Jewish Neocons and the border.

[Dr Grump]

Oh that's right. I'm the ring lead of hatred. You're a joke.

See if you can understand my complaint:

There's no denying that jews fear a strong white, christian identity, they explain as much in their own writings from their own jewish anti defamation websites. Due to this fear they advocate very open immigration policies to keep the countries white christian population and culture diluted. We can still support Israel, but let's demand the right to control our borders, despite their preference of a more liberal policy. We deserve to control our borders to the extent they demand for themselves in Israel. The hypocrisy is actually quite stunning and plain to see, for anyone willing to be honest.

You're warped. You have absolutely no proof of the above whatsoever. It's bordering on the pathetic. Are you saying all Jews think like this? Got a link to a study or a poll taken, or is this just your "gut" instinct? Because, ya know I'm sure Ben Stein and Billy Crystal sit around downing a few vodka's thinking about this shit...ALL the time....

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You're warped. You have absolutely no proof of the above whatsoever. It's bordering on the pathetic. Are you saying all Jews think like this? Got a link to a study or a poll taken, or is this just your "gut" instinct? Because, ya know I'm sure Ben Stein and Billy Crystal sit around downing a few vodka's thinking about this shit...ALL the time....

Go read the paranoid rhetoric over at ADL or the Simon Wiesanthal center. Educate yourself, retard.

 

[dilloduck]

You're warped. You have absolutely no proof of the above whatsoever. It's bordering on the pathetic. Are you saying all Jews think like this? Got a link to a study or a poll taken, or is this just your "gut" instinct? Because, ya know I'm sure Ben Stein and Billy Crystal sit around downing a few vodka's thinking about this shit...ALL the time....

ALL conservatives don't think like Bush yet you have no problem criticizing the ones who do. If there are a group of relatively powerful jews who have a questionable agenda, what's the problem with confronting it. Does it make one less patriotic or American?

 

[Dr Grump]

Go read the paranoid rhetoric over at ADL or the Simon Wiesanthal center. Educate yourself, retard.

Do they speak for ALL Jews now? BTW, the head of the ACLU is Hispanic...

 

[Dr Grump]

ALL conservatives don't think like Bush yet you have no problem criticizing the ones who do. If there are a group of relatively powerful jews who have a questionable agenda, what's the problem with confronting it. Does it make one less patriotic or American?

You might want to rewrite that first sentence. There is no problem confronting an agenda, I just wish RWA would spell it out and pony up some evidence. So far he hasn't. Just mentioned his spin on what SOME Jewish people are saying. I find it interesting you don't address some of the other issues I have mentioned such as why RWA singled out Jews and his "think their shit don't stink" comment, which really, when it all comes down to it is about is honest (and bad) as it gets. What further evidence do you need?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

An article about Abe Foxman, the dog-faced boy.

http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst/2005_catalyst/1205.htm#ADL

ADL FEARS CHRISTIAN AMERICA



After what Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) did, Bill Donohue called his friend Don Feder, president of Jews Against Anti-Christian Defamation, to join forces against Foxman's recklessness.


During the first weekend in November, Foxman met with members of his national commission in New York. According to an article in the November 7 edition of Haaretz.com (a large Israeli news outlet), Foxman warned the group of alleged efforts by Evangelical organizations to "Christianize America."


Foxman said, "Today we face a better financed, more sophisticated, coordinated, unified, energized and organized coalition of groups in opposition to our policy positions on church-state separation than ever before. Their goal is to implement their Christian worldview. To Christianize America. To save us!"


How about them apples? Christians entertaining a Christian worldview in a nation that is 85 percent Christian! It would be instructive to learn from Foxman precisely whose views Christians should be expected to entertain.


Foxman identified Focus on the Family, Alliance Defense Fund, the American Family Association and the Family Research Council as the "major players." He accused them of wanting "to Christianize all aspects of American life, from the halls of government to the libraries, to the movies, to recording studios, to the playing fields and locker rooms of professional, collegiate and amateur sports; from the military to SpongeBobSquarePants. No effort is made to hide their goals or their ambitions, and their vision of America is far different from ours."


In other words, Christians are taking over America—better man the gates. Isn't this just the type of claptrap that the ADL regularly complains about when similar things are said about Jews? Moreover, Foxman talks about Christianity as if it were a disease that Jews need to be inoculated against. Doesn't he realize that—as many Jews have said—it is because the U.S. is rooted in the Judeo-Christian ethos that Jews have fared so well here?


After reading these remarks, Don Feder issued the following statement: "Abe Foxman is hysterical, paranoid and agenda driven. There is no conspiracy to Christianize America unless Foxman considers keeping God in the Pledge of Allegiance and maintaining the traditional definition of marriage to be Christianizing America. Where does Foxman think the so-called Christianizers got the morality they are trying to force on America? From the Bible! The Torah is the foundation of Western ethics."


Bill Donohue said: "For Foxman to demonize Christians is morally reprehensible. And as Don Feder suggests, his comments reek of a profound historical ignorance. Foxman now has to answer to both the Christian and Jewish communities for the damage he has done."

