SOB’s Grins & Grumps

Everything Between Heaven and Earth and Beyond

  • Copyrights and Contact

    Henric C. Jensen
    All images and Artwork are
    © 2006-2018 Henric C. Jensen
    Mail

  • November 2021
    S M T W T F S
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    282930  
  • Categories

  • Meta

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘the Radical Far Left’

Very Interresting Discussion

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on July 8, 2007


Police: Settlers’ Papers on Hebron Building Were Forged | Jerusalem Post

Saturday July 7, 2007, 4:34 pm
Now, this should generate a lemmings-trail of “note-its” from the Far Left Anti-Zionists in this site, and yet it hasn’t – I wonder why? I think I am going to let one of my Alter-Egos post my Israel-critical news, because people seem to assume that if it’s me posting news it must be “contaminated” somehow. Come on People, get this on the front page!

Saturday July 7, 2007, 4:56 pm
Silly,
I don’t think you’re “contaminated”, I don’t always agree with you, but you make some good points.

The whole Israel issue is very complex with one reaction after the next fueling constant chaos. The military exchange is only part of the issue, settlements, road blocks and sanctions add to the tension.

What is your impression of the settlement problem in the conflict?

Saturday July 7, 2007, 5:16 pm
XX,

I think it plays a big role – it would be so much more easy to put forward good, just and viable solutions for all parties involved, if there were no settlements in the Territories. Above all, it would give Israel a bargaining chip: “Look, we are keeping our part of the International Agreement of 1947”. Dale Commented on this in HRN saying that Israel has lost the moral High ground it had back in 1948. That is true. Very true. With the Settlements in the Territories dismantled, some of that high ground would be re-gained, which I think would eventually swing the pendulum from polarization to middle-ground Internationally. Any Palestinian and/or Arab hatred/armed violence against Israel would turn against them in that context.

Or that is my hope – because then pressure could be put on the PA to make peace and start building a Palestinian Sovereign State.

Saturday July 7, 2007, 5:56 pm
The other side of the Story:

Hevron Decries State Prosecution’s Forgery Allegations

Sunday July 8, 2007, 10:42 am
Silly, thanks for providing the other link, I figured there was more to this and that it hadn’t been resolved or confirmed yet.

I agree on most of what your saying, but with only 1/3 of the population in 1948 attempting to claim control over the remaining 2/3, I don’t think Israel had much moral high ground then either.

One problems both sides are faced with is, the people expected to resolve the conflict, don’t have total control over all the people involved. Each government is full of individuals, with individual goals and idea about what is fair and reasonable, passed on to them is the task of controlling their people. So, simply having the right idea and intent to solve the problem isn’t enough, the people need to cooperate.

Without the ‘right of return’, I don’t think the Palestinians will ever fully accept a less than fair partition of land, but I do think they would accept Israel if the borders were fair, even Hamas. With the current balance of leverage, mainly in world opinion, Israel does not have the motivation or political power at home to make such concessions.

The ultimate goal is a truly peaceful relationship between Palestine Israel and all their neighbors. This requires both sides to feel the issue was resolved in a fair and just manner. The problem is, even withdrawing to 1967 borders isn’t going to satisfy the Palestinians who feel they were forced from their land by 1/3 of the population and are now told they can never return. Israel justifies their right to the land from many angles, but what they need the power to do is justify the Palestinians right to a fair partition.

Palestine has the motivation and the power available, all they need is the right plan. This has been my main message to them.

Shifting the balance of power is probably the only way this situation will be resolved. To do this, the Palestinians could to take control of their future and declare peace without negotiating terms. Israel relies on Palestinian violence to justify ‘security zones’ of occupation, all raids inflicting casualties, road blocks, check point searches, sanctions and more. By unconditionally ending violence, all of these justifications are lost, and world opinion would sway on Israels response to this. World opinion would also sway on Israel’s ability to control certain armed settlers, and out of bounds settlements. This would appeal to them as a semi immediate gain in conditions and a long term gain in leverage. It’s a simple political strategy with good motivation that can be passed straight to the people, providing that elusive control governments lack in ending the violence.

Think about it Silly, and let me know what you’re thinking.

Sunday July 8, 2007, 3:27 pm

“I agree on most of what your saying, but with only 1/3 of the population in 1948 attempting to claim control over the remaining 2/3, I don’t think Israel had much moral high ground then either.”

