As a Jewish journalist, it's sometimes bemusing to discover being discussed by any number of groups. Writing about Israel/Palestine as a non-Zionist seems to raise the blood-pressure of many. Long may this continue. I've been praised by the far-right Adelaide Institute, an organisation whose aims I find repugnant.
And now for perhaps the strangest of all. I am, according to some Australian neo-Nazis, part of the ZOG [Zionist Occupation Government] and funded by Jews:
"These 'journalists' have a lot of financial and legal backing in the form of treacherous media giants."
Let nobody say that conspiracy, paranoid delusions and falsehoods aren't the mainstay of all fringes.
And now for perhaps the strangest of all. I am, according to some Australian neo-Nazis, part of the ZOG [Zionist Occupation Government] and funded by Jews:
"These 'journalists' have a lot of financial and legal backing in the form of treacherous media giants."
Let nobody say that conspiracy, paranoid delusions and falsehoods aren't the mainstay of all fringes.
28 Comments:
The head of Al Jazeera said that the network was described by extrmists in the Arab world as an arm of the Zionists. Of course, in the US it is preceived as a terrorist organisation.
Such comments weed out the extent of extremism that exists. I guess in some way, we should celebrate such diversity o fopinion, bu tit must be spooky for you AL.
A little, I guess. The fact that I'm Jewish is clearly enough for some to damn me. So be it. They're clueless and incompetant - as Fight Dem back regularly highlights - and should be monitored.
Well the good thing is AL that your being Jewish does aloow you to discuss topics that woud be taboo otherwise.
You have to take the good with the bad I suppose.
That's just racist addamo. There is nothing not cannot be discussed by a non-jew. There is no jew who repugnant views can not be chastised by other Jews.
But Al is not religiously self identified as a jew. So he is merely accidentally jewish, and has been atoning for it for years.
I wonder if they called Amir Taheri a ZOG. Ofcourse not because he's not a Jew. He's an Iranian Muslim. OK then for Antony to call him an Zionist propogandist.
Ibrahamav said...
"There is nothing not cannot be discussed by a non-jew."
And so continues Ibrham's growing disconnect from reality.
"accidentally jewish"
There's a racist comment if I've ever heard one. Obviously Ibraham doesn't believe AL has the righ to be Jewish.
So what happens addamo? A heated debate? Do you go to jail?
Ofcourse if you discuss anything supportive of Israel, you get labelled a Zionist propogandist.
You get labelled an anti-Semite, which in our society is right up there with being labelled a pedophile or a rapist.
Any mainstraem journalist who gets branded this can also kiss their careers goodbye.
Name one journalist who's career has sufgfered from being supportive of Israel.
AL has stated, over and over, by his various writings, that he does not identify himself religiously as Jewish. AL himself has rejected the identification.
Notice the addamo slung regarding antisemitism being as socially repugnant as pedophilia? What a sick puppy.
Should an overtly antisemitic journalist have a good career?
I'm not asking you Ibraham. I was directing my question to Melanie, who happend to be an adult. Go back a play in your own excrement.
Nobody particularly cares what you want. Nobody particularly cares what you think. And no one cares whether you think someone is an adult or not.
Certainly not as long as you keep spreading addamo here.
Again, the Ibrerard is speaking on behalf of the voices in his head.
How longs it been since you had a shower Ibby? 6 months? Twelve maybe?
Seems no have disagreed with my comments concerning our main addamo spreader. Perhaps your host, eddie, wants to support you, but that seems to be it.
And no one would disagree if I were to say that you are a human stain that has single handedly turned this list into a vitriol infested bile slinging forum.
Of course they'd all disagree, if they could be bothered to deal with the addamo.
Doesn't seem to be any reason too. It will just be ignored as another senseless pile of steaming bulladdamo.
Who would disagree with the fact that you are undoubtedly the most intolerant, most vitriolic, most irrational and most spiteful member of this forum?
Sorry to be the one to break it to you.
