I hesitated for a while before posting this, but ugly as this guy is, he does deserve to be better known. For one thing, Pat Condell makes no secret of his rabid hatred for Islam, Christianity and any other religion or, for that matter, anybody religious. He is an iconic example of what I would call the “degenerate Crusader“: he is still filled with the condescending arrogance of his Frankish civilizational progenitors but he expresses it in a very modern, “grinning homo” kind of style.
Listening to this man is definitely a rather most unpleasant, sickening, experience but, I would argue, a useful one. That is the true face of militant secularism and religious people should always remember that.
The Saker
Pat Condell loves Judaism though:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIesXORjBps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vaw658Bow8
@Dadie: a-m-a-z-i-n-g…. I am speechless, I thought I had heard it all, but that is amazing. And did you notice his “”so called Palestinians”
He is racist too! I knew that, of course, but its good to hear that come out clearly too..
As for his Judeolatry – its amazing….
Well despite the sheer hypocrisy of Britain fostering, shielding and harbouring Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists from foreign prosecution like Qatada in France or al-Liby in the US and supporting Islamist linked separatists regimes around the world either overtly (Bosnia and Kosovo) or covertly (Chechnya, Dagestan, Xinjing, Central Asia and Algeria) does he not have a point about Islam?
I didn’t get around to respond to your response regarding my last comment that I will try in the future but you didn’t answer my first question from point b).
“Frankly this is the standard liberal/Muslim opinion who want to use Russia as a whore/proxy for their own means and do not give a damn about Russia because their own corrupt Muslim societies who have brought nothing but misery to the lands they have expanded their influence wrapped in intolerant religious dogma where we would be slaves to an Islamic oligarchy worse than Communism.
Show me an example where this is not the truth and Islam in the modern era has had a positive effect/influence?”
“I could cite numerous examples..”
For some reason perhaps the angle of my wireless keyboard or I was editing my comment and forgot to finish the sentence that happens quite a lot the last part of the sentence was not picked up. I meant to conclude “..to the contrary”.
Examples please?
In every conceivable level Islam as an economic, political and social system is shit unless as it does serves the interests of the NWO.
Given the direction of this particular thread, this is a good opportunity to review Walter Russell Mead’s piece from about a year ago:
“The Hate That Dares Not Speak Its Name”:
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/07/18/the-hate-that-dares-not-speak-its-name/
I respect Mead for at least giving a definition of the word “anti-Semite,” which is a lot more than most people like him will do. Here it is:
“[A]nti-Semitism involves belief in any or all of the following ideas:
1. Jews are more clannish than other people and act in concert to support a specifically Jewish agenda.
2. Jews deploy extraordinary wealth with almost superhuman cunning in support of the Jewish agenda.
3. As a religious and national minority, Jews cannot flourish without attacking the traditional values of their host society. In every country Jews seek to weaken national culture, religion, values and cohesion.
4. Jews are not a national group or a people in the way that others are; they do not have the same right to establish a nation state that other peoples do.
5. Where Jewish interests are concerned, the appearance of open debate in our society and many others is a carefully constructed illusion. In reality, Jews work together to block open debate on issues they care about and those who resist the Jewish agenda are marginalized in public discussion.
These ideas are the five pillars of anti-Semitism; you don’t have to believe them all — any one will do.”
So, I will now tale the test myself.
Item 1 – Disagree. Many people are clannish, and (at least in America), Jews are intermarrying with Gentiles to a large degree.
Item 2 – Disagree. There is no “Jewish agenda” as such. There is an Israel Lobby, but most Jews are more critical of Israel than the average American Gentile is. As Walt and Mearsheimer point out, the “Israel Lobby” is a diverse umbrella of different groups, whose agendas overlap but are not always identical.
Item 3 – I used to disagree, but now I am not so sure. As I said before, Calvinist Protestantism and Judaism are spiritual cousins, and much of what looks like “Jewish influence” in America is nothing more than a particular expression of the hustling, materialistic spirit that has always characterized America to begin with. So, in the case of America, I don’t think that Jewish influence is a matter of “subversion.” Thus, if we are speaking of America, I disagree. In terms of other countries, the case may be different.
