Pittsburgh synagogue shooting

Widdershins

Some incredibly fevered imaginations and twisting of words here.
I have never, that I remember, seen coverage of the frequent terror attacks on Israeli Jews, and I know few people who were aware of them until a Jewish person explained what happens with jihad attacks in Europe was already happening in Israel, and I would certainly expect them to be covered without any ''telling the other side of the story'' when there is no other side if an innocent person is murdered. Jews are not the Israeli government and criticism of Israel has no place in the reportage of their death, even less so when these victims were American, not Israeli. One does not expect a report of a Muslim's murder to offer another ''side''.
Meanwhile the ''far right'' is synonymous with racism etc so I see no validity in the clam that it's not acknowledged as a source of violence.
I was not the one to bring such things into the thread.
If someone wonders why people are not convinced about the ''rise of the far right'' maybe they should listen rather than shouting people down for explaining that that theory would only really resonate if these killings were unusual. They are not new, but the perpetrators come from various backgrounds and the rightwing is not standing out above the others.

From being accused of''crocodile tears'' to now being accused of refusing to condemn the recent murders, it just gets sillier....

Human Sausage

Well, I'd ask for evidence of similar left-wing violence but I can only imagine what rags you dredge up, filled with lies as much as your own posts have been. As it is, I'm just going to leave your deranged ramblings there for anyone with any sense to see why it's such a waste trying to talk to you.

Ta-ta~

Widdershins

Human Sausage wrote: »

Well, I'd ask for evidence of similar left-wing violence but I can only imagine what rags you dredge up, filled with lies as much as your own posts have been. As it is, I'm just going to leave your deranged ramblings there for anyone with any sense to see why it's such a waste trying to talk to you.

Ta-ta~

This is why people disassociate from the political Left. Those who represent it claim to practice a kinder, gentler politics but do not embody the views they espouse.

Your posts are littered with insults and name calling, along with the manipulative twisting of words, and sly implications.

I stand by my original comment which caused so much retaliation, that there is an overlooked antisemitism in the Left. Everything else you attribute to me comes from your own imagination.

Sonics2k

Widdershins wrote: »

This is why people disassociate from the political Left. Those who represent it claim to practice a kinder, gentler politics but do not embody the views they espouse.

Your posts are littered with insults and name calling, along with the manipulative twisting of words, and sly implications.

I stand by my original comment which caused so much retaliation, that there is an overlooked antisemitism in the Left. Everything else you attribute to me comes from your own imagination.

You literally tried to shoe-horn in that the shooter was a far-left person.

Also, I'm really looking for any source showing members of the far-left or left as antisemitic.

P.s. opposing the Israeli invasion of Gaza =/= antisemitic.

2 Scoops

I must say I enjoyed Ben Shapiro's podcast rant on this earlier. Shapiro, a Jew himself, was the no1 recipient of anti Semite abuse on twitter in 2016. Not only is Trump the most pro Israel President there's likely ever been, I totally forgot about how closely the left wing party in the US associates itself with open anti Semites. This is parsed, full podcast is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeO8SPxdvyU

"If we're going to talk about anti Semetic rhetoric, and who's to blame for a rise in Jewish deaths the world over, a rise in hate crimes the world over, then lets actually talk about it.

The left wing, which mainstreams outspoken anti Semites like Louis Farrakhan, which mainstreams a terrorist sympathiser like Linda Sarsour, which mainstreams the BSD movement, which mainsteams wildly anti Semetic and anti Israel policies, which one do you think is more damaging to Jews across the world and inside the United States? Which one do you think is leading to more anti Semitism? Do you think it's the party who tried to remove Jerusalem from their platform in 2012, or is the party that moved the embassy to Jerusalem in Israel. Do you think it's the party that mainlines Keith Elisson and tries to make him head of the DNC after he spends years backing Louis Farrakhan, or do you think it's the party that opposes that?

Mainstream members of the Democratic party routinely hobnob with anti semites, not just hobnob with them, agree with them. This is true on the European left aswell, such as Jeremy Corybn, expressing their sympathy for what happened in Pittsburgh. Go F yourself dude, nobody is interested in what a Hamas supporter has to say about Jews being shot in a synagogue in Pittsburgh.

When President Trump, tried to wink and nod at the alt right, he was taking a fringe group that was not associated with the conservative movement, and he was winking and nodding at them for Political purposes then he tossed them out on their ear which is why they're all angry with him. If you want to talk about rhetoric and it's impact on anti Jewish sentiment the world over, I'm going to go with the folks who suggest everytime there's a war in the gaza strip the Jews are to blame, or suggest everytime Israel is to blame for defending itself, or suggest when Jews are attacked at a cosier supermarket in France, that's a random attack. I'm happy to seperate rhetoric from violence, on all sides, but you if you to condemn rhetoric you have to condemn it when it happens, where it happens and from whom it comes.

