another Anti semitic group in SL?

if this needs explaining...there is no hope....

My country was one of the first countries to abolish slavery. And do you know what happened to the "enslaved" minority? They married whites, and their african blood dissolved into the portuguese bloodstream, to the point where in this very day and age there are still entire villages of people who look perfectly white, but with "african" noses.
It is a very popular research topic among historians and anthropologists here, to determine exactly where did all the black people go, since pretty much every "true" black here is a first generation immigrant who can barely speak our language.
Furthermore, I find it a bit of a stretch to claim that my "country" has a history of racist politics. My country in its present form is only 30 years old.
I refuse to be in any way connected to the politics of a single man, Antonio Salazar, and the iron grip he had on our country during 56 years of fascist dictatorship, attained (and overthrown) by military coup.
On top of that, I find the anti-semitic references you were so kind to dig up to be entirely tangential to my point.
First of all, I deny any responsibility for what primitive people did to each other 500 years ago. Secondly, anti-semitic sentiment was common throughout Europe at that time, not specific to my country, much like the infamous inquisition.
Finally, I said absolutely nothing for or against those of jewish faith or ascent.
I merely stated that I could understand that someone would burn an israeli flag and feel absolutely no hatred towards the jewish people.
I hate Israel, not jews, much like I hate America and not the american people. A country is defined by the actions of its politicians, and when those are corrupt, they fail to respect the will of their people. It's only natural that countries with a history of agressive behavior end up on the political protest queue.
For what it's worth, I have always defended and will continue to defend that the Jewish people DO have a right to *PEACEABLY* inhabit their former land. I am beginning to doubt, however, if they should ever have been allowed the right of self-government.
Mixing religion and politics is a recipe for disaster. When you create a country based on a religious faith, it's pretty much inevitable that the "infidels" will be cleansed, and the devout favored. A government can only be one of two things: impartial, or corrupt. Which do you think is the case?
IMHO the government of israel, iran, and america differ only in what type of religion clouds their judgement and how it is used as a tool for brainwashing the illiterate masses.

But eggy, if you hate Israel you MUST be an anti-semite

Ok, I know you're joking but let me make this clear one last time.
I hate america. I hate america as defined by those who control it, which arent its people, but rather greedy corporations and corrupt politicians.
You people are great. You make the greatest apple pie, and all americans I ever met IRL were an order of magnitude nicer than most portuguese
When I say I hate america, I really mean I hate George Bush and Bill Gates.
When I say I hate israel, I say I want that idiotic ariel sharon hung by the balls in a public place, stoned to death by the few surviving members of all the families he killed and maimed in his blind, misguided quest to put a stop on the "terrorists".
Ariel Sharon is a highly controversial leader, both outside Israel and INSIDE it.
Because, my friends, the israelites are not dumb, and much like Bush is laughed at by half of america, the jews who are living in israel are smart enough to realize the fine piece of horse shit they put in charge of them.
EDIT:
FWIW, I hate my country and our idiotic prime minister as well. He sided with Bush and sent portuguese troops to iraq for pure greed of oil.
He had a pretty much unanimous lack of public support and his unilateral actions caused public demonstrations of disapproval.
Furthermore, our EU partners condemned us and spain for that, and there was a huge scandal in the european parliament claiming that these policies were divisive and endangered the state and progress of our union.
Bleh. I'm sick of politics. Someone change the subject already

I have a question that eats at me a great deal. Without going into my own beliefs (which are never fully formed on these issues) and trying only to draw on this discussion alone... my question comes in (and I have this question during most wars).. what is a country supposed to do when it is allied with another country, and that country goes to war? I mean, how can they just say "no we won't help you"? My main thoughts end up back at World War II, and what may have happened if certain countries did not step into the fray with their allies. I am curious how others would answer this question?

As I understand it, an act of agression is internationally reprehensible, and your allies have no obligation to aid and abet your fit of lunacy.
If your motherland was in real danger from a fully sanctioned, organized and sustained attack from another country, I would be the first to enlist the portuguese army and get my ass in your first line of defense. But only if *.Bush wasnt in charge
BJ or no BJ, I'm beginning to really like Clinton.

...but come on, this is me, so you didn't really think I would, did you? I didn't!

