911 revisited

squod wrote: »

Look, I've said this already. My opinion can be changed.

Maybe if someone turns up and says 'here looks at this, heres an article proving these Isreali dudes were just a couple of dicks an' a fuggin mail man.'

Maybe then we'd have a debate on our hands.
At the minute I'm not convinced. That is all.

From reading your posts i get the feeling your one of those people who like to "blame it on the Jews"

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-614338/Blame-it-on-the-Jews.html

NOT LONG AFTER THE WORLD TRADE Center attacks of September 11, 2001, the Internet teemed with legends and rumors about the cause of the tragedy. An alarming number of these legends implicated Jews in the attacks. The American website Information Times, using misinformation propagated by the Lebanon's Al-Manar Television, claimed that 4,000 Jews were mysteriously absent from their jobs at the World Trade Center on September 11. (1) This fictitious story was a clear attempt to demonstrate Jewish foreknowledge of the terrorist attacks, and possibly even blame them for planning the acts of terrorism as a means of prompting American retaliation against Israel's Muslim enemies. More fantasies about the evil intentions of Jews would follow during the coming months. In March 2002, the Saudi-Arabian daily newspaper Al-Riyadh ran an article by Dr. Umaya Ahmad Al-Jalahma of King Faisal University in Al-Dammam claiming that Jews kill non-Jews and use their blood to make Passover matzos. (2)

To many in the West, these claims are puzzling. However, Western Christian culture was the birthplace for many of the anti-Semitic attitudes currently expressed by Islamic extremists. The claim published in Al-Riyadh that Jews need Gentile blood for rituals, for instance, was popular in Europe throughout the Middle Ages. And even in contemporary Western culture, one occasionally finds hints of Jewish conspiracy theories, such as the common belief that Jews control the media.

The "media control" theory illustrates the difficulties involved in assessing the causes of anti-Semitic ideas. Although Jews represent only about 2% of the American population, they are dramatically prominent in the newspapers, television and film industries. The reason for this is traceable to complex social and historical factors, such as the large numbers of European Jews who arrived in the United States during the formative years of Hollywood, the cultural preferences of Jews for these occupations, and the social desire for Jews to live and work with their friends and relatives. Thus, notions of Jewish "domination" of the media aren't entirely ridiculous, but they are also far from completely rational. Jewish over-representation in the media has certainly not resulted in frequent depictions of specifically Jewish issues on television. Jews working in the media need to appeal to a broad demographic base, and hardly find it prudent to promote pure "Jewish" interests foreign to most members of their target audience. Depictions of Jewish rituals such as hat-mitzvahs and Hanukah celebrations are much less frequent than corresponding depictions of such Christian cultural hallmarks as Christmas parties and church wedding ceremonies.

To realistically assess the causes of anti-Semitic theories, we need to carefully examine the specific times and places in which the theories originated, and avoid comforting oversimplifications of complex issues.

Beginnings: The Christian and Medieval Context

Many ancient peoples such as Egyptians and Romans expressed hostility toward Jews. This hostility could properly be considered anti-semitic when is focused on perceived "Jewish" traits such as exclusiveness. Still most modern anti-Semitic attitudes can be traced to the development and eventual success of the Christian religion, although this does not necessarily indicate that Christianity has been the most important factor determining expressions of anti-Semitism. Jesus was a Jew who claimed that his mission was to fulfill Jewish law, not to replace it. His followers also understood his role in human history in terms of the Jewish scriptures collected in the Septuagint, or Greek version of the Hebrew Bible. Christianity, in its early stages, was a fringe religion embraced by small groups of both Jews and Gentiles who saw in Jesus the embodiment of an ideal religious life. (3)

Since Rome had crashed an uprising of Jewish revolutionaries in 70 CE, Christians did not wish to provoke further Roman wrath by publicly blaming the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate for the death of Jesus. Thus, the gospel authors were rather generous in their portrayals of Romans. According to the author of the Gospel of Luke, both Pilate and the Roman centurion present at the crucifixion proclaim the innocence of Jesus. Pilate even offers to release Jesus, finding he has done nothing wrong, but the Jewish crowds reject his offer (Luke 23: 4-5). (4) The author of the Gospel of John also emphasizes Pilate's failed attempts to free Jesus, and the bloodlust of the Jews in demanding his death. But John goes further in designating "the Jews" as a people different from Jesus and hostile to his mission. In John 8:44, Jesus tells "the Jews" that, far from being the children of Abraham or God, they are actually the children of Satan. (5) Jesus, of course, could not have been making an ethnic or racial classification about all Jews, since he was also Jewish. But these distinctions would be lost in later times, when Christians would be fully separated from the Judaic roots of their religion and perceive "the Jews" more readily as a separate community. Jews, as a people, would be judged guilty of deicide.

