Jews urged to stop playing Holocaust victim

[Darranar]

Jews should stop "playing the victim" for the Holocaust, European respondents to an anti-Semitism poll have said.

The poll also revealed that 46% of those asked feel Jews in their nations have a "mentality and lifestyle" different to that of other citizens.

Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera commissioned the poll which was conducted in Italy, France, Belgium, Austria, Spain, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, and Britain.

...
About 40.5% said Jews in their country have "a particular relationship with money", nearly 18% said they feel Judaism is "intolerant", and almost 17% did not consider Jews "real" compatriots.

Al Jazeera
...............
It appears that anti-semitism is still a considerable threat. It should not be ignored.

[David Zephyr]

1. Well, Jews Were Victims of the Holocaust.

And I think that phrases like "playing the victim" --- in light of the horror and cruelty that 6 million women, men and children experienced and the hurt beyond measure that their loved ones suffered --- are malicious and maniacal and deserve universal condemnation.

[Darranar]

3. I agree.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. None of those groups

Including my own, has suffered as long or as thoroughly as Jews.

[mac2]

93. What about Africa?

I don't agree. It hasn't been one group but many.

[cantwealljustgetalong]

27. so lambs, after the slaughter...

be silent !!!...


YEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cassandra]

5. The numbers would have been...

indicitive of just as much bigotry as those are.

[GabysPoppy]

6. Would that make you happier?

[GabysPoppy]

4. Usually when one people post an article

They believe in it or are trying to make a point. Tell me this is a joke please. If you are not joking, I would really like to know what point you are making.

[Darranar]

10. The point...

is that anti-semitism still is a threat.

[GabysPoppy]

12. Might have been nice to see that comment

in your opening thread. It loses it's impact without it or as an afterthought or when you or questioned.

[Forkboy]

13. Doesn't lose it's impact at all

It seemed pretty clear that was the point of the thread to me :shrug:

[GabysPoppy]

14. Which words made it clear to you?

It passed me right by in the opening post.

[Forkboy]

16. The story itself

:shrug:

[GabysPoppy]

17. Oh really

Then why was it necessary for the original post to be edited 10 minutes after I raised the question if it's so obvious?

Your spin is admirable, but that's all it is.

[Darranar]

18. Oh, really?

You said it would have been nice to see the comment in the original post.

So I put it there.

[GabysPoppy]

19. WHEN YOU ORIGINALLY POSTED IT!!!!!!!

Aside from the fact you took it from Al-Jazeer. Do you really think their intention was to point out that anti-semitism is alive? Or do you think their intention was otherwise?

[Forkboy]

21. So question Al Jazeers intentions

instead of implying that the poster is the one with an agenda.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Darranar]

46. What, exactly, was wrong with the article?

In addition, how do you know that al-Jazeera is anti-semitic?

[Darranar]

52. Never mind.

[JohnLocke]

74. kick

[drewb]

47. I tend to agree with P.B. on immigration...

A stopped clock is still right twice a day...

:loveya:

[Darranar]

48. PB is wholly wrong on immigration.

[drewb]

61. I respect your opinion although I disagree.

:loveya:

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

51. Who are the "Israeli haters"?

[JohnLocke]

115. Good question.

Israel-haters:
An Israel hater is someone who seeks to demonize all of Israel's actions. He or she wants not only to criticize Israel, but portray it as the sole factor of all evil in the Middle East. The Israel-hater is not often overtly anti-Semitic in his or her feelings, but seeks to wrap them in a mantle of righteous criticism in Israel.

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gimel]

118. So you are saying...

The terms "good" and "evil" are relative. Then you go on to make an extreme value judgment about the state of the world. Value judgments are based on philosophical or religious affiliation or education.

Therefore, any claim to objectivity is lost from the start.

Solzhenitsyn is an outstanding writer, but those reverse values have emanated from prisons throughout history.

[goz]

119. Sorry but Good and Evil are absolutes! Absolutely...

It's like being pregnant. One cannot be "relatively" pregnant... One is or is not!

I see that my message to which you are responding has been deleted. I will try again to post it, but this time, I will censure myself as much as I can.

