The "Virtuous" New Nazis.

[Mindful]

The Netherlands sees 'worrisome' rise in anti-Semitism in schools
German Jewish leaders say deteriorating security has led to a 'highly dangerous situation'
Anti-Semitism threatens France’s Jewish communities
'Worrying' rise in anti-Semitic incidents, charity says - BBC News

I agree. The fact that Antisemitism in Europe has enjoyed a resurgence alongside a huge rise in Muslim immigration is no coincidence. Jews are leaving many European countries because of this, whilst Muslims can't get here quickly enough. Most holocaust deniers in Europe are Muslims, and the left are their allies. The Labour Party is chock full of anti Semites.

I believe your assertion that the "left" is antisemitic is unfounded.

You say you're from the European Union. Are you from that part of it which is destined to invoke Article 50 .. in which case, where will you say you're from, once that happens ? Will you claim to be Stateless ... ?

I am not English.

Anyway, that aside, your apparent belief that the Left isn't antisemitic is, of course, hogwash.

During the last major conflict between Hamas and the State of Israel -- Ed Miliband, Labour's then-Leader, not only strongly attacked Israel for its actions in defending itself from their terrorism, he even tried to make capital out of the Conservatives' refusal to be as robustly critical of them that he was.

Being critical of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic.

How about George Galloway, who's further to the Left than the Labour Party is ? Or Ken Livingstone, and his outrageous (i.e sick) remark about Hitler being 'a supporter of Zionism' .. ?

Being critical of Israel, as I say, may be anti-Zionist but it is not antisemitic. Many Jews criticize Israel.
Ken Livingstone was right when he mentioned Hitler and the Nazis before the war claimed to be Zionists.

Here ... check this out ...

Labour party antisemitism.

Livingstone’s remarks are a study in the far-left’s singular treatment of antisemitism, compared to every other form of racism and intolerance. This lesson is as applicable to Australia as it is to Britain. Aside from honourable exceptions, when forced to confront an incident of antisemitism, even when irrefutable, the far-left has sought to deny, invert and ultimately shift blame onto the victims themselves, always culminating in a gratuitous and predictable attack on the ‘Jewish lobby’, a form of conspiracy theory to appeal to the weak of mind. Could one imagine the far-left mounting such a response to an allegation of homophobia, sexism or Islamophobia?

As the experience of British Labour has shown, antisemitism is very real and there remain those who reserve a unique and unwavering hatred for the dominant symbols of Jewish self-identification – the Jewish community, the Jewish faith and the Jewish nation-state.

That link has a lot more to say. Check it out ...

Many false assertions were made about socialists.

You're nitpicking somewhat.

I only posted a selection of examples of the Left's antisemitism. I could have posted more. An example of Corbyn and his friendliness with Israel's enemies, for example ?

As for Livingstone, well, if he was so 'right', how come he was villified for his 'Hitler' view ? How come his employment as an LBC pundit was abruptly terminated after he expressed that comment ? How come EVEN his OWN PARTY dropped him, because he'd become too much of an embarrassment to them ?

Explain this one:

The Insider | Mayor of London faces sack for being rude to a Jewish journalist

A disciplinary panel is expected to decide if London's mayor breached a code of conduct in comparing a Jewish reporter to a concentration camp guard.

If found to have brought his office into disrepute, Ken Livingstone faces censure, but suspension is unlikely.

His lawyer has argued there was no evidence he had damaged his office with his comments made at a party last year.

The Adjudication Panel for England hearing followed a complaint from the Jewish Board of Deputies.

During the hearing the mayor has defended the altercation with Evening Standard reporter Oliver Finegold.

He accused the journalist of "doorstepping" him outside a party and asked him if he had ever been a German war criminal.

Even here, it seems, Labour were reported as being likely to pull their punches when it comes to dealing with Livingstone ...

I don't see Corbyn's appeal. He has no charisma; whatsoever.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

"Being critical of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic."

How many times have I heard that old chestnut?