 

[dilloduck]

You might want to rewrite that first sentence. There is no problem confronting an agenda, I just wish RWA would spell it out and pony up some evidence. So far he hasn't. Just mentioned his spin on what SOME Jewish people are saying. I find it interesting you don't address some of the other issues I have mentioned such as why RWA singled out Jews and his "think their shit don't stink" comment, which really, when it all comes down to it is about is honest (and bad) as it gets. What further evidence do you need?

My first sentence is fine and YOU deal with RWA. He's not my kid!

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Whatever happened to the kindler, gentler, less-covered-in-tinfoil RWA?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?p=364362#post364362

My how things can change in 5+ months.

 

[Dr Grump]

My first sentence is fine and YOU deal with RWA. He's not my kid!

Then what is the point of your first sentence? You said:

ALL conservatives don't think like Bush yet you have no problem criticizing the ones who do.

Let's start at the beginning. All conservatives don't think like Bush. True. Yet you have no problem criticizing the ones who do...uuuhhhh...yeeahhh...that's um right. The key being they think like Bush. It is conservatives who DON'T think like Bush that I don't have a problem with, which also means not ALL conservatives think alike...unlike old RWA who is using all-encompassing stereotypes.

And where have I asked YOU to deal with RWA? He is integral to the conversation because it is his thread. Don't take my mentioning of him in a post to you as a clue for you to start speaking on his behalf. That's on YOU...

 

[Diuretic]

I'm going to jump in here but it's to find a few things out.

In the article reproduced by RWA it seems to me - corrections gladly accepted, alternative points of view gladly discussed - that Foxman is not so much arguing against Christianisation (is that a word?) per se but the weakening of the separation between Church and State in America.

I'm conscious this is a domestic issue so I'm asking, not declaiming.

I know there is an argument in the US that the founding principle wasn't separation of Church and State but that there shall be no state religion

But I think that's what Foxman is on about.

If there is no state religion or if there is no melding of church and state then anyone from any other religion (and those without religion) don't feel put upon.

Now I'm a person without religion. I'm not anti-religion. The sight of a church, a temple, a stupa or a mosque doesn't offend me in the least. Nor am I offended by the private symbols of religion. But were any of those symbols to be used by my (I'm referring to my own country) government in a statement of identification with a particular religion I would be quite put out. I think the idea of separation of church and state is sound.

If you want to see how the state and religion can work together to be oppressive you only have to read the trial of William Penn. As I understand it America was founded to get rid of that sort of behaviour by the state.

There are two freedoms. Freedom to and freedom from. The founding fathers of the US knew that. So any American is free to practice their religion and is also free from religion, if they wish. I think Foxman is worried that esteemed rule is in danger of being overrun, I don't think he's anti-Christian.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I'm going to jump in here but it's to find a few things out.

In the article reproduced by RWA it seems to me - corrections gladly accepted, alternative points of view gladly discussed - that Foxman is not so much arguing against Christianisation (is that a word?) per se but the weakening of the separation between Church and State in America.

I'm conscious this is a domestic issue so I'm asking, not declaiming.

I know there is an argument in the US that the founding principle wasn't separation of Church and State but that there shall be no state religion

But I think that's what Foxman is on about.

If there is no state religion or if there is no melding of church and state then anyone from any other religion (and those without religion) don't feel put upon.

Now I'm a person without religion. I'm not anti-religion. The sight of a church, a temple, a stupa or a mosque doesn't offend me in the least. Nor am I offended by the private symbols of religion. But were any of those symbols to be used by my (I'm referring to my own country) government in a statement of identification with a particular religion I would be quite put out. I think the idea of separation of church and state is sound.

If you want to see how the state and religion can work together to be oppressive you only have to read the trial of William Penn. As I understand it America was founded to get rid of that sort of behaviour by the state.

There are two freedoms. Freedom to and freedom from. The founding fathers of the US knew that. So any American is free to practice their religion and is also free from religion, if they wish. I think Foxman is worried that esteemed rule is in danger of being overrun, I don't think he's anti-Christian.

No. He's spreading the lie that anyone is trying to institute a theocracy at all. Nobody is. Being pro life is not CHRISTIANIZING the country. Being against the promotion of homosexuality in public schools is not CHRISTIANIZING the country. There is an argument to be made from many perspectives that public schools should not be a CHANGE AGENCY for all social norms. His standard of separation of church and state is so bazaar that it in reality equates to christian repression.

 

[dilloduck]

Then what is the point of your first sentence? You said:

ALL conservatives don't think like Bush yet you have no problem criticizing the ones who do.

Let's start at the beginning. All conservatives don't think like Bush. True. Yet you have no problem criticizing the ones who do...uuuhhhh...yeeahhh...that's um right. The key being they think like Bush. It is conservatives who DON'T think like Bush that I don't have a problem with, which also means not ALL conservatives think alike...unlike old RWA who is using all-encompassing stereotypes.

And where have I asked YOU to deal with RWA? He is integral to the conversation because it is his thread. Don't take my mentioning of him in a post to you as a clue for you to start speaking on his behalf. That's on YOU...