I disagree with this for the simple reason that in 1948 Israel was content to accept the Partition Plan under UN resolution 181 and can hardly be blamed for the all out Arab attack on her before the ink on the Declaration of independence had even dried. – Nor can she be blamed for the lies spread and exaggerated by Arab Leaders. One also have to keep in mind that we are talking about here (per the agreement between Britain and France on the division of the Ottoman Empire) are the Jews in all of what once was the Ottoman Empire from Iraq to Algeria and Morroco, and they can hardly be called 1/3 of the population in comparison to the Palestinians living in Palestine.

“Without the ‘right of return’, I don’t think the Palestinians will ever fully accept a less than fair partition of land, but I do think they would accept Israel if the borders were fair, even Hamas. With the current balance of leverage, mainly in world opinion, Israel does not have the motivation or political power at home to make such concessions.”

I agree with the “right of return” to some degree and the partition of land – but I doubt you will agree with what I am to say next:

The problem with this reasoning, XX is that in 1947-1948, the land partition WAS fair – or let’s say it was satisfactory Let’s not forget the fact that (trans)Jordan annexed 50% of what was supposed to be for the Palestinians of the British Mandate, and Egypt 60% of what was supposed to be the Gaza Strip in the partition plan, leaving the Palestinians with the West Bank and a minute part of the Gaza Strip – (all one needs to do to see this is take a look at the original Partition Plan Map and a map of the British mandate of Palestine). No, that’s not fair – but you cannot blame Israel for what the Arabs did. You need to ask/demand (whichever you prefer) that Jordan and Egypt return to the Palestinians what they stole back then.

The problem with right to return is that who is and who is not a Palestinian refugee is highly disputable. No other people claims to be refugees in 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation – the Palestinians do – they have even managed to, in my mind, manipulate the International Community into creating a specific “refugee” category for them, so that they can perpetuate the idea of being victims. Yes, to right of return of those who are actually refugees without special provisions who have valid papers that show they lived inside Israel in 1947-1948 or 1967 or is an under age child of someone living inside Israel in 1947-1948 or 1967, that is acceptable – That would also mean the right of return for ALL refugees (without special provisions) to their countries of origin from (as put forward by the UN definition of who is entitled to right of return), i.e Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Iraq etc, from where the Palestinians have been expelled or deported to camps because the Arab League “forbids” the host nations to assimilate or naturalize them. If we implement “the right to return” in all fairness, we have to do so with regard only to refugees directly affected by the 1948 and 1967 wars – this means a load of Palestinians really don’t belong either in Palestine nor inside israel, and if they want to live there, they’ll have immigrate like everybody else – if they get invitations to immigrate, like Jews from all over the World are invited to immigrate to Israel – great let them come, I say.

“The problem is, even withdrawing to 1967 borders isn’t going to satisfy the Palestinians who feel they were forced from their land by 1/3 of the population and are now told they can never return. Israel justifies their right to the land from many angles, but what they need the power to do is justify the Palestinians right to a fair partition.”

Israel have already done that – Israel fully expected the Palestinian Arabs to take possession of their half of the Land, which was rightfully theirs according to all International Laws.

What the Palestinians need to UNDERSTAND is that the partition WAS fair, and that they have been lied to by the Arab League and it’s members and are unfortunately continued to be lied to by people who say things like “you are 2/3 being controlled by 1/3”. IF the Arabs and subsequently the Palestinians back in 1948 had accepted the Partition under UN Resolution 181 unconditionally like the Jews did, they would have had their Sovereign State right there and then – don’t blame Israel for the mistakes made by the Arabs back then.

Israel doesn’t need justification for the Palestinians right to their half. They gave that when they accepted the Partition in 1947-48 – they need justification for withdrawing from Occupied Territories and return to the borders of 1947-48 – which as far as I am concerned must be priority #1. Believe it or not, work and ideas are being done and discussed to that end – my Blog Entry from yesterday: Talking Torah in Lieu of Politics – Daniel Sieradski We need to re-draw the map, so that the Partition, instead of being patches here and there becomes two continuous “land-masses” with a corridor for each to have access to Jerusalem.

“Shifting the balance of power is probably the only way this situation will be resolved. To do this, the Palestinians could to take control of their future and declare peace without negotiating terms. Israel relies on Palestinian violence to justify ‘security zones’ of occupation, all raids inflicting casualties, road blocks, check point searches, sanctions and more. By unconditionally ending violence, all of these justifications are lost, and world opinion would sway on Israels response to this. World opinion would also sway on Israel’s ability to control certain armed settlers, and out of bounds settlements. This would appeal to them as a semi immediate gain in conditions and a long term gain in leverage. It’s a simple political strategy with good motivation that can be passed straight to the people, providing that elusive control governments lack in ending the violence.”