[JohnLocke]

122. Uh...I think you mean "censor," nor censure."

Apparently you're not censoring your censure, in a manner of speaking. :)

[goz]

124. Oups! That was the French word for censor. Sorry!

[Gimel]

123. Absolutes

when applied to the real world are always relative. There are no absolutes. If so, you are saying one side, the one you favor is absolute good, and the other is absolute evil. Approaching absolute evil was AH.

[goz]

125. Sorry again!

Precisely because Good and Evil are absolutes, I DO NOT apply them to human behaviour. Not the way you're implying, anyway. Good and Evil are CONCEPTS of absolutes. They DO NOT exist in reality. They are just markers, boundaries that are very useful for one to judge, measure a given human behaviour. As we say in French: "One judge a tree by (at?) its fruits."

When I chose the Ying/Yang symbol, I knew what I was doing. I always try to balance my judgements. Sometime, I forget myself, which is human I think. It's pretty annoying that someone else, on this Forum, that do not take as many precautions, is using it as well...

What is AH?

[Gimel]

126. We agree on that

but were expressing it differently. I thought that you were saying was to change good into evil or visa versa. When in fact, that yin-yang symbol should have a little yin the the yang and a little yang in the yin.

However, the viewing of one side evil and the other only good is one of the misconceptions in this conflict. Of course, portraying the IDF as soldiers in a rather infamous army of 60 years ago is doing just that. Maybe you'll see what I meant by AH, now.

While I've been accused of seeing he Israeli side as only good, it is not the case. I argue pro-Israel, but I know that humans make mistakes. I don't think the the IDF is evil. I don't think Ariel Sharon is evil. Horrible things happen, but evil is not the legitimate term to use.

[goz]

120. Facts, facts, facts...

I agree with JohnLocke. Israel is not the sole factor of all evil in the Middle East. It is THE MAIN ONE... It is also THE NUMBER ONE ROGUE STATE ON THE PLANET! That is according to the UN...

[JohnLocke]

121. Ha! and again, ha!

[Forkboy]

20. really

dont get upset because you're looking for something that isn't there.It was obvious to me,to you it wasn't.Don't blame us for your suspicions.

Everyone here has roundly denounced this poll.I'm not sure what you're looking for unless you believe darranar is posting it because he agrees with it,in which case my high opinion of you would drop considerably for being so blatantly wrong.

The only one spinning here is you,trying to portray the poster in a light that isn't true.And your spin isn't "admirable" at all...it's quite sad.

[rman]

129. except that the article shows no hate of jews

critisism and suspicion perhaps, but not hate.

[Darranar]

130. Oh, please...

You don't think stating that Jews have a "particular relationship with money" is anti-semitic?

[rman]

131. No i don't. Anti-semitic would be "i hate all jews".

Would saying that jews are relatively well represented in circles of power - something which many jews pride themselves on for being intelligent and resourcefull - would stating that truth be anti-semitic?
It would be another matter if people would also say that because of that, all jews must be imprisoned, or something like that. But that's not what people are saying. Of course one could argue that these people do want that even though they aren't saying it, but that would be jumping to conclusions.

If there's any group that's being resented by a significant part of the population, it is the muslims. After all, they belong to the same ethnic group to which the supposedly common enemy of the so called free world belongs: "terrorists". If anything, for the time being jews will have to make due with second place.

[Darranar]

132. Generalizations are inherently bigoted...

if someone were to say that "Muslims have a particular relationship with terrorism", would you accept that as perfectly okay?

[Forkboy]

7. Interesting line

"a particular relationship with money",

gee,not too bigoted and sterotypical :eyes:

[Gimel]

11. Compare the same study

In a write up in Haaretz, some of the emphasis is different. Also, I do not find the claim that al Jazeera makes "nearly 18% said they feel Judaism is "intolerant", and almost 17% did not consider Jews "real" compatriots" in the Haaretz report.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=387236&contrassID=1&subContrassID=8&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y

Edited: for correcting one word.

