I have my own thought's on this Israel Palestinian issues but I'll make another thread so as not to clog up this one.

mikey mikey wrote:
Humm I see you have reverted to your usual tactic of ad hominem attacks, rather than engaging in sensible debate - not exactly in keeping with the spirit of this site, but to be expected when dealing with the extremes of either end of the scale. Obviously logic and reason has no place in this debate!

Frog wrote:
WTF? lol :p

What is it with this merger of race and ethnicity? Who started this complete arsefuck of the English language?

andyh wrote:
The issue is the devilishness and politicisation of it and the way it is used to manipulate social and political change. There people who seem to devote all their time to these issues especially at both extremes of the debate are actually mirror images of the same disturbed and distorted mindset of PC BS, bias and prejudice. Both extremes prevent any logical and meaning full discussion on the topics effected which actually extend beyond and are often not directly related to the race issue.

It's quite interesting that out of two posts one of which was quite lengthy you chose to quote that fragment of a sentence! People who aren't suffering from hangups tend to have a broader view of issues and treat the subject as a who in the pursuit of answers or clarity. It can also been seen as pretty good indicator of intent, prejudice, bias, manipulation, politicisation and device to prevent discussion etc etc.

Frog wrote:
I chose it because it makes no sense.

German = nationality
Caucasian = race.

andyh wrote:
Please excuse the misinterpretation of the point you were raising.

That fragment was in response to the introduction of the word Gestapo into the discussion, purely as an emotive device, among a series of other fallacies and ad hominems (something I'm sure most people noticed). A member of the Gestapo would be regarded as a Caucasian German national i.e. an association is made with Germans not Caucasians. It would be hard to narrow that down to being aimed at Caucasians, without ignoring the critical requirement of being a German national.

As for who started screwing with the English language I would think it was probably collusion between Church, State and the Legal professions not unlike today.

Frog wrote:
Well I could say the same thing about this

and this
Frog wrote:
Coming from a mod and a founder of the site, I probably should take that as a warning.
Frog wrote:
Ah...I am an extremist now. There's a word for the extreme position in defence of Jewish people. It doesn't apply to me, but I fear you wouldn't listen to that.

On another site I was also called anti-German, Zionist, asked to defend the persecution of Palestinians after repeatedly condeming it and told by mods that I did not belong on their site.

Not so long ago.

The introduction of the mother line thing into a religion always seemed to be a way to obfuscate the matter, this thread is my evidence.

oioioi wrote:
yep, i heard only if mummy is jewish, otherwise, u aint.

i am giving up on this thread, you are wasting your lives going on about all this stuff. You cant solve it and it is doing your head in.

Relax. ( this thread is not for me... as u can tell. ) There isnt an answer.. that u guys can figure out.. nobody can. It is too hard.. and even if you did get an answer, u might get bumped off.

curtaincat wrote:
Likewise I have heard from not-a-nazis that despite somebody being an atheist or christian, they are "jewish" because their great aunt attended a barmitzvah of their next door neighbour.

This is not compplicated at all.

Whether or not one defines jewishness by geneology, religious practice or an "and/or" (ethnoreligiously) does not change the fact that many many people who fit in just nicely at DIF and SF and VNN, really do talk about "jewish blood" and therefore define the object of their hatred racially.

This is the definition of racism. Eroneous racism, perhaps, but that does not change their motives.

But pointing this out makes me an "extremist" apparently.

ETA:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F#Reform_Judaism

So, unsuprisingly, jewish people are in disagreement amongst themselves as to what defines " a jew".

mikey mikey wrote:
Why oh why then do people continue to waste their time discussing this never ending saga?

I don't get it.

psketti wrote:
I am certain that theological and political differences are of vital importance to jewish people.

But that is not my point: mine is that however you decide to define jewishness will not change how the not-a-nazis define them: whih is racially.

Therefore, while jews may or might not be considere a race, this does not mean that those who hate people for their "jewish blood" are not racists.

I really can't make this any simpler.

mikey mikey wrote:
NOT a race. They cannot be as it conflicts with the definition in the bloody dictionary
If they are a race then you can identify them all by merely looking at them. Only the nazis are capable of such a thing.

Well a more accurate word would be "ethnicity" and even then, it is an ethnoreligious group that only share some aspects of an ethnicity.

Nevertheless: those who discriminate against people because of their geneology and/or ethnicity are described as racists.

anything jew related bores the fuck out of me. is that racist?

curtaincat wrote:
What you have to ask yourself is why a group of people would make such a rule for qualifying to be part of their group?

It's so obvious surely?

Why didn't they use something similar to the salic law where male heritage is more important?

There is only one conclusion you can make from this historical decision to choose the female as the more important factor in being part of a group of people?

Not that it matters by the way.

batou wrote:
Ditto that

deitrich eckart , thule society .

Eckart held that, in Germany's postwar tailspin, Christ was a leader to be emulated

Hitler dedicated the second volume of Mein Kampf to Eckart,

It was Eckart who introduced Alfred Rosenberg to Adolf Hitler. Between 1920 and 1923, Eckart and Rosenberg labored tirelessly in the service of Hitler and the party. Through Rosenberg, Hitler was introduced to the writings of Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Rosenberg's inspiration. Rosenberg edited the Münchener Beobachter, a party newspaper, originally owned by the Thule Society. Rosenberg published the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in the Beobachter

A primary focus of Thule-Gesellschaft was a claim concerning the origins of the Aryan race. In 1917 people who wanted to join the "Germanic Order", out of which the Thule Society developed in 1918, had to sign a special "blood declaration of faith" concerning the lineage:
"The signer hereby swears to the best of his knowledge and belief that no Jewish or coloured blood flows in either his or in his wife's veins, and that among their ancestors are no members of the coloured races



members of the Thule Society were later prominent in Nazi Germany: the list includes Dietrich Eckart (who coached Hitler on his public speaking skills and had Mein Kampf dedicated to him) as well as Gottfried Feder, Hans Frank, Hermann Göring, Karl Haushofer, Rudolf Hess, Heinrich Himmler and Alfred Rosenberg


They identified Ultima Thule, said by Nazi mystics to be the capital of ancient Hyperborea, as a lost ancient landmass in the extreme north: near Greenland or Iceland. These ideas derived from earlier speculation by Ignatius L. Donnelly that a lost landmass had once existed in the Atlantic, and that it was the home of the Aryan race, a theory he supported by reference to the distribution of swastika motifs. He identified this with Plato's Atlantis, a theory further developed by Helena Blavatsky, an occultist during the second part of the 19th century.

next up is zionism and the protocols of zion lol