There are jihads, and there are jihads, but this one takes the cake.
A week ago Friday, after participating in a panel discussion about "Facing Violence," which also featured former Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, at a downtown San Francisco hotel, best-selling author, Holocaust survivor, and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel was dragged from the elevator, on the sixth floor, by a Holocaust denying stalker who identified himself only as "Eric Hunt" in a post to the Web site Ziopedia in which he took responsibility for this appaling act. Fortunately, the 78 year old author was unharmed, but questions remain as to why release of the assault, on February 1st, was put on hold until February 8th. There are also unresolved issues about who hides behind the nom de plume, Eric Hunt, the assailant, who has yet to be found despite the SFPD's conclusion that the attack was a hate crime.
This is not the first time Mr. Wiesel has faced violence. He survived Auschwitz and now, when he returns to Boston University, he can say he survived San Francisco, too; well, not quite. After all, we're talking about the Bay Area, the apotheosis of blue state, liberal, progressive, the free speech movement; home of Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Lee, Jerry Brown, Ron Dellums. What madness that such a vile act should occur in what many consider the bastion of all that is new left in this country.
Clearly, it's unfair, and ludicrous, to imply that this attack has anything to do with the Bay Area. For all we know, this Hunt fellow is from Orange County, or the Bronx. We know nothing about him other than what appears in his comments on an anti-Zionist Web site. We only know that he was stalking Elie Wiesel for weeks and, under the pretext of wanting to inteview him, tried to force the author into an empty room while screaming "Why don't you want people to know the truth?" Which truth did Mr. Hunt have in mind?
As his post later asserts, he wanted Wiesel to admit that the Holocaust was a "myth," a fabrication like weapons of mass destruction, just another work of fiction; no such luck. Wiesel's loud shrieks caused this two-bit coward to flee with his tail between his legs.
I wondered what kind of Web site would welcome the comments of someone who would take the pseudonym of Eric Hunt, so I decided to pay a little visit to Ziopedia to find that it is a Web site based in Sydney which bears the disclaimer that given their "highly critical attitude towards Zionism in general, and Israel in particular, it doesn't come as a surprise" that they are being called "wildly anti-Semitic."
Curiously, they also describe themselves as "antiwar" and "progressive." A quick perusal of a list of recent titles of articles on their site reveals the following: "In the olden days, an anti-Semite was someone who hated Jews; these days, it's someone the Jews hate," "Judaism is Nobody's Friend," "Poll: 40% of U.S. voters believe Israel Lobby is key factor in going to war in Iraq," as well as an editorial which suggests that those who buy Starbucks coffee are supporting Israel.
Obviously, our friends at Ziopedia make some huge leaps in assuming that 1) Judaism and Zionism are the same, 2) every Israeli is a Zionist, and/or Jew, and 3) their position is a "progressive" one. And, here I thought, all along, that it was American left that was reactionary when it came to their position on the bogey man "Israel Lobby," but at which point does the far left and the far right intersect?
As one who believes in socialized medicine, state-subsidized housing, caps on the acquisition of vast amounts of wealth and private property, a liveable wage, as well as other things that are considered to far to the left, I have to ask whether or not anyone can call himself "antiwar" and socially progressive while, at the same time, dragging an elderly man from a hotel elevator, like a piece of meat, with SS-like brutality? Is this emblematic of a "peace" movement that's here to stay? Is it okay to treat a Jew like this, and then condemn U.S. treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay?
Those who denounce Zionism, and blame the Jews for the war in Iraq, have their own little jihadist movement going which, after last Friday, can no longer be denied. When a man who survived the camps is disgraced by this kind of brute force, and arrogance, it must be a wake up call that we, in the left, need to ask if talk about AIPAC, and the "Israel Lobby," justifiably or otherwise, may be seen as a contributing factor. And, if so, what can we do to prevent an assault like this from happening on someone else? The fact that he screamed may have been the only thing that prevented the Nobel Prize winner from suffering a heinous beating. We need to ask if ideological brutality is more acceptable in the hands of a sophomoric philistine who thinks he's getting at the "truth" about the Holocaust than it is in the hands of a president who believes he takes direction from a "higher authority?"