[Darranar]

15. Thanks for the link.

[Aidoneus]

23. segments from this

Last Update: 26/01/2004 21:38
European poll: 46% say Jews are 'different'
By Haaretz Service and Reuters

A poll of nine European nations that was released Monday found that 46 percent of respondents said Jews in their nations were "different," and 35 percent said Jews should stop "playing the victim" for the Holocaust.

Some 9 percent of the respondents said they "don't like or trust Jews," and 15 percent said "it would be better if Israel didn't exist."

--snip--

Asked if Jews in their countries had a "mentality and lifestyle" different than other citizens, 46 percent said yes. About 40.5 percent said Jews in their country had "a particular relationship with money" and 35.7 percent said Jews "should stop playing the victim for the Holocaust and the persecutions of 50 years ago."

--snip--

More than 71 percent of those polled said Israel should leave the occupied territories and Palestinians should stop attacking Israeli targets.

More than 68 percent said they believed Israel had a right to exist but the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was "making the wrong choices."

--snip--

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/387236.html

Though I obviously think of Israel in a way that is usually deemed as a horrendous heresy by Zionists, I cannot understand this sort of thinking about Jews themselves. In my own experience (apparently exceptional in this sense), for better or worse every Jew I've known has been pretty much like everyone else I've known. That's not always a good thing, but not all the same not "exceptional" so as to think they're any different. I can understand why certain sources would like people to think like this (from the usual racist suspects and Israel-Zionist ideologues included, for example of the latter those Israeli agents that bombed Egyptian & Iraqi Jews in the 50s to encourage settlement), but the storyline put forward about why "the Jews" are suchandsuch just isn't even plausible. It's a single issue, tied in with certain others, but for some reason some people (these numbers are low, but bothersome) consistantly buy into the same bullshit for reasons that I cannot quite rationalize (the anti-Muslim climate in the US now resembling how the Jews have been treated, for example--the exact same bullshit in a slightly different package, but nobody seems to learn).

There is nothing wrong with the al-J piece.. the sort of kneejerk response as above is just silly.

[Gimel]

32. Actually there is

First the al Jazeera title that Jews are urged to stop playing the victim for the Holocaust is misleading. Thirty-five percent is not close to a majority. That's in Europe where the Holocaust occurred, where one might expect more sensitivity to the issue. so it is not a reflection on Jewish thought, but on European attitudes. Are Jews playing the Holocaust to gain status as victims? Only a third of those polled in Europe think so. I doubt that that high would think so in the US. In fact, compare it to the survey done in the US that I posted recently. I'll add the URL when I find that thread.

Here is the URL on the US survey:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1074931451313

The title of the Haaretz article European poll: 46% say Jews are 'different' at least quotes the most statistically significant finding. That is also only roughly close to a half of the persons questioned.

The knee-jerk response is, I'm afraid, your own.

I noticed some differences in reporting. al Jazeera has been know to misrepresent facts, such a s headlining the mayor of Ramala as a Knesset MK.

[drdon326]

24. Gee Darranar....

i thought nothing would disgust me....but seeing what
you posted and your reaction and apparent editing,
I stand corrected.

unbelieveable.

[Aidoneus]

25. what?!

[Darranar]

26. You know what really is unbelievable?

I came across this article during a perusal of Al-Jazeera's news for the day. It concerned me (as do all forms of bigotry), so I posted it on DU, assuming, apparentally foolishly, that since this is a progressive site and not a David Dukish hate site, it would be assumed that I strongly disagreed with the views expressed in the poll and that I posted it because I was concerned, not because I agreed.

I eventually realized that I had apparentally made a mistake in that assumption, so I added my thoughts to the original post to clarify my position.

What, exactly, I did to 'disgust' anyone is beyond me.

[GabysPoppy]

28. The addition was too little and too late

[Darranar]

29. Why was it necessary at all?

It doesn't take a genius to realize that this poll very clearly showed anti-semitic attitudes.

This is a progressive forum. The assumption, therefore, should be that posters are progressive (and therefore anti-bigotry), until proven otherwise. Since I have said nothing whatsoever in any of my posts to indicate that I condone anti-semitism in any way, shape or form, there is no way anyone could logically come to the conclusion that I condone the anti-semitic attitudes of many of those who responded to the poll.