Item 4 – To tell the truth, I am not sure how to answer that one. When I was a young man, I always assumed that Judaism was a religion like Christianity or Islam, and that anyone could convert of they wanted to. I have since learned that it is not so simple. Judaism is a religion AND the Jews are a people. So, I don’t have a black and white answer to that question.
Item 5 – Partially agree. “Jews work together to block open debate on issues they care about and those who resist the Jewish agenda are marginalized in public discussion” – yes, but no more than many other people do. Argumentam ad hominem and arguments from intimidation seem to be a universal characteristic of public discourse nowadays. If the Israel Lobby has the power to shut down public debate, it is because that power is granted to it by others, due to the spiritual affinity I spoke about.
So, Mead would probably flunk me and call me a raving proto-Nazi for not shouting “Disagree!” to all five items. Too bad. I reserve the right to think for myself and to examine evidence, independently of control-freak, Thought Police Gauleiters like Mead.
@Michael: thank you for a really interesting comment. Let me give you my take on it.
First, notice that anti-Semitism is defined here as a syndrome which can be established/diagnosed when the tested subject adheres to any one or more of five beliefs. What I love about this method is that NOT A SINGLE WORD IS SAID ABOUT THE EMPIRICAL REALITY DISCUSSED. In fact, one assumption of this approach is that axiomatically all of the five statements are wrong.
Second, the central concept to this model is “Jew”. Yet it is NEVER DEFINED. At the very least, that word can cover three different meanings: 1) ethnicity 2) religion 3) tribe.
So when the tested subject says anything about “The” “Jews” “They” do XYZ it is never clear to what meaning of the word “Jew” he/she is referring.
So we have a “test” of sorts about a category which is not defined and these characteristics of which cannot be compared to empirical observations. To me this only means one thing: this is a not-so-subtle attempt at CENSORING a point of view, at dismissing and branding a set of ideas any of which is considered sufficient to label the person holding it as an anti-Semite.
Interestingly, even the affirmation of such a condition (being an anti-Semite) is also rather ambiguous. Is it good? Is it bad? Why is it good or bad?
Furthermore, what is the putatively desirable position on this topic? Should a person by a philo-Semite or simply unable to articulate any opinion on the topic of Semitism?
There are basic, simple, questions which would be asked in any sociological, medical, scientific or philosophical discussion. So let’s cut through all the crap and go to the core of this which is in the title “hate that does not speak its name”:
First, notice that NONE of the five tested ideas include anything remotely resembling “hate”. Of course, “hate” is not defined here either.
Then, what in the world is a hate that “does not speak its name” and, assuming such a bizarre things is actually observed, WHY does it act in such a weird manner. After all, if we take a common definition of hate, it rarely includes shyness or reluctance to express itself.
Michael, what we are dealing here is very simply an attempt to OBFUSCATE a topic which in one form or another has been perplexing mankind since at least 2000 years and which has been very often discussed by Jews (however defined) themselves.
After the Bolshevik revolution anti-Semitism it became a crime punishable by immediate execution by the ChK. Later, the Soviet regime came up with the idea of declaring that those who hold the ‘wrong’ political ideas suffer from a psychiatric condition called “Sluggishly progressing schizophrenia” (вялотекущая шизофрения) whose main characteristic was that it was not really empirically observable in the first place. What we are dealing with here is something of a combination of the two: a list of five crimethoughts which indicate a mix of psychopathology and/or criminal inclinations.
My personal reply to such attempts to box me in is to do what I did above – to categorically reject as being based on assumptions which have not been tested or established and which often cannot be established anyway. Furthermore, I also denounce this type of “framing” as an attempt to stifle free speech and even free thought. The real purpose of this “anti-Semite detection kit” is to impose a dogma or, failing that, to at the very least totally disqualify any person ‘detected’ by this ‘test’ from any kind of acceptable debate. A clear case of intellectual terrorism, a witch-hunt of the most basic kind, a loyalty test which would make Senator McCarthy proud.
to be continued…
Michael spoke of “anti-semitism”.
