Is Anti-Zionism the Same as Anti-Semitism?

[rosends]

Again I've seen it all before, read about it for years.

You see the approach isn't to justify this or that act of violence or explain this or that case as due to some details of which we are unaware, no, that isn't the aproach.

Then what is the approach? denial, complete blatant denial, we are asked to not trust our own eyes and ears, we are told that we have completely misjudged the situation, that the reality is the exact opposite of what or common sense reveals to us.

This is how Hitler demonized the Jews, not on some case by case examples but as a complete narrative, Jews are a threat to Germans and Germany, they are akin to rats, they refuse assimilate, they cannot be trusted.

It's sad, truly sad that you embrace the same strategy to lie about victims as the Nazis did to lie about Jews.

As I said already I don't need a Nazi to "explain" Nazism to me, we didn't need it 80 years ago when my ancestors fought against them and we didn't accept their claptrap at Nuremberg either.

You cannot fool me.

I can't fool you because you have already been fooled. That's a you problem. Keep avoiding so you don't risk learning anything.

 

[Churchill]

I can't fool you because you have already been fooled. That's a you problem. Keep avoiding so you don't risk learning anything.

The Nazis used a similar retort when accused of crimes against humanity. You see I learned from the Holocaust, from history and that's why I can't be fooled. You've learned nothing from it.

 

[rosends]

The Nazis used a similar retort when accused of crimes against humanity. You see I learned from the Holocaust, from history and that's why I can't be fooled.

You claim this and yet you know nothing. Fascinating. Just make sure you don't ask a mathematician about math. You might learn something.

 

[Churchill]

You claim this and yet you know nothing.

How did you establish that? by me disagreeing with you?

Fascinating. Just make sure you don't ask a mathematician about math.

Asking a mathematician about mathematics is not analogous to asking a Nazi about Nazism.

You might learn something.

But not from you.

 

[rosends]

How did you establish that? by me disagreeing with you?

No, by your making claims that show ignorance. You know, your fruits.

Asking a mathematician about mathematics is not analogous to asking a Nazi about Nazism.

Asking an expert about an area of personal knowledge and expertise? Yeah...totally different

But not from you.

Because you might learn something. Got it.

 

[Churchill]

No, by your making claims that show ignorance. You know, your fruits.

Asking an expert about an area of personal knowledge and expertise? Yeah...totally different

So you'd believe a Nazi if he said Jews were a threat to Germany, likes rats they must be ejected from society, an inferior race of primitives etc?

Because you might learn something. Got it.

Like you might learn something from reading Mein Kampf? start to see Hitler and the Nazis as victims of a huge Jewish conspiracy? correct the unfair interpretation of their ideology all these years?

You're an idiot and any rational open minded person reading this conversation will quickly come to see that.

 

[rosends]

So you'd believe a Nazi if he said Jews were a threat to Germany

No, I would believe a Nazi if he said that a core element of Nazi belief was that Jews are a threat to Germany.

, likes rats they must be ejected from society, an inferior race of primitives etc?

If a Nazi told me that those were beliefs of Nazism, I would believe him. I guess you wouldn't.

Like you might learn something from reading Mein Kampf? start to see Hitler and the Nazis as victims of a huge Jewish conspiracy?

Not sure why you have gone so far off the rails. Try to make sense and stick with relevant points.

 

[Churchill]

No, I would believe a Nazi if he said that a core element of Nazi belief was that Jews are a threat to Germany.

But not if he said Jews were a threat to Germany, were akin to rats? after all, as you say, he's an expert why not believe him? you might learn something.

If a Nazi told me that those were beliefs of Nazism, I would believe him. I guess you wouldn't.

But not if he told you his beliefs were true? facts based on evidence? that the Holocaust was justified?

Not sure why you have gone so far off the rails. Try to make sense and stick with relevant points.

If you're confused then I can't help you, don't start debates if you are ill prepared.

There, now you've learned something.

 

[rosends]

But not if he said Jews were a threat to Germany, were akin to rats? after all, as you say, he's an expert why not believe him? you might learn something.

I am not asking him about his opinion, but about the stance/position of his ideology. Try to keep focus.

But not if he told you his beliefs were true? facts based on evidence?

I'm not asking that. The question was whether an expert in a group can define that group. You are having a hard time sticking to the point, aren't you? Glad I could help.

 

[Anarchy666]

Most of the time, it is. But not always.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

Like you might learn something from reading Mein Kampf?

The most boring book l’ve ever read.

 

[Churchill]

I am not asking him about his opinion, but about the stance/position of his ideology. Try to keep focus.

His opinions reflect his ideology. That's why Nazis exterminated six million Jews, their devotion to the ideology led to them act upon those beliefs.

I'm not asking that. The question was whether an expert in a group can define that group.