If a DUer posted a thread about Bush's approval ratings going up, and added no comment, does that indicate that he is supportive of Bush? Does it matter whether the source is the LA Times or Fox News?

[GabysPoppy]

30. No your haven't

Your posts always reflect the seriousness of anti-Semites. That is why it totally blew my mind that you posted it without a comment. If you choose to acknowledge that we haven't seen some anti-semitic posts before I can't argue with you. But posted by yourself and from that shit rag was a bit much to handle. From others I would not have been surprised. But from you?

[Darranar]

31. I found it...

at "that shit rag", which is why I posted their article.

Of course there have been anti-semitic posts in the past. If I had posted such junk, you would have much reason to believe that my motive in posting this was anti-semitic. But I have not, as you yourself admit...

Once again, this is a progressive site. Progressives generally tend to be against bigotry; in fact, bigotry is inherently anti-progressive. The assumption, therefore, should be that posters here are progressive, and hence a post such as the one starting this thread was not posted out of malice towards Jews.

I posted this without a comment because I assumed that no comment was necessary, knowing that this is a progressive site. I added my thoughts later to clarify my position, since it seemed to be unclear to some.

[Tinoire]

34. Thank you Darranar for clearly demonstrating what the Left is about

the difference between the two sides is quite... stark. My hat is off to you. The last thing I want is to see this Progressive site or the Democratic Party colored as hateful & bigotted.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnLocke]

35. Fuck Al-Jazeera

Al Jazeera should be banned from this forum.

[Darranar]

36. Why?

[JohnLocke]

37. Because of its role as Isreali-Jew-America Hater

They believe that everything America and Isreal stands for is evil. That's reason enough.

[Darranar]

38. They do?

How do you know this?

[JohnLocke]

39. I read.

[Darranar]

40. What, exactly, have you read that would indicate such a thing?

[Forkboy]

41. Kick

[thebigidea]

42. They just aren't reporting on all the GOOD THINGS going on in Iraq

we're making such GOOD PROGRESS, and they insist on only covering the carnage - not uplifting stories about new schools and cute kittens.

We should bomb their offices some more to teach them a lesson on responsible journalism.

[JohnLocke]

53. What the hell does this have to do with Iraq?

As long as we're talking about things that have no beraing on the discussion -- I have a dog.

[Darranar]

50. I'd appreciate an answer eventually.

[Forkboy]

54. Still waiting

You came back to this thread but forgot to back up your charge.I would think,if you can read as you say,that it shouldn't be too difficult,no?

[JohnLocke]

59. Try the above article.

[Darranar]

60. What about the above article?

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnLocke]

63. The headline is highly misleading and inflammatory.

[Darranar]

64. How so?

Thirty-five percent of Europeans polled thought the Jews should stop "playing the victim" for the Holocaust.

So aren't they urging Jews to stop "playing Holocaust victim" as it says in the headline?

Nowhere in the article was it said or implied that Aljazeera supported such urgings.

The only way that one could come to the conclusion that the article is anti-semitic is with the assumption that Aljazeera is anti-semitic. If that was so, the motive behind this article would be clear, and I would agree with you that the article was anti-semitic.

But the only evidence you have given is the article itself.

[GabysPoppy]

65. The assumption that Aljazeera is anti-semitic?

That wouldn't be going out on the limb very far.

[Darranar]

66. Well...

in that case it shouldn't be too hard to find evidence to back it up.

[JohnLocke]

67. The headline implies support

They should have said:

"35% of Europeans believe Jews 'play Holocaust victim,'" not "Jews urged to stop playing holocaust victim."

[Darranar]

72. That would have been more descriptive...

but I don't see how it would have been less biased.

[JohnLocke]

68. Try this:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/223CFB2F-3FDA-46B5-85A8-92B836D03719.htm

Bias in the article:

The headline: "The apartheid wall"
The subhead: "The latest indignity endured by the Palestinian people is the erection of the separation wall."

Oh, yeah, that's not biased at all. </sarcasm>

[Forkboy]

69. It's not

Did you ever stop to think the bias might be yours?

[JohnLocke]

70. Yes, I am biased.

But a "news source" shouldn't be.