Found 5 interesting because it made me think of my definition of
anti-semitism.
Some words have more than one *unrelated* meaning.
For example, the word FAST.
Fast can be an adjective that means “moves quickly”.
Fast can be a noun that means “an act of abstaining from food”.
The two meanings are unrelated.
Anti-semitism is frequently understood to mean “bias against
Jewish people”.
But anti-semitism is also a power assertion that means “we will accept no criticism and will silence you”.
An example of this power assertion, here is a recent headline:
“California State Assembly passes law defining criticism of Israel as anti-Semitism”
… continuation
It is also a very clear sign of weakness which I am quite delighted to observe.
In the early 20th century thought-criminals were simply shot. Now all we risk is being exposed to a rather crude attempt at either confusing us or labeling us.
No biggie, that we can handle, no? :-)
Now, on substance, and without accepting any of the premises/assumptions of the “anti-Semite detection test”.
I fully agree with Shlomo Sands that “Jews” are not an ethnicity. Frankly, most of the ideas of European nationalism have been proven false and this is why like most other nations “Jews” as a nation have been invented, as Dr Sands proves it in his absolutely fantastic book “The Invention of the Jewish People”.
Contemporary “Judaism” as a category is also a tricky one. First, it is most definitely not the religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It would be much better to call modern rabbinical Judaism as the religion of Maimonides, Karo and Luria. What is indisputable is that modern “Judaism” is a direct continuation of the sect of the Pharisees so well described in the New Testament. If you study rabbinical/phariseic “Judaism” carefully you will very rapidly come to a very simple conclusion: all it is is simply “anti-Christianism”, a desperate and, frankly, rather clumsy, attempts are reshaping pre-Christian Judaism into a religion which is pretty much the polar opposite of its claimed progenitor. In other words, all there is to rabbinical Judaism is an attempt to justify the rejection of the Messiah and His replacement by another, *collective* Messiah. In other words, Satanism and self-worship.
Here I am not speaking about the ideas of modern adherents of contemporary “Judaism”, but about the system of belief, the religion, itself. In reality, the degree by which these ideas are actually important to any one community depends on individual circumstances.
And then, there is the “secular Jew”. Since we know that there is no such thing as an ethnic Jew, and since the secular Jew is supposed to be non-religious, what are we dealing with?
A secular Jew is one who has identified with the ethos of modern rabbinical Judaism without really accepting its religious beliefs or regulations. In other words, a “secular Jew” will gladly discuss the vicious anti-Semitism of the Gentiles while munching on his salami sandwich. As Gilad Atzmon correctly observes, here we are dealing with a tribe, as opposed to a nation, an ethnicity or a religion.
We can logically conclude that the category “religious Jew” (as described above) is a subset of the category “Jewish tribe” which can be split into the “religious” and “secular” subgroups and which are both united and defined by an ethos which has historically been shaped by rabbinical Judaism (there was no such thing as secular Jewishness for the first 18 centuries of our era).
… to be continued
… conclusion
Now things become clear, I think. If we totally set aside the fundamentally wrong concept of “Jew” is being a race, an ethnicity or a nation, and if we then define “Jew” as a tribe whose ethos is defined by the rabbinical/phariseic “Judaism” of Maimonides, Karo, Luria (and others) but which includes secular as well as religious subsets, and whose defining characteristic is a reaction to the trauma of having rejected the Messiah, we can easily see why the five characteristics, five “thought crimes” devised by the “anti-Semite detection test” are all, of course, ABSOLUTELY TRUE! :-)
1. Jews are more clannish than other people and act in concert to support a specifically Jewish agenda. Of course they are! Rabbinical “Judaism” unambiguously teaches that only Jews are fully human while Gentiles are somewhere between animals and Jews. Get this, this is crucial: RABBINICAL JUDAISM DENIES THE COMMON HUMANITY OF JEWS AND GENTILES. Amazing, but true.