One would think, after six years of George Bush, we would have had enough of ideologues, but this sociopathic gesture in the name of correcting history proves only that there are too many holy wars, of all stripes, for one planet at any one period of time. There are too many who are willing to embrace a jihad, but few willing to clean up after it.
No one can deny that our thoughts have consequences, not just our actions. In this case, one m an's ideas about what he believes to be the fabrication of Jewish genocide resulted in an unprovoked attack on a man who has already been assaulted more than anyone deserves to be. The spineless bastard who did this should be an instant pariah among all those who believe that truth, peace, and justice are not antiquated notions, as well as those who fought the good fight for civil rights, and free speech in this country , and continue to fight. Does one have to be left to be right and, after all is said and done, is this what is left of the left ---leftovers from the days of the Weimar Republic?
We'd like to think that what happened in a San Francisco hotel, last Friday, was the act of a zealot, and a very disturbed one, but history shows that most acts of barbarism come at the hands of disturbed zealots, so we have to own this Hunt bastard. He belongs to all of us. He is our son, our brother, our neighbor, our student, our friend as, whether our worldviews are left, right, or center, whether we are in Sydney, London, or San Francisco, one thing remains constant: there are those who hunt, and those who are hunted,. And, when those who hunt infiltrate the ranks of those who condemn violence and acts of aggression, it's time to take a long, hard look at how it is that this monster came to be, so we can stop him from replicating fast.
--
http://ladyjaynestahl.blogspot.com
Widely published, poet, playwright, essayist, and screenwriter; member of PEN American Center, and PEN USA. Jayne Lyn Stahl is a Huffington Post blogger.
I don't know what Ms Stahl found when she went to http://ziopedia.com/, but it is definitely not what she describes. Ziopedia offers links to various websites, including sites that offers Starbucks franchises. Clicking on the link for Zion once again offers links to various websites, but NOTHING racist on the Ziopedia website.
So what is Ms Stahl talking about? I smell a rat in her whole article as a result of these bogus claims.
by
MarcHolt (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 12 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 5:09:53 AM
1. Why was a Nobel Laureate, a 78 years old man so alone?
2. Where was the hotel security?
3. How did that man get there?
4. There seem to be some conversation between those two people. Why did Eli Wiesel concede to have an interview by some stranger?
5. What does it all have to do with the antiwar movement in this country anyway? Bush uses Israel, Israel thinks they use Bush; we expose that, what's the problem?
There was an alleged attack on the celebrity man. Let's first do the proper investigation and stop making noises. If only you, folks have known how many Auchwitz survivors were attaccked by different people and in different places and so far no one (not even Israelis) had made any broad accusations. And what was that about Gitmo? Eli Wiesel should be the first to demand stopping that abomination.
I said once and twice andd I am saying again: stop 'loving the Jews'. It is a slimy love. Just treat us (I am a Jew) as equals and the same. Here is a man attacked- find his attacker. That is all. And stop using this " jihaad' word, for goodness sake! You know as much about it as you know about Jews.
by
Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3360 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 9:29:28 AM
When I see phrase such as "Those who denounce Zionism, and blame the Jews for the war in Iraq" which in itself associates zionism with all Jews, and is consistent with the rest of the article equating anti-zionism with anti-semitism I must suspect that this, whether intentional or just passing on the memes heard elsewhere, is part of the prevalent (and often well financed) propaganda to shut down condemnation of zionism, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, and huge influence lobbies such as JINSA and AIPAC have on US policy.
A jihadist movement among peace activists can not be denied because of one crazy attacker? Really?? It that's simple, and the connection that strong? Shall we also, then, conclude that the death of Rachel Corrie means that all Israelis are bloodthirsty murderers? My, my -- is THIS author one to talk about prejudice and pass judgements on millions of people she never met?
Similary equating an alleged attack by a nut with those who oppose the Israel government and policies is another 'sneak psiops attack' -- a poison pill meant to be ingested without noticing, as if hidden in a bowl of stew.
We read "No one can deny that our thoughts have consequences, not just our actions". Ahh... so we are to beleive that we must self-censor our thinking or we might go out and assault little old men? I think not.