By those who do SO much more than merely criticize an Israeli governmental policy here and there.

 

[Phoenall]

I agree. The fact that Antisemitism in Europe has enjoyed a resurgence alongside a huge rise in Muslim immigration is no coincidence. Jews are leaving many European countries because of this, whilst Muslims can't get here quickly enough. Most holocaust deniers in Europe are Muslims, and the left are their allies. The Labour Party is chock full of anti Semites.

I believe your assertion that the "left" is antisemitic is unfounded.

You say you're from the European Union. Are you from that part of it which is destined to invoke Article 50 .. in which case, where will you say you're from, once that happens ? Will you claim to be Stateless ... ?

I am not English.

Anyway, that aside, your apparent belief that the Left isn't antisemitic is, of course, hogwash.

During the last major conflict between Hamas and the State of Israel -- Ed Miliband, Labour's then-Leader, not only strongly attacked Israel for its actions in defending itself from their terrorism, he even tried to make capital out of the Conservatives' refusal to be as robustly critical of them that he was.

Being critical of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic.

How about George Galloway, who's further to the Left than the Labour Party is ? Or Ken Livingstone, and his outrageous (i.e sick) remark about Hitler being 'a supporter of Zionism' .. ?

Being critical of Israel, as I say, may be anti-Zionist but it is not antisemitic. Many Jews criticize Israel.
Ken Livingstone was right when he mentioned Hitler and the Nazis before the war claimed to be Zionists.

Here ... check this out ...

Labour party antisemitism.

Livingstone’s remarks are a study in the far-left’s singular treatment of antisemitism, compared to every other form of racism and intolerance. This lesson is as applicable to Australia as it is to Britain. Aside from honourable exceptions, when forced to confront an incident of antisemitism, even when irrefutable, the far-left has sought to deny, invert and ultimately shift blame onto the victims themselves, always culminating in a gratuitous and predictable attack on the ‘Jewish lobby’, a form of conspiracy theory to appeal to the weak of mind. Could one imagine the far-left mounting such a response to an allegation of homophobia, sexism or Islamophobia?

As the experience of British Labour has shown, antisemitism is very real and there remain those who reserve a unique and unwavering hatred for the dominant symbols of Jewish self-identification – the Jewish community, the Jewish faith and the Jewish nation-state.

That link has a lot more to say. Check it out ...

Many false assertions were made about socialists.

You're nitpicking somewhat.

I only posted a selection of examples of the Left's antisemitism. I could have posted more. An example of Corbyn and his friendliness with Israel's enemies, for example ?

As for Livingstone, well, if he was so 'right', how come he was villified for his 'Hitler' view ? How come his employment as an LBC pundit was abruptly terminated after he expressed that comment ? How come EVEN his OWN PARTY dropped him, because he'd become too much of an embarrassment to them ?

Explain this one:

The Insider | Mayor of London faces sack for being rude to a Jewish journalist

A disciplinary panel is expected to decide if London's mayor breached a code of conduct in comparing a Jewish reporter to a concentration camp guard.

If found to have brought his office into disrepute, Ken Livingstone faces censure, but suspension is unlikely.

His lawyer has argued there was no evidence he had damaged his office with his comments made at a party last year.

The Adjudication Panel for England hearing followed a complaint from the Jewish Board of Deputies.

During the hearing the mayor has defended the altercation with Evening Standard reporter Oliver Finegold.

He accused the journalist of "doorstepping" him outside a party and asked him if he had ever been a German war criminal.

Even here, it seems, Labour were reported as being likely to pull their punches when it comes to dealing with Livingstone ...

I don't see Corbyn's appeal. He has no charisma; whatsoever.

He will dance to the union leaders pipes, which puts him in a position where the unions can call the shots. This is why they are prepared to destroy the labour party and ruin the country. The union leaders are hard line neo marxist nazis, no better than the marxist nazi's in 1930's Germany

 

[Mindful]

Imagine, for a moment, that David Cameron had repeated the ancient antisemitic myth known as the “blood libel”, the idea that Jews murder non-Jewish children in order to use their blood for ritual purposes. Or what if he had said that Jews were “the chief financiers of the slave trade”. What would be the reaction?