2.Jews deploy extraordinary wealth with almost superhuman cunning in support of the Jewish agenda. This is like saying human deploy deploy extraordinary wealth with almost superhuman cunning in support of the human agenda. Of course it is true, human have never placed non-human life on the same plane, given it the same value, as human life.
3.As a religious and national minority, Jews cannot flourish without attacking the traditional values of their host society. In every country Jews seek to weaken national culture, religion, values and cohesion. Easy. Since Gentiles are all, inherently, afflicted by this abominable disease called “anti-Semitism”, whether manifested or latent, and since G*d commands that Jewish blood is sacred, it ought to be defended at all costs. Hence the hysterical paranoia of Jews at any signs of nationalism, patriotism, traditional religious values, etc. Gilad Atzmon brilliantly speaks of “pre-traumatic stress disorder”, i.e. the trauma resulting of future stresses. Atzmon is not only a musical genius, he is also one of the smartest thinkers on the planet, IMHO.
4.Jews are not a national group or a people in the way that others are; they do not have the same right to establish a nation state that other peoples do. Here Judaism very much agrees, of course, with the caveat that Jews have *superior* rights since they are the “collective Messiah” whom G*d has given the mission to administer the world.
5.Where Jewish interests are concerned, the appearance of open debate in our society and many others is a carefully constructed illusion. In reality, Jews work together to block open debate on issues they care about and those who resist the Jewish agenda are marginalized in public discussion. Again, since Gentiles have this mysterious condition called “anti-Semitism” it is only logical to make sure that this condition remain latent and never is given the conditions to express itself. I would say that this “anti-Semite detection test” participates into that efforts at now allowing an open and free discussion of the empirical and historical facts of the matter.
Sorry, it took three posts, but I wanted to give you a halfway decent reply.
What do you make of it?
Am I now diagnosed with that weird Gentile disease? :-)
Kind regards,
The Saker
@VINEYARDSAKER
Show me an example where this is not the truth and Islam in the modern era has had a positive effect/influence?”
Examples please?
Having trouble coming up with any?
@jack:Having trouble coming up with any?
No, not at all. I am just ignoring your posts :-)
@Saker: Good reply, indeed. You have helped flesh out my problems with this post by Mead. It was Item 4 (“Who is a Jew”) that was stumping me. Apparently, it stumps a lot of Jews as well, so it seems I am in good company.
The thing is, most Jews I know do not do the things that Netanyahu, Lieberman, Charles Schumer, Saul Alinsky, et al., do. They are not plotting, either secretly or openly, to dissolve natural social bonds like hydrochloric acid, or to dehumanize the population and turn them into cattle. They just want to contribute to society and live normal human lives like everybody else. I adhere to Martin Luther King’s dictum, that it is not the color of your skin (or your ethnicity, etc.) that counts, but the content of your character (OK, I understand that King wasn’t as big a saint as the media make him out to be, but he was right about that point).
My own views on this subject have been changing, in often quite painful ways. I am determined to account for empirically observable reality (e.g., the scores of standing ovations that Netanyahu got in front of Congress) without falling into intellectual and methodological traps in the process, such as racist ideology.
(to be continued) ….
…. (continued)
As for Mead. what can I say? He is a brilliant man, and an insightful one, but he is bought and paid for. His intellect is strong, but his character is weak. He is a high ranking member of the CFR, which tells me pretty much the same thing as being a high-ranking Freemason. I have heard (however unreliably) that even some of the induction ceremonies are similar, although I cannot prove that.
Both organizations appeal to those whose egos need a lot of stroking and pandering. They seek out brilliant, gifted men whose psychological weaknesses they can exploit. The old KGB used to recruit their “assets” by “looking for the tracks of MICE.” MICE stands for:
Money – either greed, or financial instability
Ideology – either schizoid fanaticism or naive idealism
Compromise – i.e., old fashioned “dirt” on somebody.
Ego – self explanatory.