No, the question was whether one should trust a purported expert in a group when what they say contradicts the actions of said group. Why do you think a Nazi is the best source of information of Nazism? What do you do when the claims of a Nazi are contrary to observed actions of Nazis?

You are having a hard time sticking to the point, aren't you? Glad I could help.

 

[BackAgain]

Yes, get's you thinking doesn't it.

No. Your fallacies and would-be “arguments” only make me laugh harder at you, Pooh.

I don't know the answer.

A fine confession.

I chose Nazi Germany as an example because it's in the past, over and we can use hindsight to help answer it.

No. You were attempting to use a fallacy to make your “position” seem as though it could have had any merit. It doesn’t.

Since you can't answer whether it had a right to exist,

Can’t? A refusal to play your childish games is not an inability.

what chance do we have of answering the question with respect to Israel?

Since there is no valid nexus between your fraudulent question and the one I asked, you shouldn’t have any difficulty answering it. But I knew you wouldn’t. And it’s obvious why you instead chose to suck, cover and run away.

I mean explain please how do we decide if some state has a "right" to exist or not, what is the test we must apply?

That’s not the worst question a poseur like you could ask, Pooh. I’m mildly surprised.

But who says it’s up to you?

 

[rosends]

His opinions reflect his ideology.

Or they don't. That's why i would ask his ideology, not his opinions.

That's why Nazis exterminated six million Jews, their devotion to the ideology led to them act upon those beliefs.

Right -- so we can talk about the beliefs.

No, the question was whether one should trust a purported expert in a group when what they say contradicts the actions of said group.

So if a Nazi says "Nazism says that Jews are inferior and need to be killed" you wouldn't believe him. Got it. You would wait until he actually kills someone to believe that about the group.

Why do you think a Nazi is the best source of information of Nazism? What do you do when the claims of a Nazi are contrary to observed actions of Nazis?

Then I continue to believe that the ideology of Nazism is as explained. If the Nazi goes and buys ice cream, I don't connect it to his beliefs.

 

[Churchill]

No. Your fallacies and would-be “arguments” only make me laugh harder at you, Pooh.

A fine confession.

No. You were attempting to use a fallacy to make your “position” seem as though it could have had any merit. It doesn’t.

Can’t? A refusal to play your childish games is not an inability.

Since there is no valid nexus between your fraudulent question and the one I asked, you shouldn’t have any difficulty answering it. But I knew you wouldn’t. And it’s obvious why you instead chose to suck, cover and run away.

That’s not the worst question a poseur like you could ask, Pooh. I’m mildly surprised.

But who says it’s up to you?

Tell me, what is the methodology for deciding if some country "has a right to exist"? If you don't know then say so, if you do know then tell me what that methodology is and we can apply it to Israel.

The question is meaningless, who decides the "rights" of countries with respect to other countries? ridiculous question when all said and done.

 

[BackAgain]

Tell me, what is the methodology for deciding if some country "has a right to exist"?

I already told you. It’s not up to you.

If you don't know then say so, if you do know then tell me what that methodology is.

It isn’t up to you.

The question is meaningless, who decides the "rights" of countries with respect to other countries?

Why should you — or any of your rabidly anti Semitic fellow fascist pricks — have any say in whether Israel has a right to exist? We all see (plainly) that you’re one of life’s imbeciles who buys into crap like the Protocol of the Elders of Zion. But you still don’t get a vote on the right of Israel to exist as a nation.

And scumbags like you don’t even grasp that your faux “analogy” to the right of nations to oppose Hitler and Nazi Germany is entirely fallacious.

 

[Churchill]

I already told you. It’s not up to you.

So there's no process we can follow to decide if a state has a right to exist, gotit.

It isn’t up to you.

What isn't?

Why should you — or any of your rabidly anti Semitic fellow fascist pricks — have any say in whether Israel has a right to exist?

Why did you ask my opinion then?

We all see (plainly) that you’re one of life’s imbeciles who buys into crap like the Protocol of the Elders of Zion. But you still don’t get a vote on the right of Israel to exist as a nation.

Where did I assert I had such a right? where did I mention said "protocol"?

And scumbags like you don’t even grasp that your faux “analogy” to the right of nations to oppose Hitler and Nazi Germany is entirely fallacious.

I never said anything about opposition to Nazi Germany, get new spectacles. I asked if Nazi Germany ever had a right to exist and you don't seem to have an answer, that's because you don't know what you're rambling about, all you do is ask meaningless questions.

Why is the question "Does Israel have a right to exist" a legitimate question but "Did Nazi Germany have a right to exist" not a legitimate question?

You are confused, bad tempered, emotional and uneducated.

 

[BackAgain]

So there's no process we can follow to decide if a state has a right to exist, gotit.