[Forkboy]

71. And they're not

your admitted bias just makes it seem that way.

[Vladimir]

108. and which unbiased news sources

have you read lately? Frankly, I enjoy Al-Jazeera, if only because its an antidote to the mainstream media. Whatever anti-Israel bias it has is more than nullifies by the racist anti-Muslim shite spewed by prectically every other channel out there.

V

[GabysPoppy]

109. But we are told by some here

that Al-Jazeer has no anti-Israel bias at all. Your "every other channel" statement might be a touch over the hill but hell, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[Vladimir]

110. I can't speak for others

but its pretty obvious to me that Al-Jazeera has an agenda. They would be mad not to, but elaborating on this probably falls in the I/P forum.

My point was that if you ban them, you have to ban all the media with an anti-Palestinian bias, and then we'd have some boring forums.

V

[GabysPoppy]

111. Fair enough - n/t

[adriennui]

116. anti-muslim?

i don't see that in the media. one can certainly be pro-israel or pro-US without being anti-muslim. the concepts are mutually exclusive, i'm pro-israel but i certainly have nothing against islam.i can't deny though, that i have a fear and intense anger at the wahabbis who preach intolerance and hatred in their schools. and as a woman their misogyny makes me ill.


as a new member of DU (although i've been a lurker for a long time), i'm amazed at the vitriol.

[Aussie_Hillbilly]

134. Siberia

as a new member of DU (although i've been a lurker for a long time), i'm amazed at the vitriol.

LOL. That is why I/P discussions are held in this remote sub-forum. Like a virtual Siberia. Less chance of newbies finding it and fleeing. :)

i'm pro-israel but i certainly have nothing against islam

I feel the same, although what is good for Israel is a matter of some debate here. I think posters here agree on principles more than you would think from reading the posts. It is an emotive topic, and tends to polarise debate.

Welcome to DU :toast:

[Jim Sagle]

107. Yes it is.

[Darranar]

73. Of course it's biased...

but that's not what we were discussing.

[Imperialism Inc.]

128. Ok but what does that have to do with Jews as a race or religion.

That a news source often has a bias is not the question is it?

The question was whether or not they were anti-Semitic. Right?

[BrokenSegue]

43. yeah so..

You can question the bias of a news organization. (What they choose to report) How often though can you attack the information's validity. There are some stories which only it can report on.

Fox news has a bias against liberals but we haven't banned news reports from them. It's useful to here what the fools have to say.

[Freedom of Speech]

45. World Net Daily is banned from DU and

they are in NO way more offensive than al Jazeera.

[BrokenSegue]

55. And I don't support that...

Our world of free speech shouldn't be hampered by sources of information. Sure the content may be regulated by zealous moderators (Strike me down if it weren't so) the source of information shouldn't be damed. The validity of a source may be questioned ( and used as a counter point) but the evidence must be allowed.

[JohnLocke]

56. But there are some sources whose value is always in question...

and therefore they should be restricted. Yes, it might be questioned, and the material proved wrong, but posting such a thing wastes everybody's time.

[Darranar]

57. Post #40 is waiting for your reply.

[Forkboy]

58. Why wont you answer this John?

[Sorry.]

84. it's funny

because Al-Jazeera is just the remnants of the BBC's old middle east bureau. It's only agenda is journalism and making money.
It's practically western propaganda compared to the state broadcasters that make up most of the rest of the media in the area.

It's status as some kind of extremist arab organisation is fox news fiction, which I'm afraid you've bought, hook-line-and-sinker.

[kalian]

76. Oh geez...."they hate us because of our freedoms"....

:eyes: Ummm...could you tell me again exactly WHAT freedoms are
left in this country?
Thx for the censorship tip....Ashcroft would be proud.

[mac2]

91. Bin Laden & Suddam didn't take our freedoms and way of life...

this President and Congress did that on their own.

[MikeGalos]

97. There are still quite a few

otherwise Bush wouldn't want a second term.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnLocke]

77. Kick

[Darranar]

78. Please reply...

to posts #66, #72, and #73.

[drdon326]

79. unbelieveable.

.

[JohnLocke]

80. You said it. (nt)

[Sorry.]