After Rome officially recognized Christianity in the 4th century CE, Judaism was its main intellectual and spiritual rival. Many of the early church fathers frequently took opportunities to denounce Jews as the main contributors to Christian heresies such as Arianism (the belief that Jesus was not fully divine), and as general obstacles to the spread of Christian faith. One of the most persistent critics of these "Judaizing" tendencies in Christian thought was John Chrysostom. In many eloquent orations, he emphasized the dangers of Jewish religious beliefs, and reminded his listeners of the role Jews played in the arrest and execution of Jesus. While John did not seem to display any deep hatred for Jews in his personal interactions with them, there is no doubt that his sermons contributed considerable ideological grist for the anti-Semites of later times. (6) Those who wished to view Jews as "Christ-killers" would often turn to Chrysostom's sermons for confirmation of their biases.

Through its early conflicts with Judaism, Christianity acquired a certain set of attitudes and doctrinal assertions regarding the inferiority of Judaism. These attitudes did not always lead to acts of hatred, and actual expressions of anti-Semitism varied greatly between times and places. Still, Christian beliefs about Jews were often far more hostile than those expressed by adherents of other religions. For instance, the Islamic conquests of the Holy Land in the 7th century and the strong Muslim presence in Spain beginning in the 8th century placed many Jews under direct Muslim political control. Many more Jews flooded into the Islamic Ottoman Empire after their expulsion from Catholic Spain in 1492. Jews did not have full political and civil rights under either Muslims or Christians, and encountered restrictions on their occupations and places of residence. There were some instances such as the attacks on the Jews of Granada in 1066 and 1090 when Muslims treated their Jewish subjects with considerable violence. Yet, their treatment as subjects of Islam seldom approached the worst moments of their lives in Christian nations. (7) There are few events in the history of the Jews in Muslim countries before the 20th century comparable to the acts of hatred and intolerance they endured in Christian Europe.

Much of the differences in fortune between the Jews of Islam and those of Christendom can be traced to the differences in perception of Jews between the two religions. Muslims knew that Jews conspired against Mohammed, but they also knew that the Jewish plots ended in failure. Jews were a nuisance, but not a serious threat to most Muslims. (8) Theoretically, Christians should also have perceived what they saw as Jewish actions against Jesus as fruitless, since alleged Jewish plots did not prevent Jesus from fulfilling his role as the Messiah. In practice, however, Christians dwelled on the sinister portrayals of Jews found in the New Testament and the teachings of the church fathers. To Christians, Jews were more likely to appear as menacing conspirators with a special mission to undermine the religious legacy of Jesus. This sinister image of Jews allowed Christians to develop various paranoid fantasies about diabolical Jewish rituals and conspiracies.

One of the racier charges against Jews resulted from, all things, the adoption of the church dogma of transubstantiation--the literal transformation of the Eucharistic bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. The magical aspects of this Church ritual spawned a variety of popular myths and legends. Not surprisingly, some of these myths involve nefarious schemes by Jews to steal hosts (and thus steal the body of Christ), and then mock or defile the host in rebellion against Christianity. According to one widely discussed account, two Jews in Passau in 1478 successfully schemed to obtain eight Eucharistic hosts. (9) They stabbed the hosts until blood oozed from them and threw them into a fire, but they would not burn. Instead, an image of the Christ child appeared, and several doves and angels miraculously escaped from the flames. This host desecration charge would resurface with slight variations many times, and would find expression in popular art of the period (see Figure 1).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

However, the most sinister allegation against Jews in Medieval times was the charge of "ritual murder." According to anti-Semitic theorists, Jews kidnapped Christian children and drained them of their blood, often killing the children in the process. Jews would then use the blood to perform religious or occult rites. Some Christians maintained that Jews used this ill-gotten blood to bake Passover matzos or anoint rabbis, while others argued that Jews needed the magical powers of Christian blood to remove the foul smell allegedly inflicted upon them by God for killing the messiah. (10) Still more outlandishly, some believed that God cursed male Jews by making them weak and effeminate because of their complicity in the death of Jesus. Male Jews were supposedly so feminine that they menstruated, and required Christian blood to stop bleeding. (11)