DOn't include your problems with RWA in posts to me---If you think he is the one using all encompassing generalizations, speak to him. I have questions about Israel and some jewish Agendas. I'm not accusing every jew of thinking the same way.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Whatever happened to the kindler, gentler, less-covered-in-tinfoil RWA?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?p=364362#post364362

My how things can change in 5+ months.

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt, but with the recent idiocy of the port deal and now the immigration sellout, it's obvious the neocon christian white/jew alliance is only to ensure JEW interests. The kid gloves are off and Americans need to stand up and call hypocrisy, hypocrisy. I don't care what the site looks like now.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm going to jump in here but it's to find a few things out.

In the article reproduced by RWA it seems to me - corrections gladly accepted, alternative points of view gladly discussed - that Foxman is not so much arguing against Christianisation (is that a word?) per se but the weakening of the separation between Church and State in America.

I'm conscious this is a domestic issue so I'm asking, not declaiming.

I know there is an argument in the US that the founding principle wasn't separation of Church and State but that there shall be no state religion

But I think that's what Foxman is on about.

If there is no state religion or if there is no melding of church and state then anyone from any other religion (and those without religion) don't feel put upon.

Now I'm a person without religion. I'm not anti-religion. The sight of a church, a temple, a stupa or a mosque doesn't offend me in the least. Nor am I offended by the private symbols of religion. But were any of those symbols to be used by my (I'm referring to my own country) government in a statement of identification with a particular religion I would be quite put out. I think the idea of separation of church and state is sound.

If you want to see how the state and religion can work together to be oppressive you only have to read the trial of William Penn. As I understand it America was founded to get rid of that sort of behaviour by the state.

There are two freedoms. Freedom to and freedom from. The founding fathers of the US knew that. So any American is free to practice their religion and is also free from religion, if they wish. I think Foxman is worried that esteemed rule is in danger of being overrun, I don't think he's anti-Christian.

What would the JADL say if some group claimed too many jews are procreating and coming to America ?

 

[Dr Grump]

DOn't include your problems with RWA in posts to me---If you think he is the one using all encompassing generalizations, speak to him. I have questions about Israel and some jewish Agendas. I'm not accusing every jew of thinking the same way.

If you wanna be like that, then please don't address any posts I make to RWA....

 

[dilloduck]

If you wanna be like that, then please don't address any posts I make to RWA....

If it will help you to understand that we are two different people with two different perceptions, its a deal.

Here's my question to you;

What would the JADL say if some group claimed too many jews are procreating and coming to America ?

 

[William Joyce]

I'm just looking for any indication anywhere that any jew cares about the future of america as much as they care about the future of israel. Links would be appreciated.

It'll be hard to find... Jews have been a nation unto themselves for thousands of years. They've been through rises and falls of countless nations, from the Roman Empire on. They know that from every fallen empire, THEIR PEOPLE will emerge. For white gentiles, it's different. Those nations - Rome, England, America - are much more closely connected to us, and when they fall, the results are more catastrophic for us. We built those nations, and we wrap them up in our identity. We say "I am a Roman" or "I am an American," not, "I am a European-descended person."

Only with Israel have Jews entered the nation-state game, but it's not that solidified. Most are happy here in America or the UK or South Africa, etc., where they are not subject to pogroms, the Holocaust, etc. So, Israel is like a "project" for them, but a dear one. To them, it represents "how to compete in the gentile world." I'm pretty tough on Jews myself, but I'm not actually totally unsympathetic to this impulse.

But to scream "anti-Semite!" at anyone who wants to preserve their own country is wrong. In fact, the Jewish role in opening our borders is HUGE. They alone were the driving force behind the 1965 Immigration Act, which let in floods of third-worlders. That's not a crazy conspiracy theory, it's the documented truth. And even Jewish "conservatives" like John Podhoretz point to their JEWISH IDENTITY as the reason for opposing immigration reform.

That's nice, John, but this is America, and most of aren't Jewish.

 

[Dr Grump]

If it will help you to understand that we are two different people with two different perceptions, its a deal

It is a pretty basic concept. I know you are two different people which is why I mention his name in those posts to differentiate..

Here's my question to you;

I'm not too sure what you are getting at. I concur with Diuretic. Foxman seem to be saying he wants to keep the church out of govt...not such a bad idea IMO...

 

[dilloduck]

It is a pretty basic concept. I know you are two different people which is why I mention his name in those posts to differentiate..



I'm not too sure what you are getting at. I concur with Diuretic. Foxman seem to be saying he wants to keep the church out of govt...not such a bad idea IMO...

There you go again---I'm not talking about Foxman. That was RWA.

You really need to stop sterotyping me. Want another shot at MY question?

 

[Dr Grump]

There you go again---I'm not talking about Foxman. That was RWA.

You really need to stop sterotyping me. Want another shot at MY question?

hhhmmmm...yet you first ask that question in post 243 where you quote Diuretic's post where he IS talking about Foxman...I do want a shot at your question, but I want to know what you are getting at first. IOW, why are you asking that question....