I agree.


Posted in Palestine, UN | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

"I am not Anti-Semite!! – Stop harrassing me!"

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on May 26, 2007


Illustration is © Ketutar Jensen – used with permission.

The Illustration above is very telling – and true – point out to a Radical Far Leftist that his/her statements sounds Anti-Semitic, and he/she will furiously deny being an Anti-Semite – though no such accusation has been voiced. This, to me indicates the Radical Far Leftist is very much aware of being an Anti-Semite, and doesn’t want this fact to be publicly understood, because despite their profession to not really care about what people think about them, they are very sensitive to the stigma Anti-Semitism carries with it. Which is further evidenced by the fact that they more often than not hide their Anti-Semitism in violent Anti-Zionism.

So, are a person who uses Anti-Semitic expressions an Anti-Semite? Is someone who express themselves derogatory about Black people a Racist? I say that YES, they are.

Brian Klug, an Oxford research fellow and founder member of the Jewish Forum for Justice and Human Rights, states that “It is a staple of anti-Semitic discourse that Jews are a people apart, who form ‘a state within a state’.” He goes on to ask “What is anti-Semitism?” He defines an anti-Semite as one who sees Jews as “an alien presence, a parasite that preys on humanity and seeks to dominate the world. Across the globe, their hidden hand controls the banks, the markets and the media. Even governments are under their sway. And when revolutions occur or nations go to war, it is the Jews – clever, ruthless and cohesive – who invariably pull the strings and reap the rewards.

Brian Klug defines Anti-Semitism and Anti-Semites very well.

The Radical Far Left disagrees with me and Brian Klug on this:

“Just because I speak out against the Jews doesn’t make me anti-semitic.”

Off course you are not Anti-Semitic if you speak out against “the Jews” – it just makes you a Jew-hater… Like Wilhelm Marr . The logic of this statement is rather indicative of the up-side-down Orwellian Double-Speak that is the staple of Radical Far Left ideology:

Anti-Semitism is an unmistakable sign of solid mental health.” Horst Mahler, lawyer and human rights activist”

Hmm, so if you are not an Anti-Semite, you are by Radical Far Left standards mentally deranged. Welcome to the Asylum! This is just another version (see earlier blog entry) the idea that being Jewish is a disease that Jews need to recover from by ceasing to be Jews, though it doesn’t only target Jews, it also targets anyone who disagrees with the RFL’s ideology on the matter of “the Jewish Problem“.

“As an atheist, I say fight fire with fire. Let’s see how the Jews feel when the most painful part of their history gets mocked. […] “Why Jews? Well, why not? I say attack all if you want.”

Indeed. Let’s just create another version of the age old “The Jews Killed J*sus so let’s kill them”, after all they are not human – they are Jews…

“Although the holocaust may be a more than Jewish issue, it seems the Jews are monopolising it.”

How about Hitler monopolized the Jews for his genocide? Approximately 11 million people were killed in the Holocaust – for various reasons, disability, homosexuality, socialism, Catholicism, Lutheranism, being Romani or Black – and all those groups were killed because of something they could not change or would not change. And as such the Jews were no exception, except in one respect – they were the largest group ever to be targeted in this manner. Each of the other above groups have their Holocaust memories/Memorials one way or another, so why not the Jews?

“why aren’t you and her ashamed for what Jews are doing to others?”

What are the Jews doing to others? Let’s see…it seems the Radical Far Left owes a lot to the Jews:

The term Jewish left describes Jews who identify with or support left wing or liberal causes. There is no one organization or movement which constitutes the “Jewish left”. Jews have been major forces in the history of the US labor movement, the Settlement house movement, the women’s rights movement, anti-racist work, and anti-fascist organizing of many forms.

Many well-known figures on the left have been Jewish. These include people like George Soros, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Murray Bookchin, Eric Hobsbawm or Harold Pinter, who were born to Jewish families but have little connection to Jewish communities, Jewish culture or Jewish religion. It also includes people like Michael Lerner or Arthur Waskow, religiously devout and culturally identified Jews. And it includes many secular, cosmopolitan people who nonetheless remain connected to Jewish culture in some way, such as Emma Goldman, Rose Schneiderman, Muriel Rukeyser and Susan Sontag. Similarly, views regarding Zionism from the Jewish left can be quite varied, and are often independent of their other political and social views.