81. antisemitism

from my experience of living in a european country, antisemitism simply isn't an issue. I never hear antisemitic comments and Israeli friends say they haven't experienced significant levels of racism for about a decade or so (although the same is not so true of France ...)

I'd be interested to know how many people were polled.

[MikeGalos]

82. There have been multiple polls

At least some of them very statistically valid with large polled groups and proper techniques and methods used.

While you may not have seen it, every poll shows a growth in Anti-Semitism in Europe that is the worst it has been since the end of the Holocaust. Even the governments involved are now saying that there's a growing problem.

I'm glad you haven't seen it but it's there and involving more than one country.

Oh, and in case you think I'm picking on Europe, theres a statistically significant growth of anti-Semitism in the US and Asia as well.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[_Jumper_]

88. Europeans are light years behind us and Canada in tolerance

http://eumc.eu.int/eumc/material/doc/3ec508c004aec_doc_EN.pdf

Read the EE's 2000 report on racism and xenophobia. The overwhelming majority of people in each country oppose something as basic is outlawing discrimination against minorities.

[MikeGalos]

95. Last I'd heard

not a single Jewish citizen of France, or Germany, or, for that matter, the US voted for Sharon.

But, you seem to think that racism is OK if any member of the group hated disagrees with your view of regional politics. Tell us, if I don't like the policies of the Saudi royal family is it OK for me to launch attacks on every Moslem in the world? How about if I don't like the policies of the new government in Haiti, does that mean it's understandable if I join the KKK? By the rules you use about anti-Semitism and Israel, you'd either have to think those would be OK as well or you've got some serious hypocricy to answer...

[Darranar]

98. Indeed...

though that point seems to be lost on some of the right-wing hypocrites defending Israel.

For instance, the Israeli government seems to think that it represents the Jews. The Washington Jewish Week seems to think that AIPAC is a "Jewish cause". Various articles from the JTA and others have insinuated that the Jews will vote for the most "pro-Israel" candidate, depicting the battle for Jewish votes and money as a battle over who can agree most with Ariel Sharon. The list goes on.

[MikeGalos]

99. The way you worded it they're right

AIPAC is "a" Jewish cause. So is the Democratic Party. So is the ACLU. So are hundreds of other causes. Big deal. That hardly means every Jew in the US supports any of them. But, from some of the postings you see it's assumed on both the right and the left that we Jews get some memo each morning to tell us who we support and what we think.

It's hardly as though candidates tailor their policies to appeal to 2.2% of the population even if it is a 2.2% that tends to vote and be politically active at a higher than average rate.

Face it, there are more Klan members and supporters in the US then there are Jewish voters. It's not as though George "Fuck the Jews" H. W. Bush or Richard "Aren't you going to pray with me, Jew boy" Nixon got elected with lots of Jewish support and get elected they did.

Nixon, in fact, got his start in politics by running an anti-Semitic campaign with phone trees calling WASP neighborhoods to tell them not to vote for Douglas because her husband was a Jew - Nixon won.

[Darranar]

100. Well...

I think "Jewish cause" implies more than "cause supported by some Jews", but what perhaps gets the point across more effectively is the fact that the Washington Jewish Week would never have referred to, say, Peace Now or Tikkun in the same way - though they are both causes supported by many Jews, including this one.

I didn't mean to imply that this sort of thing only came from the Right. I was referring mostly to the Jewish Right (AIPAC and similar organizations), because if the mainstream Jewish Left (Tikkun, APN, etc) had the same attitude towards Jewish opinions they would be denying their own existence. I agree with you that many leftists seem to hold the same views in regard to Jewish opinion; all one needs to do is read CounterPunch articles regularly to notice such a trend (though, to be fair, they once had an article by a leftist Jew voicing the opposite opinion).

I don't need to "face" anything in regard to Jewish votes. I don't believe that the Democratic establishments' fanatic support for Ariel Sharon has much to do with votes at all; most Democrats disagree with the man, including the vast majority of the pro-Israel posters on this board. Even if this was in doubt, the Democrats are running against a guy whose grandfather aided Hitler and made a fortune off the slaughter of the Holocaust, not to mention typical Republican views of the US being a "Christian nation"; the Dems hold the "Jewish vote", and they aren't going to lose it anytime soon. This is of course ignoring the approximately equal number of Muslims, many of which ordinarily would vote Republican but might switch over such issues.