Now. Didn;t we agree that we would behave like gentlemen fom now on - or have you decided to renig on that agreement?
Gents,
This kind of bickering must stop. It's unseemly, frankly, and unneccessary.
Please cease and stick to the topics!
addamo, In my opinion there are far more journalists critical of Israel than for Israel. And for most is a matter of perspective and that is fine. But when it comes to vilification of Israel that far exceeds any other country, and even buying into Arab propoganda such as the Jenin Massacre, Israel is apartheid, Israel has no continued historic claim to the land, Israel took the occupied territories for expansionist reasons, Israel was the aggressor in the wars etc. then I also consider the journalist to be lacking in facts quite open to Arab propoganda and quite often anti-semetic.
While what you say makes sense Melanie, I think it's blinkered to ignore why the conflict draws so much attention to it.
First, the conflict has been longer running than any other I can think of. 30 years (or more) is a long time. Most other conflicts we observe around the world are associated with civil wars of some kind. There has never really been a civil war between Israel and Palestine because of the obvious disparity in resources between the two.
Comparisons to apartheid have been difficult to avoid. We are talking about Ethnic separation here. While other countries (especially in the Arab world) are intolerant of ethic diversity, Israel is the only country I can think of, that gives right of return to a specific group of people - especially people not born of that country.
It is also difficult for Israel to shake the charge that they took occupied territories for expansionist reasons, when a) the territories were colonized, often at the expense of existing dwellings that were bulldozed, and b) in light of the existence of aspirations among extremists in Israel toward reestablishing Biblical boundaries.
Was Israel not the aggressor in the 1967 war? Was it not the aggressor in the bombing of Iraq’s Osirak reactor? Was it not the aggressor in Lebanon?
Finally, given the real David and Goliath struggle taking place, it is natural that the publics attention would be increasingly drawn to the conflict.
As for journalists, they more often than not, repeat statements made by political leaders, so perhaps it is inaccurate to suggest they are predominantly pro-Israel. Most Western leaders are very reticent to speak in a disrespectful tone about Israel.
Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
The whole thing's a tragedy, right from the beginning. I blame the British.(again)
Israel has every right to absorb the immigrants it chooses. If Israel wishes to be a refuge to the Jews of the world, they have every right to do it.
And it doesn't matter if they are Irish, Sudanese, Norwegian, Indian, Chines, Incan, as long as they are Jewish.
Comparison to lunacy is not difficult when looking at the objections of antisemites.
Herein lies the problem. Essentially this is a racist concept. Not done by civilised people. Doomed to fail in the end.
It certainly is the right of the nation to make that choice. No one has an inherent right to force a nation to allow them to come in.
As they do not have that right, it is not racist of the nation to not GIVE them the privilidge.
Israel has opened itself to be the refuge of the Jews. No other nation has.
Don't like it? Join the pother guy up eddie's ass. He doesn't like it either. Together, you can spread addamo to your hearts content.
Actually Ibraham,
I have no problem with Israel's immigration policies. As you say, all countries have the righ to decide who does and does not enter.
Though I do think the necessity for a Jewish refuge is a fantasy. Name one Western country where Jewish people are not welcome or safe.
Melbourne, no. Sydney, no. New York, no...Ohhh , I give up which one?
addamo
What YOU think is irrelevant. The state of Israel has existed legitimately since 1948. It has bitchslapped the dopey towelheads following every infringement of that legitimacy.
The towelheads should thank their lucky stars that the Soviets and the U.S. were able to intervene in what Israel should REALLY have done; and that is to have vaporised the lot of them.
Perhaps that joyous day will come soon.
Hallelujah, and then follows the Rapture.
neoleftychick said...
"What YOU think is irrelevant."
Of course it's irrelevant. Just like anyone else's opinion and that part of the body everyone has.
You still seem to grapple the fact that vaporising the towlheads would be about as advisable as firewalking with nylon thongs, but i'll leave you to enjoy your fantasies.
Post a Comment
<< Home