In the US in the last decade, the Jewish vote has gone to Democrats by 76-80% in each election, leading many to believe that the majority of American Jews are left-identified.

While many Jewish progressives root their politics in spirituality, there is also a long history of secular socialist and communist Jewish activist history (e.g. The Workmen’s Circle/Arbeter Ring) as well as anarchist-Jewish activism which denounced religion while publishing newspapers in Yiddish.”

Then of course we have Albert Einstein…many would say that he has done more for the Sciences of Mathematics and Physics than the rest of Modern Scientist since Issac Newton… There’s the fact that all legislation of the Modern Western World, including the idea of Human and Civil Rights are based in Jewish Law. Oh yes the the Jews have done plenty to others, and the majority is something to be proud of. So why would we be ashamed?

“It seems you don’t want peace. It seems you want to invade other people’s property, take it over, and rape their wives as well.”

“The fact is that by “you”, I mean Jews and the people who support them. I would guess you are Jewish, seeing as you host a Jewish group. “

This guy was addressing a person whom he had never met before – he had gotten the information that this person is Jewish and hosts a Torah Study Group, from that person’s profile page – the prejudice and the hatred is stunning – but very typical of the Anti-Semitism embraced by the Radical Far Left. I’ll just leave it as it is, as it really speaks for itself.

“Jews are fair game for criticism, seeing as Judaism is a religion.”

Aah. It is very important for the RFL to define who is a Jew, or rather what is a Jew – because they don’t want to be caught emitting racial/ethnical slurs, so they have great problems with the concept of “being Jewish” as a indivisible combination of ethnical, religious and cultural Identity – they NEED “Jewish” to be one or the other or the third – because that makes their “criticism” safe from being criticized. They like to use Karl Marx’ criticism of Judaism in his response to Bruno Bauer (On the Jewish Question) as a proof text that Karl Marx was an Anti-Semite who had understood the dangers inherent in the Jewish People – but they forget that Karl Marx, because he was himself Jewish, didn’t criticize “being Jewish”, only the practice of religion as such. “The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism. I.e the goal is the social emancipation of the Jew – who will remain Jewish – by getting rid of the religious practices that in Marx’ mind is holding the Jew back from being part of Society – he doesn’t say one word about the Jew ceasing to be Jewish. The Jew can be Jewish as long as he is not religious. Marx was an atheist, and saw any kind of religion as straight-jacket put on the masses by the ruling class to control them.

You judge for yourself: Which is more probable – Marx was an Anti-Semite who was preaching the annihilation of his own people, or he was an atheist Jew who felt that the religious practices of Judaism was holding the Jewish people in Europe back from being all they could be?

Shalom

Other Entries in this Series:

# On the matter of Anti-Semitism
# On the matter of Anti- Semitism II
# On the matter of Anti-Semitism III
# Why people spewing Anti-Semitism are not JOKES
# Why people spewing Anti-Semitism are not JOKES II

Posted in Karl Marx | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Why people spewing Anti-Semitism are not JOKES II

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on May 24, 2007



Illustration is © Ketutar Jensen – used with permission.


It seems that calling a spade a spade is not appreciated by the “general public” and causes the Powers That Be to interpret the laws of the land rather widely and arbitrarily for this reason I cannot attribute most of those quotes – but if you email me in private I will verify the authenticity. But no matter – the fact remains that Anti-Semitism flows through the ether, and despite what many believe is not a phenomenon of the Past.

So what do Modern Anti-Semitism look like – what do Modern Anti-Semites say, and what does it mean? I have written before about how people on the Radical Far Left with or without deliberation use the three concepts, Israelis, Jews and Zionists interchangeably. Those who do it deliberately do it because they have an Anti-Semitic agenda – they really truly believe that not only is there a Jewish conspiracy, they also believe that any Jewish person who does not publicly renounce their birth-right and themselves become Anti-Semites is a part of this conspiracy and a worthless human being – example from an earlier blog entry:

“In that sense, there is no such thing as a good Jew. For a Jew to become a valuable human being, they must recant Jewishness and become what’s known as a former or recovering Jew. They must embrace unreservedly the rest of mankind as their equals, regardless of their heritage, nationality, religion or race. They must become Earthians, no more and no less.” ( Jewish consciousness and the river of denial my bold)

It can hardly be said any clearer. The only good Jew is a Jew that is not a Jew. And as long as he is a Jews he is not human.