You don’t “got it.” You’re far too simple minded. Already told you; it’s not a choice that’s up to an asshole like you, Pooh.

What isn't?

Whether Israel has a right to exist. You moron.

Why did you ask my opinion then?

I felt it would be helpful to a discussion to expose you for what you are. And it worked.
Since we can all see with perfect clarity that you’re one of the diseased scumbags who would deny Israel a right to exist, the question was more rhetorical than anything else. But, it still isn’t up to you. Not should it be.

Where did I assert I had such a right? where did I mention said protocol?

I don’t recall saying that you had said any such thing. It’s a statement of fact regardless of whether you acknowledge it or not.

I never said anything about opposition to Nazi Germany, get new spectacles.

Actually, you assuole, you did. Stop lying.

I asked if Nazi Germany ever had a right to exist and you don't seem to have an answer,

Nazi Germany may have had a right to exist UNTIL Hitler had its military attack and invade other nations. At that point, we all had a right to deny its continued existence. You really are too stupid to grasp any of this.

that's because you don't know what you're rambling about,

I’m not rambling. And I do know what I’m talking about. I suspect even a retard like you understands it, too. But since you can’t refute anything, you simply lie and deny.

all you do is ask meaningless questions.

Wrong again, Pooh. All you do is run away from reality. You’re an anti Semitic piece of shit. And it’s that hateful retardation that “forms” all of your vile opinions.

 

[Churchill]

You don’t “got it.” You’re far too simple minded. Already told you; it’s not a choice that’s up to an asshole like you, Pooh.

Whether Israel has a right to exist. You moron.

I felt it would be helpful to a discussion to expose you for what you are. And it worked.
Since we can all see with perfect clarity that you’re one of the diseased scumbags who would deny Israel a right to exist, the question was more rhetorical than anything else. But, it still isn’t up to you. Not should it be.



I don’t recall saying that you had said any such thing. It’s a statement of fact regardless of whether you acknowledge it or not.

Actually, you assuole, you did. Stop lying.

Nazi Germany may have had a right to exist UNTIL Hitler had its military attack and invade other nations. At that point, we all had a right to deny its continued existence. You really are too stupid to grasp any of this.

I’m not rambling. And I do know what I’m talking about. I suspect even a retard like you understands it, too. But since you can’t refute anything, you simply lie and deny.

Wrong again, Pooh. All you do is run away from reality. You’re an anti Semitic piece of shit. And it’s that hateful retardation that “forms” all of your vile opinions.

You ask me the meaningless question "does Israel have a right to exist" and then you tell me "it's not up to you" !

You then throw in the tired canard "you’re an anti Semitic piece of shit" in attempt to divert the discussion because you can't engage like an adult, only a petulant spoiled brat. When logic fails you why not introduce theatrics and hysteria!

Anyway you finally grew a pair and said "Nazi Germany may have had a right to exist UNTIL Hitler had its military attack and invade other nations" (but persecution of Jews and Kristallnacht before the war was OK with you - and you call me an antisemite!)

So you'll agree Nazi Germany (at some point) lost the right to exist but that did not equate to the destruction of Germany or all Germans did it? No, the cessation of the Third Reich did not mean the destruction of Germany and all Germans.

So if someone were to say "Zionist Israel has no right to exist" that would not mean Israel and all Jews must be destroyed - does it asshole?

You'll learn, slowly but I think you made some progress today.

 

[Churchill]

You don’t “got it.” You’re far too simple minded. Already told you; it’s not a choice that’s up to an asshole like you, Pooh.

Whether Israel has a right to exist. You moron.

I felt it would be helpful to a discussion to expose you for what you are. And it worked.
Since we can all see with perfect clarity that you’re one of the diseased scumbags who would deny Israel a right to exist, the question was more rhetorical than anything else. But, it still isn’t up to you. Not should it be.



I don’t recall saying that you had said any such thing. It’s a statement of fact regardless of whether you acknowledge it or not.

Actually, you assuole, you did. Stop lying.

Nazi Germany may have had a right to exist UNTIL Hitler had its military attack and invade other nations. At that point, we all had a right to deny its continued existence. You really are too stupid to grasp any of this.

I’m not rambling. And I do know what I’m talking about. I suspect even a retard like you understands it, too. But since you can’t refute anything, you simply lie and deny.

Wrong again, Pooh. All you do is run away from reality. You’re an anti Semitic piece of shit. And it’s that hateful retardation that “forms” all of your vile opinions.

Oh and while were at it pea-nuts, what do you think of this antisemitic intellectual, insinuating that the State of Israel should not exist?

Kind of makes a joke of your holier-than-though know-all position you've taken here, the spokesman for all Jews.

He saw what was coming, he'd seen it before, but the intoxicated crowd couldn't see it then and they (you) can't see it now, how sad, how very very sad.