Listen Up, Ya Mugs!
#11
(08-07-2009, 03:19 PM)MitOS Wrote:
(08-06-2009, 09:45 AM)alaric Wrote:
(08-05-2009, 05:56 AM)stvincentferrer Wrote: After reading all those rules and clarifications the only thing I take away from it all is that "Vox is frightened to death of the Jews." I don't blame her. Christ was too. A good argument in favor of having a low view of the Jewish people is the amount of pressure placed on us to have a high opinion of them.

I still haven't figured out how someone who doesn't like Jewish people is an anti-Semite.
Neither have the Palestinians...... Sneaky

Word games with the language. It is a common attempt to justify behavior that they can not justify.  They would prefer to divert attention away so they change the subject into something irrelevant.  Basically manipulation of the debate. 

You do not have control over language any more than Daniel Webster.  It has come into popular use as a reference to the Jews.  Language does not always follow logic and it is not subject to pseudo-ivory tower deep thinking.  It has been dealt with by the Popes, who used this word and its meaning applied to the Jews.  A pretend academic discussion is as useful as arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.  Neither have anything to do with the topic but it often diverts the debate away from something the writer finds a little uncomfortable.    It does not always work; sometimes someone notices it is a form of manipulation, (no disrespect to Palestinians implied.)

Take up your objection up with the Popes (That would includes the pre Vatican II Pontiffs)
Whew, that was deep.........Nevertheless, most "jews" as we know them, are not racially or ethnically [i]Semitic.


But then again, you might be on to something there in language and context of the times. How many Muslim Arabs we have today regarding themselves as "Frenchmen"  or "Germans".
Reply
#12
(08-07-2009, 03:55 PM)alaric Wrote:
(08-07-2009, 03:19 PM)MitOS Wrote:
(08-06-2009, 09:45 AM)alaric Wrote:
(08-05-2009, 05:56 AM)stvincentferrer Wrote: After reading all those rules and clarifications the only thing I take away from it all is that "Vox is frightened to death of the Jews." I don't blame her. Christ was too. A good argument in favor of having a low view of the Jewish people is the amount of pressure placed on us to have a high opinion of them.

I still haven't figured out how someone who doesn't like Jewish people is an anti-Semite.
Neither have the Palestinians...... Sneaky

Word games with the language. It is a common attempt to justify behavior that they can not justify.  They would prefer to divert attention away so they change the subject into something irrelevant.  Basically manipulation of the debate. 

You do not have control over language any more than Daniel Webster.  It has come into popular use as a reference to the Jews.  Language does not always follow logic and it is not subject to pseudo-ivory tower deep thinking.  It has been dealt with by the Popes, who used this word and its meaning applied to the Jews.  A pretend academic discussion is as useful as arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.  Neither have anything to do with the topic but it often diverts the debate away from something the writer finds a little uncomfortable.    It does not always work; sometimes someone notices it is a form of manipulation, (no disrespect to Palestinians implied.)

Take up your objection up with the Popes (That would includes the pre Vatican II Pontiffs)
Whew, that was deep.........Nevertheless, most "jews" as we know them, are not racially or ethnically [i]Semitic.

Irrelevant

Quote:But then again, you might be on to something there in language and context of the times. How many Muslim Arabs we have today regarding themselves as "Frenchmen"  or "Germans".

That I do not know you will have to ask them.  It is a good example of the kind of thing I mean.  Go back 200 years and call a powerful man condescending and you will have complimented him, try that today and he may get mad at you.

Anti-Semitic is about the Jews, nothing you or I can do anything about it.


Reply
#13
(08-07-2009, 04:19 PM)MitOS Wrote:
(08-07-2009, 03:55 PM)alaric Wrote:
(08-07-2009, 03:19 PM)MitOS Wrote:
(08-06-2009, 09:45 AM)alaric Wrote:
(08-05-2009, 05:56 AM)stvincentferrer Wrote: After reading all those rules and clarifications the only thing I take away from it all is that "Vox is frightened to death of the Jews." I don't blame her. Christ was too. A good argument in favor of having a low view of the Jewish people is the amount of pressure placed on us to have a high opinion of them.

I still haven't figured out how someone who doesn't like Jewish people is an anti-Semite.
Neither have the Palestinians...... Sneaky

Word games with the language. It is a common attempt to justify behavior that they can not justify.  They would prefer to divert attention away so they change the subject into something irrelevant.  Basically manipulation of the debate. 