I'm Jewish. In fact, I'm so Jewish I created SL's first in world Mezuzah and sometimes have to excuse myself from events o Friday afternoons to take the challah out of the oven. I"m damn near frum. (For those of you who don't know, that's Yiddish for "the Jewish version of religiously PC."

I am also:
- a strong supporter of the Palestinian right to statehood.
- an opponenet of the State of Isreal, and all the damage it has done to modern Judaism. (For those of you who put any stock in the Bible, Lamentations denies Isreal to the Jews until the coming of the Messiach. For those of you who don't, the question still remains - how do you have a Jewish state if Jewish scripture says any Jewish Isreal before the coming of the Messiach is false and will keep the Messianic age from arriving?)
- an American who is ashamed of the US's role in creating Isreal so that the US, France and England wouldn't have to take "dirty Jews" from the post WWII immigration wave. AND who is even more ashamed that we sent Jews back to Germany rather than granting them asylum, even after we knew about the concentration camps.
- pretty damn sick of the Zionist hold on Judaism.

You can be Jewish and not be a Zionist.

Heck, look at al the Hassidim who agree with me.

Hard to get more frum than that!

Bhodi

Wow Eggy,

I agree Israels tactics are not always the best and they should be condemned for that. But in every instance of open war with the muslims, they were attacked first, they have offered to give back the land conquered many times, they always come to the peace table to sit, but they KEEP GETTING ATTACKED. Why does the UN not condemn the palestinians??? Why only Israel? If there was no bombing in Israel do you think the Israelis would still be killing palestinians? Israel is the only country in the mideast where everyone has rights, many muslim/arabs live in israel in peace, its only the palestinians who have a hard time, why? because they won't live among the israelis they'd rather kill them and "DRIVE THEM TO THE SEA".

JV

Since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada, there has been a sharp increase in the number of attacks perpetrated by Palestinian organizations against Israeli civilians. These attacks have killed hundreds of Israelis and wounded thousands, including many children, inside Israel and in the Occupied Territories.

Attacks aimed at civilians undermine all rules of law. Specifically, the intentional killing of civilians is considered a “grave breach” of international humanitarian law and a war crime. Whatever the circumstances, such acts are unjustifiable.

Palestinian organizations raise several arguments to justify attacks on Israeli civilians. The main argument is that “all means are appropriate in fighting against a foreign occupation and to attain independence.” This argument is baseless. It is also contrary to the fundamental principle of international humanitarian law, whereby civilians are to be protected from the consequences of warfare. In attacking the other side, therefore, each party must discriminate in selecting its targets and attack only military objects. This principle is part of international customary law; as such, it applies to every state, organization, and person, even those who are not party to any relevant convention.

Palestinian spokespersons distinguish between attacks inside Israel and attacks directed at settlers in the Occupied Territories. They argue that, because the settlements are illegal and many settlers belong to Israel's security forces, settlers are not entitled to the protections granted to civilians by international law.

This argument is readily refuted. The illegality of the settlements has no effect at all on the status of their civilian residents. The settlers constitute a distinctly civilian population, which is entitled to all the protections granted civilians by international law. The Israeli security forces' use of land in the settlements or the membership of some settlers in the Israeli security forces does not affect the status of the other residents living among them, and certainly does not make them proper targets of attack.

JV, this is like when two children are fighting. I dont care who started it.
I never said that palestinians were innocent. There are no innocents. Each side has acted in a reprehensible way.
Killing is wrong, and killing more is more wrong than killing less.
Whatever their reasons may be, the fact remains that the state of israel has killed a lot more people than the palestinian terrorist organizations.
IMHO terrorism is a crime, and so it should be dealt with by the police.
Leveling entire villages does nothing but generate more anti-israeli hatred and terrorist attacks.
Israel needs to understand that after all the crap they've done, every palestinian man, woman and child is full of hatred.
Someone who is full of hatred has the potential to become a terrorist. They can't just kill them all, can they?
Even if you got rid of the terrorist *organizations* every single palestinian would still be seeking blood on their own.
The only way to stop a fight is for one side to drop the guns. If israel starts acting nicer instead of blowing up 10 or 20 random palestinians for each israeli citizen attacked, the hostilities will fade and peaceful coexistence will increasingly become a reality.