When Jews stop being anti-everyone except themselves will we be able to come to a peaceful understanding.”

This is just an echo of the old idea that a Jewish person has no loyalty for the country he was born and raised in, and will betray that country either in favor of other Jews or simply because he/she is Jewish. A modern repetition of the Dreyfus-affair in sentiment.

“There needs to be equality. If there were, then we would not have to condemn the Palestinians and find excuses for the Jews.

This is a really interesting statement, because it on one hand calls for equality, and on the other hand sets the entire Jewish People apart as something that is somehow being excluded positively from the rest of humanity. It also implies that the entire Jewish People needs to be excused for something; in this case something the author believes the Palestinians are being condemned for. This is a common reasoning on the Radical Far Left, if one is not condemning every Jewish person alive or dead for all the bad that happens to the Palestinians, one is making excuses for “the Jews”.

“I respect people’s right to their beliefs and think that this is just another ploy by the Americans and Jews to make the Muslims more equated to terrorism.

The Americans and Jews needed another example of how Muslims get too emotional and violent over what most of the world might deem as “trivial”.

“And when all is said and done, I’ll go a step further and say that the militant wings of Islam have been made possible by its oppressors. Yes, the U.S., Israel, and Jews around the world.

“There’s no denying that these 3 groups—Israelis, Jews elsewhere, and Americans, are working hand-in-hand to make Muslims look bad.

I “like” those four – that Muslims are being equated with terrorism is not the result of the actions of a few terrorists, but the doing of all Jews and all Americans…and how some Muslims re-acted to the Muhammad Cartoon Controversy is not the responsibility of those few Muslims, it’s was all orchestrated by the American s and the Jews, and that there are militants among Muslims is the doing of Israel, the US and all the Jews in the world. Then the idea that there is a conspiracy to make the Muslims look bad…all directed by the Jews, with some help from the Israeli and the Americans. Do you hear how this is beginning to sound like the screen-play for a filmatization of the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”?

I don’t think it was a co-incidence that the PEZ originated in Pre-Leninist/Stalinist Russia, where the need for the rulers to control the masses through conspiracy-theories were greater than in the rest of Europe. That in my opinion is also why the PEZ is revered by the so many people on the Radical Far left, especially in this day and time – after all, in the Western World, enemies to do battle with are getting fewer and fewer, as more and more proletarians move up the social-economic ladder and become middle-class. See earlier entries

“Again, you are making ridiculous requests that I prove how every Jew around the world thinks. Haven’t you heard of representative populations?

This is a most “innovative” response to a protest against the author making blanket-statements about Jews as having some sort of “hive-mind” that makes them incapable of independent thinking, and the subsequent request that he give some substantial evidence of this.

“Representative populations…” Indeed Benjamin Disraeli was right about lies – there are three kinds, lies, damned lies and statistics. But it falls back to the idea that the Jewish People are somehow exclusive and disloyal because they are Jewish, or bound to follow some sort of Jewish party-line, regardless of their own personal inclinations.

Why are all of those quotes Anti-Semitism? Simply because they express prejudice against an entire People. One can easily substitute the word “Jew”/Jews” with “Black”/”Blacks” and then just sit back and wait for the angry “Racism!” retort from the Afro-American Community. Try it – just alter the statements to fit in “Afro-Americans” and see how it looks.

Those quotes are not Jokes, and not a laughing matter, because in the end they do target an entire People and make an entire People fair-game for all sorts of abuses – from discrimination in the work-place and schools to genocide. There is nothing funny about that. It wasn’t funny when the Romans did it, it wasn’t funny when Hitler or Stalin did it, and it is not funny now when Iran, the Radical Far Left, the Extreme Right and and their sympathizers do it.

The Radical Far Left often profess that they are not targeting all Jewish people, only the one’s in the Israeli government that are responsible for whatever bad things the Palestinians are going through that specific day, but if that was true, one really have to ask: Why not change the rhetoric to reflect this intention? After all, isn’t it better to be heard clearly than to be drowned out by accusations of Anti-Semitism and constantly having to explain that you are not criticizing the entire Jewish People?

Other entries in this series:

On the matter of Anti-Semitism
On the matter of Anti- Semitism II
On the matter of Anti-Semitism III
Why people spewing Anti-Semitism are not JOKES

Shalom!

