to do to make ammends.

You state that you will have to leave this conversations and endure my displeasure, because you're not going to appologize. Well, that's okay. You just slither off to another topic. If you can endure the embarassment of acting in the contemptable way you have, without making amends, I can too.

I guess Hitler didng kill Jews and NASA faked the moon landing...I got news for you the mass graves were found in Bosnia and they contained thousands of dead Bosnians. Yes all sided did it. But the Serbs did it systematicaly jusat like the Nazis in Germany, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the Turks in Armenia and Saddam in Iraq. If you want to ignore it just because CNN reported it, go ahead. (By the way, I watch no CNN. FOX rules...)

Actually, Hitler really did kill the Jews, and man really did land on the moon. But I repeat, and it's been discussed on this board in numerous detail, that most reports of Serb atrocities were later proven false, and in any event they were not systematic. And, for your information, it was conclusively proven that some of Hussein's atrocities against Kuwaitis were false as well (the story about the young Kuwaiti girl talking about babies being ripped from incubators leaps to mind).

"Germany and her allies killed 6 million Jews."

I am assuming that you are speaking about the Holocaust here, if that's the case, I'd like to make a slight correction to that statement.

Germany and her allies killed 11 million people in the death camps. Six million of which were Jews.

I find it interesting that the article turned "sour" on you the moment that you cow was being gored. I aslo think that your characterizations of the administration in relation to the events in Israel are off-base.

"But every time Israel took punitive actions designed to make those who perpetrated such attacks pay a heavy price, as well as destroy the aparatus to carry out those attacks, Bush and his Secretary of State condemned Israel immeidately and resoundly."

I have listened to the statements from the White House, and I recently attended a function that featured Ari Fleischer as the key note speaker, where the administration's policies regarding Israel were discussed. Mr. Fleischer minced no words when detailing the administration's support of Israel.

In every statement that I have read from the White House addressing the ongoing fighting in Israel, President Bush has openly spoken about the right of Israel to defend itself. I do understand the calls for peace in the area, it's the responsible thing to do.

"This is much more direct evidence of anti-Semitism than anything Pat has every done."

I would venture to say that praising Hitler is sufficient to cast a shadow over Pat's love of "American jewry" as he is fond of calling them.

In a column published by The Guardian on 1/14/92, Pat described Adolf Hitler as "an individual of great courage" and continued his praise by saying that "...Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path."

Perhaps Pat can look at Hitler subjectively, and gloss over the murder of eleven million people in work camps, while praising the Third Reich's advances in the area of manufacturing, or even military strategy. To expect Jews to do the same, or not to call him an anti-semite is foolish of Pat.

To: DoughtyOne

I find it interesting that the article turned "sour" on you the moment that you cow was being gored. I aslo think that your characterizations of the administration in relation to the events in Israel are off-base. If someone made a remark that intimated that you were a racist with regard to Jews, I'd expect you to defend yourself. What did you expect of me?

"But every time Israel took punitive actions designed to make those who perpetrated such attacks pay a heavy price, as well as destroy the aparatus to carry
out those attacks, Bush and his Secretary of State condemned Israel immeidately and resoundly."

In Israel's latest campaign Bush put out the demands that Israel leave the West Bank. Luis, if US citizens were entering Mexico and bombing citizens down there, I'd drive the Mexican troops from the border to the perps homes in the US If I could arrange it. I can't imagine Israel doing anything other than what it did. If Ariel Sharon hadn't plowed into the West Bank I'd have thought him unfit to lead Israel. As it is, I am amazed that he took so long. After eighteen months of bombings against citizens, I'd support Mexican troops in our nation until they brough the bombings to an end, if we hadn't by then. That's how strongly I feel about this. No nation deserves to have it's citizens blown to bits by foreign nationals unless a war or military campaign is being justly pursued by an injured party. Even then I want to see as few citizens harmed as possible.

I have listened to the statements from the White House, and I recently attended a function that featured Ari Fleischer as the key note speaker, where the
administration's policies regarding Israel were discussed. Mr. Fleischer minced no words when detailing the administration's support of Israel.

Luis, I can't tell you how many times I've heard Palestinian defenders paroting Bushes comments regarding Israel. They did it again on Saturday. It's one thing to make a sound bite, but something's got to be a little askew if they can find statements that fit their own purposes over and over again.. I wouldn't give them a scrap of bread crumbs if it were me. Bombing citizens is a terrorist crime. Whatever the avenging nation does to stop it receives my approval. There woouldn't be any qualified comments that could be construed in any manner to suit the perps or their backers.

In every statement that I have read from the White House addressing the ongoing fighting in Israel, President Bush has openly spoken about the right of Israel to defend itself. I do understand the calls for peace in the area, it's the responsible thing to do.

You see this differently than I do, and I don't find your comments credible. I'm sure you think I'm out to dump on Bush and could care less. To be honest, that's not where I'm coming from. The refusal to name Arafat a terrorist is a perfect example. Through your eyes it's a warranted pragmatist action. Through my eyes it's a complete betrayal of Bush's War on Terrorism. Arafat recieves direct assistance from Iran and Iraq. Terrorist bomber's families are being given from $10 to $25 thousand by Iraq. Arafat's own henchment are training the bombers. Araft's own notes seem to indicate he was intimately involved in the bombing plots. Other terrorist states are supplying them with weapons The explosives have to come from somewhere. They aren't given for free. As far as I am concerned Arafat is not with us. By Bush's own standard that makes him and his buds against us. Arafat's not supporting the War on Terrorism. He's conducting his own War of Terrorism. Bush said it was global. Arafat is on the planet.