The current power elite does the same. I don’t know what Mead’s hook is, but clearly he is a dishonest man, who misuses his intellectual gifts to serve his psychopathic masters. In other words, he is a faithful member of the “Outer Party” of Orwell’s novel – the “bourgeoisie” of the Pathocracy. No doubt his “broad and hazy” Anglicanism allows him plenty of room indulge in Orwellian “doublethink” (the art of “knowing” and yet “not knowing” what is really happening).
As for the increasing weakness of the Pathocracy, it may interest you to know that Mead has recently closed comments on his blog. His explanation for doing so is quite revealing:
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/09/01/the-end-of-an-era-comments-are-closed/
His stated reasons are rational enough (trolls, and psychologically disturbed posters), but it is not hard to read between the lines. Here is the money quote:
“We apologize to the readers who participated in or valued the comments section on the blog, and especially to the well mannered and thoughtful contributors who never tried to hog the microphone, launch flame wars, smuggle hate speech into the comment page, rant about personal pet peeves repeatedly and predictably, let partisan or ideological animus run wild or otherwise abuse what at its best was a forum for reflection and thoughtful debate.”
“Hate speech” of course, means “any truth-telling that threatens the Pathocracy.” Apparently, too much of that was starting to happen for Mead’s liking. I say – “Tough! Get used to it!”
@Saker:” Frankly, most of the ideas of European nationalism have been proven false and this is why like most other nations “Jews” as a nation have been invented, as Dr Sands proves it in his absolutely fantastic book “The Invention of the Jewish People”.”
I think that is going too far.
There truly are such things as nations, peoples and civilizations. My understanding of “What is a people” comes from the work of Oswald Spengler (whose magnum opus I read when I was 19 years old), and Toynbee (who I read when I was 21). Like them, I define ethnicity primarily in terms of shared collective experience and spiritual affinity, and less upon physical racial markers.
Take me, for instance. I was born into a white Protestant American family. However, I never felt like I “fit in” and was always looking for “my own kind” which I never found until I was baptized into the Orthodox Church. My Serbian Orthodox parish is now my family, and they have stood by me through some pretty hair-raising events. I look upon them now as far more my “kin” than most of my biological relatives ever were.
It is upon this basis that I understand St. John the Baptist’s denunciation of the Pharisees, saying to them that God could raise stones to be sons of Abraham if he wants to. It is also the basis upon which I understand Christ’s denunciation of them as being “of your father, the devil.” The Pharisees were sons of the devil, not based upon Calvinist predestination by God, but based upon their chosen spiritual affinity to the evil one.
That is why I insist that America’s unconditional loyalty to Israel is a “call of the blood.” In terms of genetics, this is ridiculous. On a spiritual level, “like calls unto like.”
We need to be careful that we don’t claim too much, for the sake of rhetorical point-scoring.
@Michael: this is fun and interesting, thanks! My turn for a few comments:
The thing is, most Jews I know do not do the things that Netanyahu, Lieberman, Charles Schumer, Saul Alinsky, et Of course not! That is the big mistake of what I call the “zoological anti-Semites” – they assume that somehow “Jewishness” is hidden somewhere in one’s DNA, which is not only utter nonsense, but it even mirrors the rabbinical belief that “somehow” Jews and Gentiles are different. They are not. However,
There truly are such things as nations, peoples and civilizations
Historically there used to be tribes, religions and MULTI-ETHNIC civilizations and Empires. This is why the citizens of the Byzantine Empire did NOT see themselves as Greek, but as Romans. It was the French Revolution which replaced the King with the “Nation” as the unifying self-identifier. Before 1789 a Breton from, say, Saint Malo was 1) a “Malouin”, 2) a member of the Roman Catholic Church, and 3) a subject of the King of France. He most definitely did NOT think that he was of the same Nation as somebody for Languedoc or Corsica in terms of ethnicity. Furthermore, not only are key European states recent inventions (Germany, Italy), but all the borders are highly artificial. Ok, on the other extreme, I will concede that there is probably such a phenomenon in nature as a Japanese Nation. But Jews?! For SURE not. What would a Persian Jew and a Moroccan Jew have in common in terms of “shared collective experience and spiritual affinity”? Their religion, of course. But that’s *IT*. I am in no way denying that there is a Jewish religion out there, all I am saying is that there is no such thing as a Jewish nation or ethnicity or race.