Table 1 shows the frequency of ritual murder charges in various European countries from the 12th through the 16th centuries. The first documented ritual murder accusation occurred in 1148 in England, and spread most quickly through German-speaking Europe, partially because large populations of Jews expelled from other areas of Europe had resettled in Germanic lands. One of the most famous ritual murder charges was the Simon of Trent affair of 1475, in which a 25-year old local Jew was blamed for the unexplained death of a 2-year old boy (see Figure 2). Under heavy torture, the Jew "admitted" he had killed the boy and drained his blood for use in magic rituals. Such coerced confessions provided solutions for unresolved tragedies, and allowed neglectful or abusive parents to find scapegoats for the deaths of their children. (12) Such charges would remain common until the 16th century, when Protestant polemics labeled belief in ritual murder as Catholic superstition, helping to discredit these allegations.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

The reduced number of ritual murder charges during the 14th century was not due to any decrease in anti-Semitism. Instead, new conspiracy theories about Jews spreading the Black Death temporarily distracted popular attention from ritual murder paranoia. As in ritual murder trials, torture played a prominent role in extracting bogus confessions from Jews. Subjected to actual or threatened torture, Jews confessed to spreading the deadly disease by poisoning wells and public fountains. The charges linking Jews to the onset of the plague seemed to originate in southern France and in Spain, where a large share of Europe's Jews lived prior to the expulsion edict of 1492. Soon, mob violence against Jews erupted in many European towns, including Barcelona, where 20 Jews were slaughtered and much property destroyed. (13)

We must try to understand these expressions of anti-Semitic hatred in a larger context. Most acts of violence against the Jews originated in the underclasses, and not with incitement by church or government authorities. Sometimes, in fact, mob actions against Jews were part of larger reactions against the existing order. This was certainly true of the Cossack leader Bogdan Chmielnicki, who led an uprising against Polish overlords who exploited the peasantry. Many Jews died in the Chmeilnicki uprising, but largely because they were visible targets as financial mediaries responsible for collecting payments from the peasant classes. (14) Official authorities were certainly not free of prejudice by modern standards, but they seldom condoned mob violence and often punished the perpetrators. During the height of the ritual murder accusations, for example, Austrian emperors placed Jews under their protection and sometimes explicitly forbade further ritual murder charges against them. Still, popular prejudice against Jews remained, and would nurture the development of a new kind of anti-Semitic theory in the 18th century.

The Growth of Conspiracy: Jews in the Modern World

Throughout the Middle Ages and early modern period, many anti-Semites portrayed Jews as bogeymen who plotted to harm Christians through ritual murder, well poisonings and various black arts. Those who were not inclined to attribute such magical and diabolical traits to Jews still tended to regard them as social undesirables who profited in peddling and money lending. But these ideas were not yet modern conspiracy theories, with their imagined secret networks of individuals controlling the politics and economies of entire nations. To understand how these theories arose, we need to examine the historical context of the period before and after the Enlightenment of the 18th century.

Before the late 17th century, national and religious identities were intertwined. Most people assumed (as some members of the Christian Right still do) that a nation containing people of different religious affiliations would lack the bonds of spiritual and intellectual affinity necessary to survive. For if some citizens pursued a religious identity separate from the majority faith of their nation, they would not feel the same spirit of kinship shared by their countrymen. They would worship in different places and follow different religious rituals and holidays, reducing their communal ties with other citizens and compromising their suitability for civil and military service. For all these reasons, religious minorities were considered potential sources of subversion, and did not enjoy equal rights in any country. (15)

Jews, of course, were a well-known and conspicuous minority. Partly because of the prohibitions limiting their choices of occupations and residence, and partly because of cultural and social ties characteristic of most minority groups, Jews were largely a separate people. They did not scatter diffusely across the population of Europe, but tended to concentrate within particular towns and communities. Their range of occupations was broader than contemporary accounts would have us believe, but nonetheless, large numbers of Jews did enter professions such as banking and usury. There were many factors influencing these occupational choices. Civil service positions and many other occupations were closed to Jews, and difficulties in obtaining land (coupled with the threat of expulsion by local governments) discouraged trades such as agriculture that required large investments in land and property. (16) Cultural preferences for jobs shared by other members of their community was another important consideration. Jews, therefore, were culturally distinct from the larger society in which they lived.