"This is much more direct evidence of anti-Semitism than anything Pat has every done."

When twenty-three Israelis died on the tail end of hundreds, the best Bush could do was demand that Israel take into consideration the ramifications of their actions. Bud, that's no resounding endorsement of a friend. Once Israel entered the West Bank, Bush tried to order them out. When that flopped he said, "I told them I wanted them to leave and that's what I meant." Sorry, that's unacceptable to me.

I would venture to say that praising Hitler is sufficient to cast a shadow over Pat's love of "American jewry" as he is fond of calling them.

In a column published by The Guardian on 1/14/92, Pat described Adolf Hitler as "an individual of great courage" and continued his praise by saying that "...Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path."

I could avoid this section of your comments. As a matter of fact, I'm absolutely positive you'll do your best to turn my comments into something they aren't. But you asked a questing and I don't run from issues. I don't opperate that way. I'll give you my honest assessment.

Luis I haven't read Winston Churchill's books regarding WWII. As much contempt as he must have had for Hitler, I wonder if he may have placed a few paragraphs in there that documented Hitler's ability to rebuild Germany's economic base, develop his military machine and become the most contemptable figure of Western Culture for the 20th Century? I know others have. As detestible as Hitler is to you and I, the man was able to pull this off. I believe he did it in about ten years, perhaps a little longer. He took a nation that was flat on it's back and turned it into a powerhouse that may have conquered Europe if he hadn't been absolutely nuts. Certain aspects of the man can be discussed and noted at the same time holding him in utter contempt.

Was Hitler a man of great courage? Did he have gifts, one of which was intuitively sensing the weaknesses of other world statesmen? I can't imagine how he would have done the things he did without courage. Was it misdirected? Hell yes. Do you have to be reminded of this, or can someone address another facet of Hitler without doing so? As for his intuitive abilities, the man was able to hoodwink every single leader of Europe. McMillan came off the number one fool of the Century. He wasn't alone by any means. His namby pamby appeasement enabled Hitler's fondest desires. And Hitler read these people like a book. Once again, do you need to be reminded that Hitler was a Satanic figure, here? No. Once again, you know it, Buchanan knows it and everyone else knows it.

Perhaps Pat can look at Hitler subjectively, and gloss over the murder of eleven million people in work camps, while praising the Third Reich's advances in the area of manufacturing, or even military strategy. To expect Jews to do the same, or not to call him an anti-semite is foolish of Pat.

Luis, when you read Pat's comments on Hitler, did you forget about the attrocities? No you didn't. And when Pat made his comments he knew you wouldn't. Nobody could. The Satanic side of Hitler goes without saying. Therefore I think it's silly to think that Pat approves of the demonic side of Hitler. He didn't say that. He didn't intimate that.

What you seem to be saying is that the beginning, the body, and the ending of all comments about Hitler should refer to the Holocaust or Hitler's Satanic nature. If our words regarding Hitler are going to be limited to "Hitler was bad" we're not going to observe his other traits. And not observing his actions is the best way I know of to make sure another Hitler will come along. How did Hitler accomplish what he did? How did he manipulate the masses the way he did? How did he manipulate the leaders of Europe the way he did?

Just prior to WWII, Winston Churchill was trying to tell McMillan and anyone that would listen, that Hitler wasn't to be trusted. As I understand it, even Churchill had to make an about face at one point. But when he saw Hitler and Germany for what they were, he tried to warn people. They laughed at him. McMillan conducted his business and the rest is history. Big business thought McMillan had pulled off a miracle. Wrong.

Today we see the same buildup in China that Churchill recognized in Germany. Sadly everyone is ignoring the implications as if they were a great big joke, it could never turn hostile. China's our trading partner after all.

Luis, I'd say that we are doing too little study of 1930s Germany and Hitler. As for Pat's comments, I can remember teachers addressing the issue of Hitler. Even then they were able to recognize that despite the Satanic figure he was, he did have certain abilities that would have been recognized as positive if other posessed them.

Does this in any way imply that Hitler's vile tendencies should be applauded or emulated? Well, I'd hope you would agree with me on that. Outside of the Holocaust victims and their families, I don't think anyone holds Hitler in more contempt that I do. I respect Jewish people and try to deal with them as I would anyone else.

127 posted on 4/22/02 10:11 PM Pacific by Luis Gonzalez

By the way Luis, I am discussing this issue with you alone. I will not discuss this issue with others. I'm not going to be tag teamed endlessly on this subject. If you'd like to continue a dialogue on the topic, I will do so as long as you keep it civil.

I find it interesting that the article turned "sour" on you the moment that you cow was being gored. I aslo think that your characterizations of the administration in relation to the events in Israel are off-base. If someone made a remark that intimated that you were a racist with regard to Jews, I'd expect you to defend yourself. What did you expect of me?

I note that I misinterpreted this first statement last night. You were refering to the references to Buchanan in the article, and my reaction to them. When an article goes south, starts making false statements, it undercuts it's credibility throughout. The guy was making sense. Then he flipped out. That's my take.