You really think terrorism should be handled by police? That is what Clinton did, he only sought after the people who actually were involved in attacked and never went after the overarching organizations, that is why we had 9/11, because Clinton saw it as a crime, not a war.

I agree both sides have blame in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I know Israeli's and I know Palestinians, and I plan to travel there soon as I have enough money, so I think my viewpoint is pretty unbiased. Israeli's try to not target civilians, not as much as they could, but usually (note i said usually not always) they are going after a terrorist and civilians die in collateral damage, while the terrorists there don't give a damn, they just attack anyone as long as they can take a bunch of "jews" out with them.

There will be no peace until Arafat is gone, Sharon may be a tough guy, he may make some wrong decisions, but I have seen in my short lifetime more attempts to compromise from him than ever have come from the palestinian side. Most recently he was going to pull the settlements out which was very unpopular in the strong conservative part of Israel. But of course did Hamas stop attacking? No...

JV

Just to add more clarification. Semite does not equal Jewish.

So as you toss around the phrase ant-semite, it is a good idea to understand completely what a semite is.

Google can help with this.

Also, this is something noone can ever answer for me.

Why would the Israeli's have it out for the Palestinians?

Israel has the most liberal citizen policies in all of the Mideast. Women have rights, all ethnic and religious backgrounded people have full rights... Yes muslims/arabs LIVE IN PEACE with Israeli's, right accross the street, go to the same schools, they all vote!!! Hmmm then why is there a problem with the Palestinians? Because the Palestinians aren't willing to live in peace with the Israeli's, they won't rest until every last "jew is driven to the sea". I've seen them in action here in America, I've protested palestinian conferences where they advocated suicide bombings of civilians, and called for the deaths of all jews.

You say our media is biased, but how do you know that yours isn't? Maybe all media is biased (ding ding ding, everything in the world is biased, noone can keep their viewpoint out of it).


Go ahead and have 2 states, i'm for it, and i hope to god it works, but I would be willing to bet money, that if this state is run by Arafat it will attack Israel as soon as it has the capability and backing of other Arab nations, and I don't believe that Hamas will stop its terrorism even if they get a state.

JV

But JV, Arafat is an old and senile man. He is harmless. Palestinian terrorists will attack israelis on their own, whether or not they were ordered to, and even if they dont belong to a terrorist organization.
It's a cultural thing now.

I See you couldn't give me a reason why the Israeli's would have it out for the Palestinians when every other type of human can live in Israel in peace.

Also you admit that the palestinians will not stop attacking no matter what.

My question for you is do you believe that if Israel fully withdraws to their own territory and if the Palestinians are given full statehood that the violence will stop. This is the most important point.

JV

No by being old and senile he is not harmless, inaction to stop terrorism within his terrority is not harmless it is very harmful, Palestine needs a leader that can try to control its people.

JV

Eggy...

Let me be the first to let you know...

America will be just fine without your love.

How fine will The United States be when its own citizens dont love it anymore ?

PS its not AMERICA, AMERICA is the name of two continents NORTH AMERICA and SOUTH AMERICA

EDIT
Heh, freudian slip (american)

Since this discussion is no longer about SL, I've moved the thread. Since we know this is a topic about which many people feel passionate, please try not to let it get personal.

No technically there is no continent named America, definitely not 2, you had them right, North America, and South America.

If you just said America.... would you be speaking of continents, would anyone understand that you were? no?

We let words change all the time, gay now means a sexual preference, yet you can't allow America to be used as it is world over as the United States of America?


tsk tsk, words are fine to change meanings when someone wants them to, but not when you don't.... Ok word police.

JV

I read a lot about the pro's and con's of both the Isreali/Palestinian conflict and the US/Iraq conflict. Well, next time anyone wants to cry me a river about the injustices done by Isreali's to Palestinians, or the horrible things done by the US to the Iraqi's, feel free, we at least are a free country that -tries- to live up to our own hype.

Something to consider

Tit for tat? Eye for an eye?

Last time I looked, there weren't any Rabbis in Israel tricking teenagers into blowing themselves up so they could kill a few more innocent people. (restraining the strong urge to say something not very polite here)

Please keep the discussion non-personal or this thread will be locked.

Guess we need to rename this thread to "wandering homeless thread"...second time its been moved...what constitutes the moving of a thread from World oF Sl....to Rants...to way off topic?...