At a minimum he would be universally shunned, shamed and discredited. If he were still Prime Minister, he’d have been hounded out of office. Certainly the only people who would share platforms with him after that would be people who either agreed with his sentiment or were apologists for it.

So why has Jeremy Corbyn shared platforms with people who have said those exact words? Such as Jackie Walker, who refuses to apologise for her outrageous remarks? Why did Corbyn express a wish to have tea on the parliamentary terrace with the leader of the Islamic Movement in Northern Israel, Raed Salah, who was found by a British court judge to have used the blood libel against Jews?

Yet by contrast, during the EU referendum campaign, Corbyn refused on multiple occasions to share a platform with David Cameron. What does that say about Jeremy Corbyn’s moral outlook?

Corbyn is often defended by well meaning, naive observers as “a nice guy” even if you disagree with him. Yet the record shows that time and again, Corbyn will provide oxygen and cover for bigots, racists, terrorist sympathisers and antisemites.

Read more:

http://hurryupharry.org/2016/09/17/...-guy-hes-an-apologist-for-racists-and-bigots/

 

[Phoenall]

Imagine, for a moment, that David Cameron had repeated the ancient antisemitic myth known as the “blood libel”, the idea that Jews murder non-Jewish children in order to use their blood for ritual purposes. Or what if he had said that Jews were “the chief financiers of the slave trade”. What would be the reaction?

At a minimum he would be universally shunned, shamed and discredited. If he were still Prime Minister, he’d have been hounded out of office. Certainly the only people who would share platforms with him after that would be people who either agreed with his sentiment or were apologists for it.

So why has Jeremy Corbyn shared platforms with people who have said those exact words? Such as Jackie Walker, who refuses to apologise for her outrageous remarks? Why did Corbyn express a wish to have tea on the parliamentary terrace with the leader of the Islamic Movement in Northern Israel, Raed Salah, who was found by a British court judge to have used the blood libel against Jews?

Yet by contrast, during the EU referendum campaign, Corbyn refused on multiple occasions to share a platform with David Cameron. What does that say about Jeremy Corbyn’s moral outlook?

Corbyn is often defended by well meaning, naive observers as “a nice guy” even if you disagree with him. Yet the record shows that time and again, Corbyn will provide oxygen and cover for bigots, racists, terrorist sympathisers and antisemites.

Read more:

http://hurryupharry.org/2016/09/17/...-guy-hes-an-apologist-for-racists-and-bigots/

He has cost the Labour party much of its donations to help it fight elections, so much so that the labour party will split into two seperate parties this year and the non neo marxist group will get the majority of the donations. This will mean the Unions will either force their members to pay more for less, or fold and leave the workers without any legal cover or representation. The labour party was overrun by islamonazi terrorists in the 1990's and now is a cancer on the workers

 

[Coyote]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

What does this have to do with anti-semitism in Europe?

 

[Coyote]

"Being critical of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic."

How many times have I heard that old chestnut?

It seems to me that you are setting up a scenario where any criticism of Israel becomes anti-semitism.

 

[Mindful]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

What does this have to do with anti-semitism in Europe?

A profile of the country the anti Semites want to lobby against?

 

[Mindful]

"Being critical of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic."

How many times have I heard that old chestnut?

It seems to me that you are setting up a scenario where any criticism of Israel becomes anti-semitism.

It doesn't seem that way to me.

 

[Coyote]

"Being critical of Israel is not the same as being antisemitic."

How many times have I heard that old chestnut?

It seems to me that you are setting up a scenario where any criticism of Israel becomes anti-semitism.

It doesn't seem that way to me.

Where do you draw the line? Is all criticism of Israel anti-semitism? Can Israel's policies NOT be criticized?

I see the difference when it becomes a diatribe on Jews vs anger at specific policies of a nation.