[MikeGalos]

101. Fanatic Support of Sharon?

Where did you dream that one up? I have yet to hear ANYBODY fanatically defend Sharon. At best, he gets defended purely as an elected official. He's the PM and like it or not he IS the head of government.

Please, let me know who in the Democratic Party is a fanatic supporter of Sharon. I've never heard of one.

BTW: I'd be surprised if any paper that referred to AIPAC as "a Jewish cause" also didn't refer to Tikkun in the same way and seriously question your assumption that they don't. Please, let us know what phrase they use to refer to Tikkun.

[Darranar]

102. Perhaps...

those Democrats who have been attacking Bush for telling Sharon to show "restraint"?

Perhaps John Kerry, who refuses to criticize Israel's "security fence" at all while Bush says that it's a problem?

Nancy Pelosi and Joe Lieberman also fit into this category, as do most of the Democratic candidates and Democratic leadership.

I'm not sure how the Washington Jewish Week refers to the various Jewish leftist organizations; I think it highly unlikely, however, from what I know of their style, that they refer to them in the same way.

[MikeGalos]

103. So there aren't any?

Or are you now saying that supporting each individual policy is now "Fanatic Support for Sharon" rather than support for an individual policy.

On the other topic, so I guess you were making that up as you went along and hoped nobody would call you on it?

[Darranar]

104. I think agreeing with everything someone does...

is fanatic support for that person, yes.

No, I was not making it up. I have never read the Washington Jewish Week refer to a left-wing Jewish organization as a "Jewish cause". Their bias in favor of Israel is quite obvious, as is their view of Jewish opinions. This particular example was simply the only one I remember clearly.

BTW, Foxman apparentally thinks that the Dems won't do well with the Jewish community unless they adopt Bush's policy of only mild talk and no action. Care to comment?

The thread is here.

[MikeGalos]

105. You seem to confuse

Left-wing and not being pro-Israel. Please stop making that assumption. I've got both left-wing and pro-Israel history going back decades for both as do the vast majority of liberals. Hence the DNC position on Israel. (And no, it isn't because they fear losing 2% of the electorate to the Republicans. If anything they assume the Jewish vote is so safe that they can ignore it.)

As for the Foxman statement, if you can give me a link so I see the actual quote in context rather than your interpretation of what he said with no context, I'll be happy to comment.

[Darranar]

106. "Left-wing" is meant as a reference...

to positions on Israel/Palestine only.

I am very well aware that some of the most ardent hawks - people who would be considered quite right-wing in Israel - are also advocates of economic justice to such a degree that they are unquestionably left-wing in regard to the US political spectrum.

If you don't like the term, simply substitute "pro-Palestinian" and the point will get across.

I provided a link to the thread. The article is posted there, including the exact quote.

[MikeGalos]

112. And again

you make the egocentric mistake of saying that the only true "left-wing" view on a topic you like is your own.

There are a LOT of left-wing people here in the US that both oppose Sharon, strongly support Israel and vehemently oppose the terrorist thugs that pass as leadership in the PA.

To suggest that only those who agree with you are "left-wing" and any who oppose you are somehow suspect is both vain and ludicrous.

[Darranar]

113. There is no point in continuing this argument...

consider it egocentric if you wish, but as I said in my last post, simply substitute "pro-Palestinian" if you don't like it.

Now, would you please actually respond to what I was saying before you brought up this matter?

[mac2]

92. Why would you expect less?

The whole ME is a mess because of Bush, Inc. Sharon has his permission to move into Palestine. Killing and war is on the rise again.

USA poll shows Americans on the whole don't hate the people of Israel..only it's leadership. They want both Israel and Palenstine to live in peace and have their own states.

What else can they do when leadership fails to listen to them?