We are asked "Is this [physical attack] emblematic of a "peace" movement that's here to stay?". No -- emphatically and obviously no! why on earth would anyone with honorable intentions, especially one who tried to establish credentials as "far left" ask such a question?
We are also asked "Does one have to be left to be right"? -- implying that the right is right, and the left is not. But this from someone who professes to be far left? How strange.
No -- this article just doesn't pass the smell test.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 11:14:54 AM
you fools----- especially the one who "smells a rat." I have been in favor of an independent and autonomous Palestine since before you were born, most likely. I have spoken out against Israeli oppression of Arabs, within Israel, since the 1970's, as well as Israeli apartheid, but many neanderthals who like to think of themselves as nouveau left are just that--neanderthals, and Jew haters. The "rat" you smell is your own ignorance, and inability to see things in more than one dimension. This country is in serious trouble if it has ideologues, and bigots like the ones I read here this morning.
by
Jayne Lyn Stahl (168 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 64 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 11:49:46 AM
No Jayne, the rat they smell is their own anti-Semitism using anti-Zionism as the vehicle. I would sure like to see some of their birth certificates, talking about "rats."
This is telling: NOT ONE WORD OF HORROR ABOUT A YOUNG MAN ATTACKING A 78 YEAR OLD AUSCHWITZ SURVIVOR, an American citizen by the way.
And Jayne do not follow MarcHolt's link. It is a cover. Go to Google and Google in Ziopedia, hit on the top of the menu. It is far different than where MarcHolt's link takes you.
Shame on you, MarcHolt. Try harder. Get back farther back in your hole or is it Mosque?
These comments sound like something straight out of radical Islam.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 5:11:26 PM
Did I mention rats? I assume your response, and the one from prattlif94 are referring to my comment. What fails the smell test is the article, and the continuance of blanket charge of anti-Semitism against progressives who object to the Zionist ideology.
First -- to set the record straight -- no, unless you are CONSIDERABLY older than you picture indicates you are not near enough old enough to be even born since before I was alive. But thank you for the ad hominem, Ma'am -- may I have another?
"Fool"? Oh thank you -- any more personal insults? "Neanderthal", "Jew hater", "nouveau left"? Well -- perhaps "Neanderthal" -- at least that's closer to a characterization of my years as well beyond your apparent age. "Jew hater", though? My many Jewish relatives, including the holocaust survivors, and my Jewish inlaws, would be hesitant to think I hated them, as would my numerous Jewish friends. I am very nearly one of the "self-hating Jews" the Zionists charge people with -- a quirk of my great grandfather not being my great grandmother, in fact, or I would qualify for Israeli citizenship.
No, my dear -- it is not anti-Semitism I express, but an appalled abhorrence of what Israel is doing, the Zionist lobbies are doing, and the very predictable accusations of anti-Semitism any time I express them. Perhaps I am a "self-hating American" because I am also appalled by what the US is doing -- and of course I have called a traitor and such for voicing those objections. No -- such logic is absurd.
My objections in this case, are to what you have written however, and how you have written it. It is filled with logical fallacies and associative counterfeits. It is BAD writing, and worse, BAD thinking. You seek to censor criticism of AIPAC by suggesting it is a contributing factor towards a senselessly violent attack by someone who is deranged -- and you do it with pure emotionalism. In response, instead of responding to my criticisms of the article, you attack me with unfounded assumptions and more emotionalism -- suggesting that you know you CAN'T defend the article.
That article, regardless of your political leanings in other areas, is anathema to progressivism and reasoned discourse. It does disservice not only to progressive causes, but to Judaism as well. These sorts of wild accusations and off-the-wall attacks on those who object the evils of Zionism actually contribute to true anti-Semitism by overstating the case, trivializing the term, and polarizing people -- anti-Zionistic Jews included. When you demonize the left and the anti-war movement and accuse them, as general class, of being anti-Semitic, and equate them with crazies, you alienate allies and take on much the same position as the super-patriots of the right who shout "love it leave it". True love is NOT blind.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 8:20:33 PM
I was refering to MarcHolt, but if you want to make the shoe fit you, I have no problem with that. You may be Hamas identical twins from all I know. I doubt if you are a Jew and that is for sure. Read my other comment to see what I mean.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 11:44:10 PM
"Jayne Lyn Stahl" ? Hmmm wonder what religion the author would be ?