I see a bunch of people who don't give a damn when a Jew gets killed in Jerusalem popping out of the woodwork to say the right is responible for what just happened in Pittsburgh all the while championing an Iran deal that will eventually lead to the anniliation of millions of people if the Iranians have their way.

Now let's talk about policy, and which policies are getting Jews killed. If you want to talk about policy that leads to Jews dieing, it isn't President Trump's. Trump not only moved the embassy to Jerusalem, he cut off aid to the openly anti semitic terrorist supporting Palestinian authority. Obama's administration tried to make Israel make concessions to those terrorists. The Obama administration in the middle of the Gaza war in 2014 threatened to cut off military supply to the Israeli's. The Obama administration was not only blatently anti Israel, but promotional of a wing of progressive Jews, where progressivism came first and Judiasm came second."

Widdershins

Sonics2k wrote: »

You literally tried to shoe-horn in that the shooter was a far-left person.

Also, I'm really looking for any source showing members of the far-left or left as antisemitic.

P.s. opposing the Israeli invasion of Gaza =/= antisemitic.

It's called expressing an opinion. Not ''shoehorning''. You could all do with expanding your vocabulary. Or being less hypocritical after ''shoehorning' Israel / Palestine comments into a thread about the murder of American Jews.

The problem with antisemites, is that nothing less than the holocaust is antisemitism, to them.

nullzero

Widdershins wrote: »

The problem with antisemites, is that nothing less than the holocaust is antisemitism, to them.

You need to calm down and think about what you're posting.

Widdershins

nullzero wrote: »

You need to calm down and think about what you're posting.

Pardon? I am quite calm. It was said quite blandly. I find people have a very high threshold for antisemitism.

I have not accused anyone here of antisemitism if that's what you mean.

What is it with Boards posters attributing emotions to others?

Why did you advise me to calm down and not the ranting poster above, spewing insults?

batgoat

Widdershins wrote: »

Pardon? I am quite calm. It was said quite blandly. I find people have a very high threshold for antisemitism.

I have not accused anyone here of antisemitism if that's what you mean.

What is it with Boards posters attributing emotions to others?

Pretty sure you just labelled everyone that has an issue with Israel's behaviour in Palestine as "anti-semites"? Unless I'm misreading you...

WinnyThePoo

Shovels people. She needs a bigger shovel.

Widdershins

batgoat wrote: »

Pretty sure you just labelled everyone that has an issue with Israel's behaviour in Palestine as "anti-semites"? Unless I'm misreading you...

You are. Criticism of any government is fine, as far as I'm concerned.

I think there's far too much reading between the lines and putting words into peoples' mouths. And that does apply to posters here...

mammajamma

This last year or two in the united states has provided the biggest/worst mass shootings, in schools, offices, churches, everywhere. Its getting worse.

As far as I can see, here are the two ingredients absolutely necessary for chaos.

Keep sub-dividing the population of a country via the introduction/strengthening of many directly opposed groups. In other words, do away with homogeneity.

Second, make arms available to those competing groups.

The united states is a dead man walking, its already over and just waiting for the inevitable.

Anthracite

2 Scoops wrote: »

which mainstreams the BSD movement, which mainsteams wildly anti Semetic and anti Israel policies

Woah woah woah there cowboy: what is is anti-semitic about opposing Israeli policies in the occupied territories?

Is it possible, do you think, to be equally opposed to the maltreatment/abuse/demonisation of Jewish people around the world and Palestinian people in Palestine?

Grayson

Widdershins wrote: »

Pardon? I am quite calm. It was said quite blandly. I find people have a very high threshold for antisemitism.

I have not accused anyone here of antisemitism if that's what you mean.

What is it with Boards posters attributing emotions to others?

Why did you advise me to calm down and not the ranting poster above, spewing insults?

Considering you've been very abusive to me in the past it's a bit rich saying that.

And you've found that people have a high threshold for anti semitism? Is there anyone here who's even vaguely said that it;'s ok? If it's in real life then I'd suggest getting better friends.

personally I think the anti semitism is the most unacceptable form of bigotry. partly because of the holocaust. We've all seen what can happen because of someones stupid belief that jews are bad. We've all seen where an irrational hatred of jews can lead.

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

Keep sub-dividing the population of a country via the introduction/strengthening of many directly opposed groups. In other words, do away with homogeneity.

Ireland in the 50s was pretty homogenous. It was a sh!thole. I think you might be indentifying the wrong source for the problems in the US - homogeneity per se doesn't make things bad, and diversity per se does not make things good. It's entirely possible to have a happy, diverse society, and unless you have a suggestion as to how to make the US homogenous, they should probably get cracking on that.

Widdershins

Grayson wrote: »

Considering you've been very abusive to me in the past it's a bit rich saying that.