 

[Coyote]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

What does this have to do with anti-semitism in Europe?

A profile of the country the anti Semites want to lobby against?

It's old history.

Edited to add: but if you consider it topical, then I will stop refraining from that part of the discussion.

 

[Mindful]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

What does this have to do with anti-semitism in Europe?

A profile of the country the anti Semites want to lobby against?

It's old history.

So is my country.

Historical perspective.

It took 1,000 years to get where we are today.

 

[Mindful]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

What does this have to do with anti-semitism in Europe?

A profile of the country the anti Semites want to lobby against?

It's old history.

Edited to add: but if you consider it topical, then I will stop refraining from that part of the discussion.

That's very kind of you.

 

[Coyote]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

Per RoccoR, in another discussion in IP on this - the Balfour Delcaration had no legal authority and made no promises to either Arab entities or Jewish entities. It was simply an aggreement between the allied powers.

 

[Coyote]

You trawl hate sites and post garbage from them to support your points. You choose them over legitimate sites. That says a lot about your repulsive character as does your selective support of scapegoating and hate campaigns.

When you choose to use hate sites, it's like walking through dog shit. It sticks to your sole (or perhaps that should be soul) and no matter how often you wash, the stink still remains.

Yes, we have heard ad nauseum about your vaunted education. A pity it doesn't seem very apparent in your posts other than to inform us that you were accepted into Stanford.

That wasn't actually a challenge to you to double down on the turnspeak, you know, but as long as you want to reveal what you are all about to an even greater degree, then be my guest

I'm curious. Do you ever actually discuss the topic or is your sole contribution to this place discussing other posters?

Instead of discussing a topic, you discuss posters, most of whom you've fit into pigeonholes. You do this in thread after thread as if it has some sort of importance beyond disruption.

You claim to be neither left nor right (I call bullshit on that) - you have a lot to say on leftwing anti-semitism but nothing on rightwing antisemitism. You're arguments are hardly impartial but entirely one sided.

You have NO problem whatsoever with hatred and rhetoric directed at Muslims who have done nothing to deserve it. Like the anti-semites, you blame the entire group for the actions of some. Yet, that same rhetoric applied to the Jewish people has you up in arms.

Wouldn't the world be a better place if we applied to same standards to all?

I don't expect you to see that. You have no integrity. Not when you rely on hate sites for sources.

So when will you apply your standards to the arab muslims that you reserve for the Jews. Start with the Jews rights under international law to live in Israel as granted under international laws. Something that you have denied exists until it was pointed out the rest of the M.E. was created under the same laws.

They have the same rights to live there as the Palestinians. Something I've consistently agreed on.

 

[Coyote]

Meet the packs of new Nazis, posing as Righteousness and Virtue, pursuing new exterminationist policies against Israel and, right after that, the Jews.

"In Nazi Germany," noted Brendan O'Neill in the Wall Street Journal, "it was all the rage to make one's town Judenfrei."

"Now a new fashion is sweeping Europe: to make one's town or city what we might call 'Zionistfrei' -- free of the products and culture of the Jewish state. Across the Continent, cities and towns are declaring themselves 'Israel-free zones,' insulating their citizens from Israeli produce and culture. It has ugly echoes of what happened 70 years ago."

The Nazis said "kauft nicht bei Juden": do not buy from Jews. The slogan of these new racists is "kauft nicht beim Judenstaat": do not buy from the Jewish State. The Nazis repeated "Geh nach Palästina, du Jud": Go to Palestine, you Jew. Racists in Europe shout "Jews out of Palestine!"

The "Virtuous" New Nazis

Those idiots don't realize that Jews were never a threat to them and that the one true threat to them, as well as most of the world......is Islam.

Right, so it's ok to scapegoat innocent Muslims for the actions of a few. Never changes. Just choose new targets.

 

[Coyote]

As one poster said - there are many faces to antisemitism. .

Yours is certainly one of the ugliest.