She says,
" when those who hunt infiltrate the ranks of those who condemn violence and acts of aggression, it's time to take a long, hard look at how it is that this monster came to be, so we can stop him from replicating fast. "
Hmmmm, could be a little selective paraphrasing here ?
After all, what nation does the hunting in Palestine ?
Which nation is it, that simply bristles with aggression, and military might ?
I'd suspect our Jayne may just be a little inclind to bias and looking through rose coloured glasses at the World.
Course, this is only MHO.
by
Eddy Schmid (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 197 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 7:56:50 PM
what religion? I'm what used to be called a human being. I'm sure you're familiar with what a human being is... can one be born to a religion? hunh, my Fuhrer friend?
I know a place that can do a mean yellow star... is that what you'd like to see, you Nazi scumbag.
by
Jayne Lyn Stahl (168 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 64 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 8:05:47 PM
"There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress."
But referring to a poster as a "Nazi scumbag" is really just an ad hominem when other words fail.
I don't know if you are Jewish, and I don't really care, but an accusation of bias is not entirely inappropriate considering what you have written here so far.
I hope you know that there are many Jews, Orthodox included, who are strongly against both Zionism and organized Jewish interference in the governments of their resident nations -- and THAT'S in scripture. Just google on 'Jews against Zionism" and take a look.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 8:31:33 PM
I did not make any derogatory statements undermining the author of the article; I just asked some questions about the essence of the article and also I did state that excessive 'loving of the Jews' was not necessary and even might be harmful, as well as the frivolous usage of the word 'jihad', which is being used everywhere now without any reason and just for raising the adrenaline levels. Certainly, in this particular case the 'jihad' does not seeem anything to do with the unfortunate event. The attacker might not even be a Moslem. He might be a troubled person or someone who just was sent to scare a person designated. Hopefully, when he is caught we will know more. We all have our painful experiences. It is unfortunate that the author reacts that way to the quite legitimate inquiries. You do not have to like the comments but you cannot make broad conclusions like the author have made. I did not make any conclusions of such kind in my comment and never intended too. As for expression of sympathy, it goe without saying and does not have to be announced with the trumpets. I think I can say in all good faith that we all here sympathize with Eli Wiesel as an elderly gentleman, a survivor of an unbelievable horror and as a person who is very respected. But that is all. Eli or not Eli, the accident with him cannot be a source of broad conclusions, no matter what unfortunately had happened to him. His assailiant should be promptly caught and justice should be served. And that is all.
That is respectfully.
by
Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3360 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 9:17:41 PM
I agree that the word jihad is inappropriately used -- as it often is of late. This seems to have nothing whatever to do with Moslems, or the meaning of jihad.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 10:04:18 PM
And now, you call her a "nut." Quite the gentleman are you not? No you are not a gentleman. Just a Jew hater and a sorry excuse for a human being at that.
Now that really got us somewhere did it not? I am the "aged Neanderthal" or so you say, and Jayne is a "nut" so you say. I guess that makes it true since you say it. Just as you are "Jew Hater" since I say it, and "a sorry excuse for a human being" since I say it.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 11:58:54 PM
>And now, you call her a "nut." Quite the gentleman are you >not?
I called Hunt a nut -- not Jayne. You need to do more than skim what I write if you expect to legitimately respond.
>No you are not a gentleman. Just a Jew hater and a sorry >excuse for a human being at that.
There is no basis for that -- you are just name calling and ranting. No, I am decidely not a Jew hater.
The bottom line is this was an attack by some weirdo, who then wrote it up on the Ziopedia site which is strange but clearly says it accepts posts form everyone, right or left,without editing or blocking. The attack had nothing to do with the antiwar movement, liberals, progressives, or the left, or with jihads (or Moslems). Neither does it have anything to do with the legitimate criticism of Zionism or the Israeli lobbies. There is no legitimate reason to connect the attack with those things, and doing so id at best silly and uninformed, or at worst deliberate propaganda to silence critics of Zionism and Israel -- which has been a major activity in recent years. This was an attack by a nut -- not an expression of anything coming out of progressivism, and trying to make such a link is disingenuous.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 9:14:05 AM
Do not use the link provided by MarcHolt. It is a dead link and a sham to cover what Ziopedia is really all about. I suggest you go to Google and Google in Ziopedia, click on the the first offering on the menu which will take you to the anti-Semitic Ziopedia web site home page. Hit on some of their articles about the "Holocaust' that "never happened," or "Jewry" who "controls the United States," or "Israel who has no right to exist." They equate Zionism with Jewry and with Israel and since you "Jews", defend them, I take for granted you equate Israel with Zionism, too. You just don't want to be called out for it.