And you've found that people have a high threshold for anti semitism? Is there anyone here who's even vaguely said that it;'s ok? If it's in real life then I'd suggest getting better friends.

personally I think the anti semitism is the most unacceptable form of bigotry. partly because of the holocaust. We've all seen what can happen because of someones stupid belief that jews are bad. We've all seen where an irrational hatred of jews can lead.

I have not been abusive to anybody. If you are not confusing me with someone else (which has happened, I think there's another poster with a similar name or posting style) then why didn't you say so or report my post?

I don't have a clue who you are or why you would be holding a grudge.

I wasn't referring to you as the poster spewing insults.

Widdershins

Anthracite wrote: »

Woah woah woah there cowboy: what is is anti-semitic about opposing Israeli policies in the occupied territories?

Is it possible, do you think, to be equally opposed to the maltreatment/abuse/demonisation of Jewish people around the world and Palestinian people in Palestine?

Maybe if BDS focused on other countries, that might be easier to believe. And then there's this:
https://www.algemeiner.com/2018/10/26/poll-half-of-canadian-bds-supporters-would-continue-boycotting-israel-even-if-it-agreed-to-all-their-demands/?fbclid=IwAR1VTQUDY2KHor8G1WEOlm3tJ-Gn92f6GFed3rlJy9OFbqbKwdPGafAl0Z4

So even if Israel gave the Palestinian Arabs everything the BDS asks for, they would continue boycotting Israel.This is what the survey proves.

Personally I also find it morally dubious to punish ordinary people for anything their government does.

Anthracite

Widdershins wrote: »

Maybe if BDS focused on other countries, that might be easier to believe.

Isn't that like saying that you'd find the Cancer Society 'easier to believe' if it tried to cure heart disease, asthma and diabetes too?

Widdershins wrote: »

And then there's this:
https://www.algemeiner.com/2018/10/26/poll-half-of-canadian-bds-supporters-would-continue-boycotting-israel-even-if-it-agreed-to-all-their-demands/?fbclid=IwAR1VTQUDY2KHor8G1WEOlm3tJ-Gn92f6GFed3rlJy9OFbqbKwdPGafAl0Z4

So even if Israel gave the Palestinian Arabs everything the BDS asks for, they would continue boycotting Israel.This is what the survey proves.

Well it doesn't actually prove that, it may suggest it. But the poll seems a tad flawed:

The poll — commissioned by the group La’ad Canada, and carried out by Campaign Research in mid September — found that 12 percent of the 1,485 Canadians surveyed were aware of the Palestinian-led boycott movement, which has attracted support from a limited but growing number of students, academics, cultural figures, and others in North America.

In addition, it was carried out by a Jewish lobby group, who may or may not have an incentive to skew the results, consciously or unconsciously.

Widdershins wrote: »

Personally I also find it morally dubious to punish ordinary people for anything their government does.

I have some sympathy with that view, but who is voting for the Israeli government? Can you suggest other non-violent means whereby we can get Israel the change the way it brutalises the people who are just trying to live where they have lived for thousands of years and had their land taken from under them?

batgoat

Jewish group in Pittsburgh telling Trump not to visit until he denounces White Nationalism and have said the events that transpired are a culmination of his rhetoric...

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5bd66a3de4b0d38b5884ee66/amp?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067&__twitter_impression=true

Sweetemotion

batgoat wrote: »

Jewish group in Pittsburgh telling Trump not to visit until he denounces White Nationalism and have said the events that transpired are a culmination of his rhetoric...

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5bd66a3de4b0d38b5884ee66/amp?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067&__twitter_impression=true

Here is the Israeli ambassadors reply.

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

Ireland in the 50s was pretty homogenous. It was a sh!thole. I think you might be indentifying the wrong source for the problems in the US - homogeneity per se doesn't make things bad, and diversity per se does not make things good. It's entirely possible to have a happy, diverse society, and unless you have a suggestion as to how to make the US homogenous, they should probably get cracking on that.

!00% the biggest problem in the united states is its increasingly mixed population. If it was a single homogenous group, it would be able to rectify and overcome problems (if not immediately, then eventually). A diverse society is simply a bunch of different groups pulling in different directions forever, and that prevents problems from being unilaterally challenged and solved.

Its a mess.

How do you define "****hole" for the 50's? That incredibly small percentages of the population weren't having as a good a time as now? Wealth? Opportunity?

Because if so, those elements are not in discussion per se. Unity is best, despite the circumstances of any given timeframe. If Ireland had been 25% indian people, 17% Russian, 4% Sumatran, 20% catholic, 14% hindu etc etc...….how easily would we have won our freedom from the English, do you think? Would it have been easier, or harder than with 100% irish people?

The idea of homogeneity versus diversity is ridiculous at its core. How on earth "diversity" turned from an antonym into a synonym for the strength of a society has to be one of the biggest social coups of the decade.