You do not have control over language any more than Daniel Webster.  It has come into popular use as a reference to the Jews.  Language does not always follow logic and it is not subject to pseudo-ivory tower deep thinking.  It has been dealt with by the Popes, who used this word and its meaning applied to the Jews.  A pretend academic discussion is as useful as arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.  Neither have anything to do with the topic but it often diverts the debate away from something the writer finds a little uncomfortable.    It does not always work; sometimes someone notices it is a form of manipulation, (no disrespect to Palestinians implied.)

Take up your objection up with the Popes (That would includes the pre Vatican II Pontiffs)
Whew, that was deep.........Nevertheless, most "jews" as we know them, are not racially or ethnically Semitic.

Irrelevant

Quote:But then again, you might be on to something there in language and context of the times. How many Muslim Arabs we have today regarding themselves as "Frenchmen"  or "Germans".

That I do not know you will have to ask them.  It is a good example of the kind of thing I mean.  Go back 200 years and call a powerful man condescending and you will have complimented him, try that today and he may get mad at you.

Anti-Semitic is about the Jews, nothing you or I can do anything about it.
Nothing new here, Jesus was an antisemite as far  as most Jews of today are concerned.

Probably [i]the antisemite.
Reply
#14
MitOS, we don't just have to accept this term, as you say. People who oppose Zionism should not be called racists, which is what the meaning of anti-Semitism amounts to in the popular mind. People who oppose Judaism should not be called racists. If we don't deconstruct the phony language of our oppressors we get nowhere. I don't accept this "it's just the way it is" argument.
Reply
#15
sip sip
Reply
#16
(08-07-2009, 05:07 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: MitOS, we don't just have to accept this term, as you say. People who oppose Zionism should not be called racists, which is what the meaning of anti-Semitism amounts to in the popular mind. People who oppose Judaism should not be called racists. If we don't deconstruct the phony language of our oppressors we get nowhere. I don't accept this "it's just the way it is" argument.

Yes you do.  You do not have authority over the Pope.  You will have to accept it or you are just pissing in your own pants.

It may give you a warm feeling for now but it always goes cold and eventually starts to chaff.
Reply
#17
(08-07-2009, 08:40 PM)MitOS Wrote:
(08-07-2009, 05:07 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: MitOS, we don't just have to accept this term, as you say. People who oppose Zionism should not be called racists, which is what the meaning of anti-Semitism amounts to in the popular mind. People who oppose Judaism should not be called racists. If we don't deconstruct the phony language of our oppressors we get nowhere. I don't accept this "it's just the way it is" argument.

Yes you do.  You do not have authority over the Pope.  You will have to accept it or you are just pissing in your own pants.

It may give you a warm feeling for now but it always goes cold and eventually starts to chaff.

Eww.
Reply
#18
P.S.  My post above is in reference to the one part "we don't just have to accept this term, as you say."  Not the rest of the persons post.  As to that a person may be opposed to Zionism and still not be Anti-Semitic but it doesn't prevent it either.  Fr Malachi Martin, I hear tell, says anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitic.  I do not know if he said such a thing or not but I disagree with it just the same.  

Put then it does not prevent it from being a possibility either.
Reply
#19
(08-07-2009, 08:45 PM)MitOS Wrote: P.S.  My post above is in reference to the one part "we don't just have to accept this term, as you say."  Not the rest of the persons post.  As to that a person may be opposed to Zionism and still not be Anti-Semitic but it doesn't prevent it either.  Fr Malachi Martin, I hear tell, says anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitic.  I do not know if he said such a thing or not but I disagree with it just the same.  

Put then it does not prevent it from being a possibility either.
So just what is your ( Or your perception of the Jewish) def intion of "Antisemitism"?

I've never really heard a clear-cut one, it always mutates and transforms, like the Jews themselves.

I like the "Antisemitism is a disease you catch from Jews" one myself.
Reply
#20
(08-07-2009, 09:02 PM)alaric Wrote:
(08-07-2009, 08:45 PM)MitOS Wrote: P.S.  My post above is in reference to the one part "we don't just have to accept this term, as you say."  Not the rest of the persons post.  As to that a person may be opposed to Zionism and still not be Anti-Semitic but it doesn't prevent it either.  Fr Malachi Martin, I hear tell, says anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitic.  I do not know if he said such a thing or not but I disagree with it just the same.  

Put then it does not prevent it from being a possibility either.


I like the "Antisemitism is a disease you catch from Jews" one myself.

Sobran's definition is pretty good:

anti-Semite: a person who’s hated by Jews

http://www.sobran.com/cynosure.shtml
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)