Here are a few of their articles on ZIOPEDIA- THE ANTI-SEMITIC web site.
Starbuck gave 6.4 million dollars to Israel. If you buy from Starbuck, you are supporting Zionism. They even give you Starbuck logo with a Star of David on her head.
"Dare to care: Why I don't believe in the Holocaust"
Andrew Winker is the anti-Semite who publishes this trash.
Article on Anti-Semitism-opening paragraph
"Most Westerners are adamant that the Jews are the innocent victims of centuries of wicked persecution. They don't have much of an idea why people keep picking at Jews, but they know for sure that the Jews are the goodies and their enemies the baddies."
Jayne, the links a web site features tell much about its interest. Go to Ziopedia (which is short for Zionism Encyclopedia), and look at to whom they link:
Hits
Arthur Butz, "The biggest hoax of the 20th century".
A classic of Holocaust revisionism.
Holocaust - Education - Digest by A. Kimel
Holocaust site providing detailed statistics of
European Jew numbers in different countries,
before and after World War II. A weakness of this
site is that, when making conclusions on
the number of Jews killed...
The Holocaust Story and the Lies of Ulysses
A Study of the Nazi Concentration Camps and
the Alleged Extermination of European Jewry.
Jayne, one of the links that Ziopedia, has – is-you guessed-are you ready "Panurg"? Are you ready "MarcHolt"? Are you ready "bluepilgrim"? One of the links is to "The Protocols of Zion." Wow. It is under Ziopedia and hit the articles about "Jewry." How low can you guys get? What a cop out!
You claim to be Jews and you are defending a web site that denies the Holocaust, denies Israel's right to exist, and promotes the "Protocols of Zion." I think some of you are about as Jewish as am. Any Jews with Irish extraction out there? I am about as Jewish as Oprah.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Sunday, February 11, 2007 at 11:38:54 PM
What planet are you on?
You say "You claim to be Jews and you are defending a web site that denies the Holocaust, denies Israel's right to exist, and promotes the "Protocols of Zion." I think some of you are about as Jewish as am. Any Jews with Irish extraction out there? I am about as Jewish as Oprah."
I, and no one else I see here is defending that site. OK -- you found a site with a lot of anti-semiSemitism on it --and some things which are not anti-Semitic -- there is a mixture there from I saw in my brief look. The world is not all-or-nothing. I don't like the anti-Semitic content there (and there is quite a bit of it), but making wild and groundless accusations against me or other posters here is NOT the way combat anti-Semitism or any other sort of bigotry.
If you have an objection to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (and you should), then give the information that it was fabricated propaganda by Russian secretpolice in the 1890s, as is explain at click here , for instance.
No, I am not Jewish, but it is a strong cultural element in my family, as I explained. I assume that panurg is -- I have no reason at this point to doubt him. What does Oprah or the Irish have to do with an attack on Weisel by a crazy man? Nothing. You are ranting.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 9:26:51 AM
I am for pressuring Israel to leave Gaza and the West Bank, every single Jew, and immediately. What Israel is doing there is ungodly. She needs to read her own Tanakh (Bible) about how King Saul tried to destroy the Gibeonites who lived in the land, but were not Israelis. God sent a great famine in the land. When King David inquired of the Lord the reason for no rain, God said it was for the way the House of Saul treated the Gibeonites and tried to cleanse the land of them. The Story is in the Christian Old Testament book called II Samuel 21. When Israel starts trying to cleanse the land of all but Jews, she would do well to remember that story.