As for ideas on how to "make things homogenous", theres no need. It will take its natural course. The same way it has throughout the entirety of human existence. Its one thing to watch it happen from far away, its another thing to invite it to happen in your own home.

But who knows, maybe this one time will be different!

batgoat

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Here is the Israeli ambassadors reply.

That doesn't negate the view of this Jewish group and all the other Jewish people who have said the same thing... Even Israeli publications have said it so the Israeli Ambassador isn't the be all and end all in this matter.

Anthracite

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Here is the Israeli ambassadors reply.

I haven't watched the video, but I wouldn't be hugely surprised if Netanyahu's ambassador gave Trump a full rim job.

Anthracite

mammajamma wrote: »

As for ideas on how to "make things homogenous", theres no need. It will take its natural course.

What, like happened in 'homogenous' 19th century Britain as the Picts, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Irish etc. etc.? Everybody gradually merges into a new society with elements of each?

I'm not sure what history you've been reading. I presume you are not familiar with the Roman empire either?

Sweetemotion

batgoat wrote: »

That doesn't negate the view of this Jewish group and all the other Jewish people who have said the same thing... Even Israeli publications have said it so the Israeli Ambassador isn't the be all and end all in this matter.

Just like your Huffpost link isn't the be all and end all in this matter.

brendanwalsh

America is a dump lads. The American dream died a long time ago. Take a trip to Detroit, Hartford, Springfield ma, places that have literally nothing going for them. Thank god we were born this side of the Atlantic on this great Emerald Isle in spite of our own issues.

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

!00% the biggest problem in the united states is its increasingly mixed population. If it was a single homogenous group, it would be able to rectify and overcome problems (if not immediately, then eventually). A diverse society is simply a bunch of different groups pulling in different directions forever, and that prevents problems from being unilaterally challenged and solved

When has the United States ever had a homogenous population or anything close to it?

hill16bhoy

mammajamma wrote: »

As for ideas on how to "make things homogenous", theres no need. It will take its natural course. The same way it has throughout the entirety of human existence.

That reads to me like a proposal for entirely unlimited migration worldwide, given that migration has been happening throughout the entirety of human existence, and only in relatively recent times was in any way hindered by the existence of artificial lines like borders.

mammajamma

Anthracite wrote: »

What, like happened in 'homogenous' 19th century Britain as the Picts, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Danes, Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Irish etc. etc.? Everybody gradually merges into a new society with elements of each?

I'm not sure what history you've been reading. I presume you are not familiar with the Roman empire either?

The big difference is space and free movement of people to establish what they want. You may have noticed there is no more space anymore. There is also the ignored point of time. Huge amounts of time for the assimilation of small groups of people with plenty of space. Does that sound anything remotely like today? During some of the past couple of years, the equivalent population of Ireland has moved into europe. Imagine another Ireland just appearing in Europe in the space of a year!? Filled with lots and lots of the least compatible people you could find, both culturally and religiously!

You may also have noticed Scotland, England, Ireland and northern Ireland don't seem to be joined at the hip so much ANd after how much time is that the result? And as for the roman empire, it collapsed due to its diversity and was overcome by unified and therefore inherently stronger groups that both raided and took over.

You also missed everything else I said.

How about that question of which would have been easier? Would a diverse "country" of Ireland composed of 20 different groups and religions have been better suited to overcoming the English to establish "their" land....or a single unified group? But you already know the answer.

This is all semantics, the diversity thing is just a gigantic magicians trick that doesn't stand up to an ounce of scrutiny or common sense :P

And yeah, history will repeat. If you cant see it literally taking shape all over the world right now, whether the USA or boko haram in Nigeria, Brexit or Saudi arabia and on and on….you would need to be wilfully blind to not see where this is going.

mammajamma

hill16bhoy wrote: »

When has the United States ever had a homogenous population or anything close to it?

Common language evolved very quickly, common ancestry, common religion of Christianity, zero mollycoddling of social welfare and the "do or die" to join society. For the vast majority, these people came from Europe. They even looked like each other! It was quickly a necessity to assimilate to each other.

Now, not so common language, I was riding a train in new York recently and was surprised that all of the advertisements in that particular carriage were in Spanish. How does that kind of thing bring people together, seriously, literally putting up barriers of communication? That's "diversity" for you....division and separation.

At the beginning, with genuinely huge, mostly empty country, the beginnings of the US was diverse. But it had all the elements necessary to create its own unique identity.

For comparisons sake, imagine if the American indian population of the US was gigantic, filling the place coast to coast. How well do you think an influx of people from another continent, with an entirely different way of life would have been greeted? Conducive to harmony? I think you can guess how that would have played out.

America was unique, it formed together under unique circumstances, now its time is just about over again. Apples and oranges to Europe.