Beginning in the late 17th century, a new generation of political thinkers challenged existing bonds between religion and state. To a growing number of modern thinkers, society was based on a contract between rational individuals seeking to safeguard basic rights and qualities of life. One could not justify the existence of a given society based on arguments from tradition and political or religious authority. The influence of these thinkers would spread throughout Europe during the Enlightenment of the 18th century.

Enlightened Europeans often discussed their new philosophical ideas in salons or social clubs. Some of these clubs were professional associations of tradesmen, and adopted rituals of membership to establish their uniqueness. The Freemasons, originally an association of professional tradesmen such as stoneworkers (hence the name "masons"), was one such organization. With time, however, the society downplayed its professional affiliations to attract more members. By the mid-18th century, the Freemasons were primarily a philosophical club in which the latest intellectual trends would be discussed. Because of the society's relative exclusiveness and involvement in political thought, many prominent political leaders were members. Eventually, a number of other new societies would model themselves after the Freemasons, with the Bavarian Illuminati being among the most famous of them. (17)

The existence of these "secret societies" would intersect in important ways with the development of modern conspiracy theorists and their preoccupation with Jews. The democratic revolutions that swept through the West during the 18th century gave the new breed of political theorists a chance to put their ideas into practice. These revolutions caused social upheaval on unprecedented levels, and many people tried to understand the underlying reasons for the changes affecting their lives. The actual causes, of course, involved a complicated mixture of politics, religion, economics, and the contingencies of history. But most of us cannot, with any satisfaction, shake our fists in anger at impersonal social forces. We need to blame people for the perceived ills of society, and we need to imagine that these people are acting with established motives.

To many people, secret societies such as the Freemasons and Bavarian Illuminati seemed to be behind the sweeping changes occurring in their societies. After all, some prominent leaders belonged to these organizations, and political ideas were known topics of discussion at their meetings. As secret societies continued to spread and diversify across Europe, former members added to the growing paranoia by publicly "revealing" hysterically sordid details about life among their lodge brothers. (18) Their motives in spreading these exaggerated revelations varied from spite to ambitions of political favor, but in either case they filled the public mind with fantasies about secret rituals, dark oaths, and evil plots.

It was also at this time that public attention began turning toward the political rights of Jews. The ideals of the Enlightenment declared that societies should be open to participation by all men, regardless of their religion. But in practice, political leaders questioned whether Jews could become fully integrated members of their larger nations. The "enlightened despot" Joseph II granted some civic rights to Jews in southern...

<mod snip> This is a topic about 911. Please stick to the topic. </mod snip>

Black Uhlan wrote: »

I think you should read this piece from the Guardian about your propoganda source MEMRI.

Wow the Guardian attacking a group that defends Jews.

They are usually such great supporters of the Jewish people.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

The ADL is one of the most extremist websites on the net in my opinion. As I mentioned previously they have been caught out in a spy scandal devoiding them of any legitimacy. If this is your main source how can you expect to get any sembelance of a broader view?

The fact that you think the "ADL is one of the most extremist websites on the net" reveals a lot about you.

"Tracking "extremists"

The ADL keeps track of the activities of various "extremist" groups and movements.[11] According to ADL Director Abe Foxman, "Our mission is to monitor and expose those who are anti-Jewish, racist, anti-democratic, and violence-prone, and we monitor them primarily by reading publications and attending public meetings …. Because extremist organizations are highly secretive, sometimes ADL can learn of their activities only by using undercover sources … [who] function in a manner directly analogous to investigative journalists. Some have performed great service to the American people—for example, by uncovering the existence of right-wing extremist paramilitary training camps—with no recognition and at considerable personal risk."[12] A person apprehended in connection to the 2002 white supremacist terror plot had drawn a cartoon of himself blowing up the Boston offices of the ADL.[13]

The ADL regularly releases reports on anti-Semitism and extremist activities on the far left and the far right. For instance, as part of its Law Enforcement Agency Resource Network (L.E.A.R.N.), the ADL has published information about the Militia Movement[14] in America and a guide for law enforcement officials titled Officer Safety and Extremists.[15] An archive of "The Militia Watchdog" research on U.S. right-wing extremism (including groups not specifically cited as anti-Semitic) from 1995 to 2000 is also available on the ADL website.[14]

In the 1990s, some details of the ADL's monitoring activities became public and controversial, including the fact that the ADL had gathered information about some non-extremist groups."