For one thing, being “Jewish” is ALWAYS ALWAYS a *CHOICE*. Think of it: you choose a religion and you choose a tribe and you choose an ideology. But you do not choose your ethnicity or DNA, right? Again, Atzmon has got it right when he says that you cannot be a Jew and an “normal” human being. That very idea – being Jewish – contains in itself the absolutely central dogma of the difference in essence between a Jew (created in the image and likeness of God) and a Gentile (born of the Earth, as the Kabbalists believe). This idea is absolutely not rooted in any ethnicity or genetic characteristic. Its something which a person must subscribe to, voluntarily adhere to. And this is why it is absolutely legitimate for us, Christians, to denounce it vehemently, in the strongest terms, as did Christ himself (their father the Devil, Synagogue of Satan, etc. you know the quotes).
What we are dealing here with is a tribal ideology, shaped by a satanic cult, which rejects the common humanity of all man, and which spends most of its time engaged in absolutely obscene self-worship. That is an abomination which ALL decent humans – regardless of their other beliefs – should denounce and reject in the strongest possible terms.
Frankly, I think that two books say it all, much better than I ever will:
1) Shlomo Sand’s “The Invention of the Jewish People” and
2) Gilad Atzmon’s “The Wandering Who”
That both of them are considered “ethnic Jews” and both are Israeli just makes their case even more poignant.
By the way, these two heroes of mine are also perfect example of the fact that no ideology can prevail against our common humanity. Think of it 99.99% of Gentiles have been beat down and stomped into a catatonic stupor, and here come to Israelis to loudly and very brilliantly denounce the entire charade. Beautiful, no?! God is the greatest, indeed :-)
to be continued….
… continued:
… continued
My own ethnicity is a total mess: Dutch, Russian mainly, but also Italian, Polish, Lithuanian, English, and even Tartar. Culturally, I was raised in a typical hyper-convervative pre-1917 “White” Russian family. The country which I always loved the most was, of all things, Argentina, where I spent a lot of time. My politics are either socialist or libertarian on most social, labor and economic issues, but my values are shaped by my extremely concervative brand of Greek (not even Russian!) Orthodoxy. I live in the USA which I love but whose regime I loathe. And you know what my I would use as a one-word self-describer? Roman. I very much feel that my roots reach, via Imperial Russia, into the late Roman Empire (aka “Byzantium”, which is a misnomer, of course). And that, by the way, is of course a choice I made. Nobody in my family would ever call himself “Roman”, I assure you!! Frankly, I have a feeling that you, judging by your words, might also be fairly described as a “Roman” much better than as an American, don’t you think? If you parish is ethnos-heavy, you might be more of a Serbian, but if you parish is Patristic-heavy, then you are more of a Roman, is that not so?
All of us have this fundemental freedom to decide for ourselves what or who we want to be, regardless of where we were born and into what family. This is why Christ said “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” He did not advocate the hate of parents, of course, but the simply expressed what a mature, freely made, committment is needed to become a Christian.
Alas, Orthodox communites have recently tend to define themselves in ethnic terms. Not that there is anything wrong with ethnic expressions of piety, but in all to many parishes the catholic (meaning here “universal”) nature of Orthodoxy has been replaced by an ethno-tribalism of the wost kind, often going outright into phyletism. To put it blunlty: this is a heresy. An Orthodox church cannot reduced into a folkloric club with ethnic singing and dishes. So we, Orthodox people, have suffered the toxic effect of European nationalism and its no wonder that Jews have also succombed to that false category. And then, from ethno-tribalism there is only a short step to outright pyletism, racism and, of course, self-worship. WHen I hear Russians speak of “God-bearing people” (Народ богоносец) I cringe and always think “we are not all that different from Jews after all” (an insulting though for both Russians and Jews, I would add, LOL!). And the Greek have their own “panethniki” which, I believe, expresses the notion that somehow Greeks are the most sublime expression of humanity or something equally modest. It is hard to escape the conclusion that nationalism always ends up in the worst, most crudest, forms of self-worship. This is why our Lord told us that “For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ” and “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”
… to be continued
… conclusion:
as for Mead and all those brilliant men who for all their brilliance fail to see the obvious or, worse, choose not to see it, they remind me of quote from Rabelais:“Science sans conscience n’est que ruine de l’âme”: science without conscience is but the ruin of the soul. The MICE baiting technique is impotent against a man with a strong, moral, conscience, I think.
