Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 20:52:25 +0200 Subject: Re: history of palestine From: Yves Winter <winter-AT-lsealumni.com> Erik, Well, anybody who says that orthodox Jews are arrogant bastards may not be a friend of Hitler, but disqualifies her/himself by making a stupid generalization. And anybody who automatically links orthodox Jewry with Israeli politics should be locked up in a library to find out about the different strands in orthodox Judaism which range from Zionist to non-Zionist, anti-Zionist and post-Zionist. So, please, instead of preaching nuance, practice it! Yves On 07/09/01 17:52 Uhr, "Erik Hoogcarspel" wrote: > Lionel, you would be paranoiaic if you would suggest that the Free > constructionworkers were the only factor. This is not how I understand you. > And > there are other causes of cours. > It's not only in creating the state of Israel, but also in supporting it in > all > activities of religious terrorism that western countries have contributed to > the > present situation. And that cannot only be blamed on the Free Masons. I think > the orthodox Protestant movements are much stronger and all consider the Jews > as > the choosen people. In the U.S. many hospitals have taken over the practice of > circumsizing babies, just because it's a jewish custom (any neutral medical > expert will tell you that there's no medical or hygienic reason to do such a > thing, in fact it's as intelligent as trying to keep your feet clean by > throwing > all you're shoes and socks away). > Here in Holland I've met quite some people who will not hear any critic on the > Israeli politics, because they've spent a year in a kibbuts or because they > still feel guilty about the shoah and see the Jews as the innocent prosecuted > underdog. And there's no room for nuance. Anyone who says that orthodox Jews > are > arrogant bastards, is supposed to be a friend of Hitler's. > > erik > > Lionel Boxer wrote: > >> I don't think my comments are paranoiaic at all. They do not worry me if >> that is what you are referring to ... rather they explain why the English >> created the State of Isreal. They saw it as their duty to make it happen. >> >> In an article about Gadamer, Outwaite (in Skinner (1985, p. 24)) explains: >> 'This notion of projection tends to be misunderstood in the Anglo-Saxon >> world as a mysterious kind of empathy, but what Dilthey (1958) and others >> really had in mind was a much more cerebral process based on a common sphere >> of experience. >> >> This Masonry was indeed a common sphere of experience and the English did >> not (and perhaps still do not) 'know what they do does', to quote another >> idea of Foucault. If a whole nation attend monthyly meetings that reinforce >> the notion that Jews are meant to be in Isreal then they will gain >> satisfaction in seeing that take place. >> >> Just an idea. Not paranoiaic. >> >> After reading a bit of Foucualt, I get the feeling that the English race >> does not understand alegory to the same degree that the French and Russians >> do. >> >> --------------- >> guillame debord <guydeborder-AT-yahoo.ca> >> Some of those things that you are saying are quite >> parnoiaic. Very good and nice, I like that mad >> critical nuts which reads things into those weird >> movements de la passe!! >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp >
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005