Since the formal State of Palestine exists as I understand it, Israel should have nothing to do with it either for good or bad. What Palestine does is no concern of Israel. She should close her borders, Palestine should close her borders. No Jew should go into Palestine and no Palestine into Israel. They should go their own way. Jerusalem should be declared an open city by the UN with free access by everyone to all sites.
Palestine has enough problems of her own without bothering Israel. Palestine must decide if she is going to be a secular state (Fatah) or an Islamic State (Hamas). Whoever is in charge of Palestine must control everything in and out of her borders which includes suicide bombers and rockets. If she cannot or will not control what happens, then Israel must react to the state of war, invade and control every city by Marshall Law until the Palestinians can bring civilization with her borders. If she has to kill civilians, it must happen
Israel is going no where. She has submarines and she has the bomb with a complete delivery system. If she thought her borders were going to be overrun by any Islamic nation, she will use nuclear weapons as a very last resort. I have nothing to base that Israel will use nuclear weapons as a last resort except that is exactly what I would do if I were her. Losing six and one half million people in one holocaust is enough.
Israel has been very successful. She has had no more to work with than any other Muslim country such as Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Turkey. What she has done, those countries must do, but will never do until they have secular governments such as in the west. Islam is a yoke around every Muslim countries neck, just as Christendom was a yoke around every western nation until they threw it off. If Israel keeps turning toward being a radical Muslim wanabee state with her iron clad totalitarianism as in Likud, using Judaism in place of Islam, she does not have to worry about the Nation of Islam destroying her, she will self destruct. Separation of Religion and State is mandatory for any successful nation.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:49:15 AM
You say
"Islam is a yoke around every Muslim countries neck, just as Christendom was a yoke around every western nation until they threw it off."
This is an expression of bigotry as much as classically ignorant anti_semitism. There is no more or less good or evil, ignorance or wisdom, in any of the three Abrahamic religions of the People of the Book, who all worship the same Biblical God.
You might start by browsing http://www.religioustolerance.org to get an idea of what's what. Any religion can be an inspiring art for and source of wisdom, or a source of extremism and justification for base actions and cruelty -- there is no to stop people from reading their own hatred and ignorance INTO religious doctrine, not to stop them from perverting the fundamental precepts.
You obviously do not yet know much abut Islam, Palestine and Israel, or religion and politics: go study and learn. There is far more to it than you seem to think.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 9:56:59 AM
If it comes to denying what seventeen miles of records just made public a week ago in Germany concerning the execution of Jews, if denying the Holocaust, I do not need to be educated nor "revised." The most anti-Semitic act a person can commit today is the denial of The Holocaust. It attacks every Jew in the world whether you "Jews" realize it.
I read article after article on this website and articles on many other web sites attacking Zionism. I have carefully come to the conclusion that anti-Zionism is to be equated with anti-Semitism. When one goes to sites such as Ziopedia and some of the Muslim sites to read article after article of attack on all Jewry while denying the Holocaust and teaching it never happened, it allows us to do it again; after all it never really happened in the first place did it; therefore we can do it again and again?
Panurg, Elie Wiesel is not just a man mugged and the mugger is not just a typical mugger. Elie Wiesal is the embodiment of the Holocaust. He is a Poet Laureate, an author of over forty books and a world renowned speaker. This was the symbol of the Holocaust being attacked by an admitted Holocaust denier.
You men are not that ignorant, especially if you are Jews. When I say it is doubtful you are Jews, this is the very reason for my doubts. When MarcHolt puts up a dead end link trying to hide what Ziopedia really is, it just gives credence to my belief that all of you are lying about a lot of things. To deny the Holocaust is the most virulent of Anti-Semitism. It spits on the graves of six million Jews.
As far as the throwing off of Christianity and throwing off Islam, notice first that I am a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You men are not so ignorant that you do not know the Roman Catholic hijacked the State in the Fifth Century and kept the State hijacked almost one thousand years. The period the Church ruled the State is called The Dark Ages for a reason. Islam is in their Dark Ages and they are beginning to have birth pains of coming to an age of freedom for all who live in their borders.
The Reformers were little better than the Roman Catholic Church. Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli were three of the most important reformers. Each of them set up a government with no separation of Church and State, but there began to be a cry for freedom until the government was violently forced out the Church and the Church forced violently out of the government.