As for closing comments, you can see my position by what I do in this (very modest) blog: I would never ban anything I would deem as “hate speech”. I might challenge it, or I might decide to ignore it, but I will not censor it as crimethink. My personal experience is that the really nasty types soon leave by themselves, the paid hasbara agents realize its hopeless and also leave, and the crazies eventually can be convinced that they are only making themselves look silly. So this holier than thou can of attitude like locking comments to suppress hate speech is, I think, a phenomenal admission of weakness and this is good news. If these folks have to devise “5 step anti-Semite detection tests” and lock comments, then we are all in very very good shape, is that not so?
Kind regards,
The Saker
@EVERYBODY: looks like I am committing even more typos than usual. Sorry about that, I am very time pressed these days. Please ignore the obvious typos. Sorry :-(
@VINEYARDSAKER
No, not at all. I am just ignoring your posts :-)
I believe I have made my point maybe now you will come to the obvious and reasonable conclusion about Islam that it is part of the NWO.
As for the points Michael posted the best we to gauge Jewish attitudes although they differ somewhat depending on ethnic variation and region is from Jewish sources themselves as David Duke (whatever one may think of him) does in his research and others regarding Jews as a social, economic and political entity.
Off topic but what do you think about the new Russian film The Horde that is causing some controversy in Russia at least among some Tatars?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxB_Yqx_VIQ
http://www.austereinsomniac.info/blog/2012/9/21/rferl-horde-raids-a-russian-film.html#comments
Great rebuttal of Pat Condell here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HabBb9Uka8
@Anonymous: Great rebuttal of Pat Condell here:
Oh yes, Ry Dawson is very very sharp! Thanks a lot for the link, excellent stuff!
After living without a television set for the past 11 years, I recently purchased an internet enabled “Smart TV” which can doubles as a video monitor and which allows me to watch video sites like YouTube and Vimeo via a streaming internet connection.
Wouldn’t you know it, but one of the few dozen or so Youtube channels loaded in as presets on a Vizio Smart tv was Pat Condell’s channel? That’s pretty shocking considering how overtly hostile to Islam this guy is. There is no chance that Vizio would load RussiaToday or PressTV in as preset news channel. No chance that they would load a video channel that is openly intolerant of other racesor homosexuals either. But this guys channel is one of only a dozen or so religous YouTube channels that appears on YT as an atheist ‘religious channel.
It’s the same on Samsung Smart tv’s too. His is one of the small handful of preset channels that pops up when trying to acquaint yourself with the dtreaming youtube video app. Can you imagine loading David Duke’s video channel or a holocaust denier’s video channel as a preset on most people’s smart tv’s? This guy is at least as hateful as Duke, and in a culture where ‘hate speech’ is an enormous taboo, I am flabbergasted that this one of the first video channels anyone with a Smart tv gets exposed too.
I can’t prove it, but I am pretty sure this is no accident. Someone is exerting enough editorial control to suggest a list of channels which might be of interest to new buyers of these smart tv’s. As I said, no smart tv’s YouTube app comes preloaded with examples of RT or PressTv as news channels. No smart tv would have Daid Duke as an example of a political channel or a holocaust denier’s channel as an exmple of history channel, but millions of Vizio and Samsung tv’s come with this as one of a few examples of religious channels (specifically titled as ‘Atheist’) that all new buyers of their products are exposed to.
Pat Condell is pure venom and intolerance of other faiths — especially Islam. But somehow that’s kosher with big companies.