At least a couple of the other antisemites are up front about it to some degree. You play the vile game of claiming to support one thing, but ALWAYS taking the side of those who persecute Jews.

Coming from someone who habitually trawls hate sites for information your (lack of) any credibility is noted.

Scapegoating innocent people is evil, yes?

I think so. I don't think you do.

So why do you see no problem in scapegoating the Jews and try to blame them for everything. They did not start the problems in the world, that was down to the religions that came after

Where have I "scapegoated" Jews or blamed them for everything? Think carefully before you keep lying Phoenall. Maybe you could provide a link.

Your complete acceptance of what team palestine post shows that you blame them for everything that is happening. Your refusal to accept that the same international laws that created Jordan, Iraq, Iran and Syria also created the Jewish national home. Your denial of the Jews rights under international laws and claims of war crimes also shows you to scapegoat the Jews and blame them for everything. Your latest trick of STEALING Jewish land to give to illegal immigrants as it will make the area more peaceful is a laugh after being shown the arab muslims many charters that say the exact opposite and that the only way to ensue peace is to wipe out the Jews and give the land to the muslims.

Not just me that has seen through your veneer as far too many posters are now calling you out.

Where have I blamed Jews for everything? Your inability to provide links (yet again) is duly noted.

 

[Mindful]

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

Per RoccoR, in another discussion in IP on this - the Balfour Delcaration had no legal authority and made no promises to either Arab entities or Jewish entities. It was simply an aggreement between the allied powers.

In 1921, Great Britain reneged on the Balfour Declaration, lopped off 77 percent of the Land promised in the Balfour Declaration to the Jews, and set up the Arab Emirate of Trans Jordan. Which eventually became Jordan.

Per RoccoR, in another discussion in IP on this - the Balfour Delcaration had no legal authority and made no promises to either Arab entities or Jewish entities. It was simply an aggreement between the allied powers.

Is that so?

I wonder why Mahmoud Abbas made a call to sue the British government over the Balfour declaration of November 1917.

 

[Votto]

Judenrein is once again the fashion. It is now a product of the left rather than the right for the most part, however.

Who was it who said "Antisemitism is the socialism of fools"?

It was always the left.



Hating Jews does not make anyone "right" winged

Hitler hated capitalism as well.

 

[LuckyDuck]

Meet the packs of new Nazis, posing as Righteousness and Virtue, pursuing new exterminationist policies against Israel and, right after that, the Jews.

"In Nazi Germany," noted Brendan O'Neill in the Wall Street Journal, "it was all the rage to make one's town Judenfrei."

"Now a new fashion is sweeping Europe: to make one's town or city what we might call 'Zionistfrei' -- free of the products and culture of the Jewish state. Across the Continent, cities and towns are declaring themselves 'Israel-free zones,' insulating their citizens from Israeli produce and culture. It has ugly echoes of what happened 70 years ago."

The Nazis said "kauft nicht bei Juden": do not buy from Jews. The slogan of these new racists is "kauft nicht beim Judenstaat": do not buy from the Jewish State. The Nazis repeated "Geh nach Palästina, du Jud": Go to Palestine, you Jew. Racists in Europe shout "Jews out of Palestine!"

The "Virtuous" New Nazis

Those idiots don't realize that Jews were never a threat to them and that the one true threat to them, as well as most of the world......is Islam.

Right, so it's ok to scapegoat innocent Muslims for the actions of a few. Never changes. Just choose new targets.

Pew polls and research have interviewed Muslims in various Muslim nations and found a common thread. To the "majority," Sharia Law is preferable to any other law (and as Sharia Law is part of Islams political aims, it is absolutely incompatible with western society), Gays/Lesbians should be imprisoned or killed, stoning of adulterers is acceptable, and on and on it goes. The reason we don't see most Muslims out there running amok and killing indiscriminately is because many have families to feed and are busy supporting their large families; yet they will still support the overall goal of conquering the non-Islamic world. Any who say otherwise are using "taqqiya."