Role in arrest of potential assassins of Barack Obama

In October 2008, the ADL reportedly assisted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) by providing, on request, information on Daniel Cowart and Paul Schlesselman (as well as their associates and contacts) and on their ties to the Supreme White Alliance. Shortly thereafter, the two men were arrested on charges of plotting to murder dozens of African Americans and plotting to assassinate President-elect Barack Obama.[16][17]


Defending other religions

As its goal is to defend not only Jews, but also "all citizens alike and to put an end forever to unjust and unfair discrimination against and ridicule of any sect or body of citizens," the ADL has periodically made statements against misrepresentations of other faiths. For example, when the anti-Mormon film "The God Makers" was produced, Rhonda M. Abrams, Central Pacific (San Francisco) Regional Director for the ADL wrote a critical review, including the following statement:

Had a similar movie been made with either Judaism or Catholicism as its target, it would be immediately denounced for the scurrilous piece that it is. I sincerely hope that people of all faiths will similarly repudiate "The Godmakers" as defamatory and untrue, and recognize it for what it truly represents—a challenge to the religious liberty of all.[10]


Separation of church and state

One of the ADL's major focuses is religious freedom for people of all faiths.[6] In the context of public schools, the ADL has taken the position that because Creationism and Intelligent design are religious beliefs, and the government is prohibited from endorsing the beliefs of any particular religion, they should not be taught in science classrooms: "The U.S. Constitution guarantees the rights of Americans to believe the religious theories of creation (as well as other theories) but it does not permit them to be taught in public school science classes."[7] Similarly, the ADL supports the legal precedent that it is unconstitutional for the government to post the Ten Commandments in courthouses, schools, and other public places: "True religious liberty means freedom from having the government impose the religion of the majority on all citizens."[8] The ADL has also condemned the public school Bible curriculum published by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, saying that it raises "serious constitutional problems" and "advocates the acceptance of one faith tradition's interpretation of the Bible over another."[9] The ADL opposed Proposition 8, and supported the Matthew Shepard Act.


Interfaith camp

ADL's New England Regional Office has also established a faith-based initiative called "The Interfaith Youth Leadership Program," better known as "Camp If," or Camp Interfaith. Involving teenagers of the Christian, Jewish, and Islamic faiths, the camp brings the teens together for a week at camp where the teens bond and learn about each other's cultures. The camp has emerged as a new attempt to foster good relations between younger members of the Abrahamic faiths.[27]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Defamation_League#Role_in_arrest_of_potential_assassins_of_Barack_Obama

Yes a very scary organization.

Here is a list of groups who I consider to be "the most extremist websites on the net"

http://www.bombsecurity.com/extremists.html

squod wrote: »

So what are we saying here. Exactly what does this have to do with the events of 9/11. I'm sure it's lovely reading n' all. But, why here?

Is this just more diversion?

Diversion from what, Israel's involvement in 9/11?

No i don't believe they knew anything.

Am I surprised people are involving Jews in a conspiracy?, No.

"I'm sure it's lovely reading n' all"

I was just responding to a poster if that is ok with you, who said the Anti-Defamation League was the most extremists organization on the internet.

A ridiculous statement i'm sure you'd agree.

squod wrote: »

I say it again, it's only you.

I thought it was you who brought up "the devious Jews might have been in on it" conspiracy?

and when it was repeatedly pointed out they were released without charge

"Look, I've said this already. My opinion can be changed.

Maybe if someone turns up and says 'here looks at this, heres an article proving these Isreali dudes were just a couple of dicks an' a fuggin mail man.'

Maybe then we'd have a debate on our hands.
At the minute I'm not convinced. That is all. "

Your opinion can't be changed, maybe if there's an article proving their innocence you'll change your mind. Maybe?

Why are you so entrenched in the idea of Israeli involvement?

Out of interest are you investigating any other Jewish conspiracies?