You men are smart enough to know that the One Hundred Years War, the Eighty Years War and the Thirty Years War were wars between church and states. The bloody red earth of Europe was not much different than the bloody red earth of Iraq today with Protestant killing Roman Catholic and Roman Catholic killing Protestant until the people fled to a new world where they could practice their religion without fear of persecution. Make no mistake, the colonies were not founded for religious freedom. They were founded for the freedom of that particular Church alone.
It was not until Roger Williams found the first Baptist church in what is now Rhode Island that universal suffrage was written into their Colony charter that sufferage was for everyone.
People were so sick and tired of religious wars in Europe and afraid if a central government was formed the wars would start all over again in their new land. It is the reason the Constitution was not ratified and was rejected until ten amendments were written into it called the Bill of Rights and the very first one deals with separation of Church and State.
Until Islam does the same thing and throws the Mosque out of the government, they will always be five steps behind the Asians and the Western powers. You cannot force half of your population behind a burka or veil, not allow them to be educated and say that their witness is worth only half of that of a man's witness in court. It is crude in the worst sort of crudeness. To have religious police as in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam, walking around hitting women with sticks for revealing a limb or just speaking to a man; and that is only part of the problem of Islam in a modern government. Any non-Muslim living under Islamic has to pay an extra tax to show he is inferior to a Muslim. It is crude in the worst sort of crudeness.
Traditional Islam condones slavery which is practiced in some African nations, even commanding the Muslim to make slaves. How crude can you be in a modern society? I could go on about amputation of hands, feet and heads for breaking religious law such as insulting the Koran, insulting Mohammed, converting someone out of Islam, converting yourself out of Islam. How crude can you be in a modern society?
Islam tries to hide these seventh century practices which may have been in the Seventh Century better than what their neighbors had to offer, but it is far worse than what a free state has to offer in a free society.
Until members of nations such as Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Pakistan, Sudan, Turkey, Iran, Morocco, Algeria Saudi Arabia, Iraq and other nations decide to compete in the common markets of ideas and worship, they will never become more than what they are: poor, superstitious nations beating their citizens into subjection to Allah.
If Islam is so very great why are they so afraid to compete in the free market place of ideas? Something stinks to God in Heaven when a person converts from Islam and must flee for his life; or is accused of trying to make converts as in Saudi Arabia when it took all the West's extraordinary powers to keep two Filipinos from being beheaded. What a sorry excuse for a religion if that is all Islam has to offer. Just to say what I just in the above mentioned countries would be to have my head chopped off my shoulders.
You so called "Jews" can defend them if you wish, but that is what you are getting if you win. We who used to know very little about Islam are learning every day and we are watching and we are teaching others what we see and what we think. So far, Islam is in deep trouble and will fall on its own face by its own force unless it finds a reformation like unto the reformation which we in the West found. That reformation saved both the religion and the State. We in the West are just hoping Islam is watching and learning and making some important decisions before it is too late to make them.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments)
on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 6:38:11 PM
I'm not wasting much more time with this. I'll just say that you should learn about what ordinary Muslims do. I happen to be cyber-friends with two in Egypt -one got her doctorate in laser physics a year or so ago, and the other, when I asked a question on Islam said he wasn't very religious -- but they have both been activists for peace and freedom.
You may think anti-Zionism is anti_semitism -- but you are wrong. Zionism is a nationalistic movement having very little to do with the religious aspects of Judaism.
You say "It is the reason the Constitution was not ratified and was rejected until ten amendments were written into it called the Bill of Rights and the very first one deals with separation of Church and State."
As I said, educate yourself (and learn to research):
click here [...]
After fierce fights over ratification in many of the states, New Hampshire became that ninth state on June 21, 1788.
[...]
The United States Bill of Rights were the ten amendments added to the Constitution in 1791, as the supporters had promised opponents during the debates of 1788.
[...]
Again -- no, liberals do not generally deny the holocaust occurred, and hunt is no more a liberal than Sharon is a "man of peace", or Al Qaeda follows the teachings of Islam. As for Islam, you simply don't know what you are talking about -- you take the extremes and deviants and portray them as the norm (as can be done with any religion or group).
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 8:27:47 PM