[PATRICK]

83. Pretty much then like

racism in America. The same survey about blacks would uncover even uglier lingering racist stereotypical ideas in the common opinion. You have to have many generations of continued relentless fight against this disease and mainly to live in such peace and harmony the issue would fade. However, I think many surprising old hates and prejudices linger for many centuries, and in the case of women back into the unknown prehistory of mankind. They can surface whenever social conditions and attached evil attitudes exploit them even among people who seemingly had no cultural exposure to the ideas OR the people in question.

History has been a short brutal affair. Human evil probably can go on much longer that its causal explanation. Most mentally lazy people don't even know themselves or their history or their nature or their ideals or anything except myths and needs.

[durutti]

85. Deeply troubling.

I'd be interested in seeing the results of this survery as compared to similar ones taken before the current intifada.

[MikeGalos]

86. They're out there

I DO know that anti-Semitism in the US tends, like all racism and bigotry, to be tied to the economy. The US studies show bigotry tends to go up when Republicans are in office and down with Democrats and that also tends to track the economy.

So:
Republican - bad economy - increase in anti-Semitism
Democrat - good economy - decrease in anti-Semitism

If you want to prove it's all Israel's fault. Good luck. No study has shown a correlation. (Although there's no shortage of people wanting to find some way of blaming the Jews for the existance of Jew haters, the data doesn't back up their hatred.)

[drdon326]

89. kick

.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MikeGalos]

96. Hmmm

<EDIT NOTE: This message was a reply to a post that suggested in the words used below for three other groups, that Jews are responsible for anti-Semitism. Thanks to the mods for deleting it. I'm adding this note to show the context of my reply.>

-------------------------------------------


What are Blacks doing to change this perception by the Klan?
Or do they just continue down the same path of screaming racism? Do they ask themselves if others may have a point? Why do they say it?

What are Gays doing to change this perception by homophobes?
Or do they just continue down the same path of screaming homophobia? Do they ask themselves if others may have a point? Why do they say it?

What are Women doing to change this perception by sexists?
Or do they just continue down the same path of screaming sexism? Do they ask themselves if others may have a point? Why do they say it?

Do you ask the victim of bigotry to justify their existance in any other cases or is it something you only reserve to spew out when Jews are the targets of bigotry and racism?

Since when do we spend our time telling victims of bigotry that it's really their fault that they're hated because they haven't spent more time making bigots happy?

What an absolutely disgusting view.

[drdon326]

114. kick

.

[JohnLocke]

127. piggyback-kick.

[Sorry.]

133. a few points ...

I'd be interested to see the age distribution of this poll. My suspicion would be that older people would be disproportionately antisemitic, as would the muslim community.

I'd also like to know if it was up or down on the last time a similar poll was conducted. I'd guess that it's probably fairly unchanged.

It should be pointed out that these responses could just as easily represent simple prejudice rather than active hatred. Most of my grandfather's generation have pretty strange views about other cultures - but they also risked their lives fighting Fascism.

Regarding the 'playing the victim' question. As the poll suggests that it's bit more of a widespread opinion. It's related to disgust at what the IDF does in the occupied territories, and the way that the Israeli government seems to use anti-semitism as a stick to beat Europeans who suggest their actions are wrong.

[no name no slogan]

137. Curious about age, too

IMHO, the survivors of WWII would probably be the least anti-Semetic of those polled, mainly because there was such strong action by European governments from 1945 through the 70s to eliminate such perceptions.

However, along with the rise of economic and social conservatism in the 1980s (think Thatcherism/Reaganism) there was also a strong rise in racism and anti-Semetism among European youth.

In Britain, the overtly racist National Front began to poll in the double digits in many burroughs that were once Labour strongholds, and many other right-wing/skinhead/nativist groups grew stronger on the continent as well-- especially in places where economic troubles impacted the working class hardest.

The young people, IMHO, may still be experiencing the "hangover" of the racism from 20 years ago, and may actually be the most racist in some respects-- witness the banning of wearing hijab in French public schools by Muslim women.

Unfortunately, this is something where all good people need to be ever vigilant: progressives, liberals, conservatives, everyone. We cannot forget the crimes of the past, but at the same time, we cannot turn a blind eye to the crimes of the present, either.

[JohnLocke]

135. Kick

[JohnLocke]

136. Kick (nt).