Posted in Hitler, Israel, Protocols of the Elders of Zion | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

On the matter of Anti-Semitism III

Posted by Henric C. Jensen on May 14, 2007


Basic Tactics of the Radical Far Left

1. Ask Rhetorical Questions or Questions that in it’s body carries one or several assumptions/presuppositions. Example:

“Why do you Zionists support a murderous and genocidal Government?”

The person asking this kind of question isn’t interested in getting an answer. He or she is disguising a truck load of prejudice, presuppositions and logically fallacious assumptions for the purpose of propaganda, in the form of a question. This is a set up that wants its target to start defending him or herself against the numerous allegations brought through those prejudices, presuppositions and logically fallacious assumptions – best answered by pointing out that the question is not a real question, like I just did. Note that “Zionist” is a RFL buzzword for “Jew” or someone either married to a Jew or not having displayed enough Anti-Israeli sentiments throughout the debate.

If you engage in answering the question, the person asking has succeeded in his or her mission, to distract attention from the real debate, which most likely is about some imaginary fact he or she brought earlier. Stick to debunking the fallacies of those facts using objective and verifiable facts from objective sources, and you will be fine. Remember that you are not debating the person behind the posting, you are debating the ideas expressed in the posting.

2. Make blanket statements about Jews and belittle them.

“Get a debate started and you’ll see that the Jews will lose the argument and the sentiment of the public in almost every turn.”

Here’s a blatant Anti-Semitic statement – it really cannot be any clearer than this. The best way to deal with that is to point out that it is a blanket statement that targets all Jewish People.

This kind of statement will surface when there are no other viable arguments accessible to the RFL – next will be the allegation that you are either a Nazi or a Racist. This is a sure sign that you have those people backed into a corner. You can safely leave the debate knowing that you did well.

3. Refuse to answer any questions pertaining to the issue – such as the source of their facts, and countering with more None-Question like above.

This is staple food for the RFL, especially if the person you are debating is not particularly intelligent or capable of gleaning information from diverse sources. Chances are that they have not understood your questions – chances are also that they have understood your questions, but doesn’t like the answers they come up with, and don’t want to be caught being incorrect. Most likely they are refusing to answer your questions as an attempt to silence you through ignoring you, at the same time try to make you look bad by bombarding you with questions based in prejudice, presuppositions and logically fallacious assumptions. Keep pointing out that they are not answering your questions – list your questions so that it becomes clear exactly what they do not want to answer – again remember that you are not debating the person behind the posting, you are debating the ideas expressed, and each post they make gives you an opportunity to debunk those ideas. That is why you are debating them.

4. Cut and paste News articles from sources that are viciously Anti-Semitic/Anti-Zionist, along with pictures that has little or nothing to do with the objective Topic of the debate.

This is the most aggressive tactic in their arsenal – apart from personal attacks and accusations of being a Nazi/Racist – and they have only one purpose: To derail any intelligent debate and appeal to iemotions. Those Cut and Paste Bombings are often given highly aggressive and unfactual Titles, intended to grab attention and steer the discussion away from rational arguments in to the quagmire of “defense/attack”.5. “Two wrongs always make One right” or “They did it first…”.

They will defend the use of terrorism by pointing out that Israel or Groups of Jewish people have in the past acted similarly, often accompanying their assertions with references to the Stern-Gang, Lehi and Irgun, using past incidents as justification for present acts of terrorism against Jews and Israel. They will, when the irrelevance of those references are pointed out, claim that you are supporting Israeli Military Terrorism against the defenseless Palestinian People, who are just defending themselves, and because you do that, Palestinian terrorism is naturally justifiable and right.

6. Re-Defining established definitions of concepts such as “Genocide”, “Anti-Semitism” “Terrorist”.

Genocide, in the vocabulary of the RFL, becomes any harm to or death of a Palestinian, regardless of who killed or why. Anti-Semitism in their dictionary has little or nothing to do with hate of the Jewish People. It now means “hatred for any person belonging to the Semitic language Group, EXCEPT the Jews…”. Terrorist is no longer a person that carries out acts of Terrorism against innocent civilians, iit is proud, patriotic and g-dfearing “freedom fighter” who is only doing what he or she needs to to achieve his or her goal – in this case the utter annihilation of the Jewish People.

Shalom!

Posted in Antisemitism, Bigotry, Radical Far Left | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: