Discussion in 'Foreign Affairs' started by maxflinn, Sep 19, 2017.
The Israeli War Crimes, Terrorism And Humanitarian Abuse Thread.
And so he should be angry. When terrorist states like Israel have illegal nukes, then decent countries are better to make sure they have a credible deterrent.
None of the cartoons in the Iranian competition were anti-Semitic. Indeed, they were mostly defending Semitic people - the Palestinians. The cartoons pointed to the strange fact that the Zionists obsess so much about what some Europeans did to the Jews nearly a century ago - but they are perpetrating the same genocide on other Semitic people today. They also pointed out that the genuine suffering of Jews in the 1930s and 40s have been hijacked by the Zionists and turned into a cash cow. One where money given by Germans to make life easier for Holocaust Survivors is stolen from them by the Zionist Régime and instead of being used to make some old people comfortable in their old age, is being use to perpetrate another Holocaust on the Palestinians. The Jewish Survivors are left in poverty and isolation - while Netanyahu and his fellow gangsters live it up in style on their money. And the fact that your meme had to show an American anti-Jewish cartoon shows that you found it difficult to find any Iranian cartoon that wasn't simply telling the truth.
How the State of Israel Abuses Holocaust Survivors
50,000 Holocaust survivors in Israel live in poverty
On one level, you need to lay out all of those cartoons in front of yourself, and ask, "... what is the sentiment that these cartoons are intended to evoke and stoke in their viewer, and what group is the intended object of this sentiment?"
(For me, that is the nub of it. And I can tell you I often observe exactly the sentiment that is evoked and stoked. For example, in the comments sections under many of the "anti-Zionist" Youtube videos regularly promulgated on the internet. The murderous sentiment in all of these Western commentators is unmistakable. )
On another level, what Iran engages in this competition comes down to the essence of what many Jewish people and "Zionists" actually argue comprise the basis for twenty-first antisemitism. They say that there are three components of this new wave of antisemitism: (1) denial of the Holocaust (2) the competition of victimhood (3) the demonization of Israel.
Now, no doubt, the people who engage in the above say "this is not antisemitism". But I will set out the argument that is made for posterity's sake. (I well know everyone on here will never allow their victims to define what is antisemitism. They especially hate anyone capable of articulating their case.).
In this regard I think Bernard Levi articulates very well below exactly what is in this "Competition of victimhood" that Iran promotes, and why it does consist antisemitism.
Interviewer: What is the state of anti-Semitism today? Is it coming? Going away? Doing both at the same time?Bernard-Henri Lévy: It’s doing both at the same time. Going away in its old shape. And coming back in its new shape. As always. Anti-Semitism has no fixed pattern; it does not present itself always in the same form. It’s like a virus which changes. What are the workings of its changes, what is its logic is tied, simply, to what is acceptable. It is as if anti-Semitism — without giving it an intelligence, which it doesn’t have — is searching for the precise words or intellectual schemes for allowing itself to be heard, to be supported by the most people. It is as if it were searching for the words which might help it advance, not under the flag of pure evil, but under the flag of an evil aiming sort of in a good direction.When some Christians were anti-Semitic, they did not just say, ‘We hate Jews.’ They said, ‘We hate Jews because, unfortunately, they committed the great crime, which was to kill Christ.’ When Voltaire was anti-Semitic, he did not say, ‘I hate Jews because there is something in their essence which deserves hate;’ he said, ‘I hate them because they invented Christ.’And this is the sort of tricky way of assembling a big number of people around the speech of hatred. Barring that, you would have very few anti-Semites. So today, all the old processes of legitimacy are dying, are more or less dead. Not so many Christians really think that I killed Christ. Not so many followers of Voltaire really think I am guilty of having invented Christianity. Fewer and fewer believe in the racist identity of the Jews, of which people like me would be the bearers.But we are facing the installment of a new scheme, with new arguments, new reasons, new logic, trying to make anti-Semitism again acceptable, relatively, according to the general mood of the times. In the chapter you allude to, I try to identify the words with which anti-Semitism must express itself in order to gather under its flag a reasonable number of people, which is a real danger, of course.Interviewer: What are some of those ways?There are three: which are denial of the Holocaust, the competition of victimhood, and the demonization of Israel. If you put the three together, you have the portrait of a people, a community, who are guilty of three crimes. Which is the crime of being crooks, moral crooks, inventing or exaggerating their own martyrdom, doing that in order to overshadow others’ martyrdom, and the whole thing in the interest of an illegitimate and deeply guilty state, which is Israel. If you can put it into the brain of some people that Jews are people who exaggerate their martyrdom, who therefore [minimize] the martyrdom of other people, all this with the sole selfish aim of saving Israel, you give to some people some new motives, arguments, reasons for feeding the old hatred.Interviewer: Is this what Ahmadinejad drew on for his Holocaust deniers conference last year?Ahmadinejad relied on some of these people. So you have this in America. Competition of victimhood: we are fed up with the Holocaust; please, there are other things to think about. This idea exists in Europe, of course; it is what Palestinians say — what a lot of people in the Arab world say. And you have that in America and in France. If you listen to some of the radical groups, the African-American groups like that of Farrakhan, it is more or less what they say. Competition of victimhood. You have to choose, Jews or Blacks. You cannot support both. You have to choose your victims. You have to choose your cause.Competition of victimhood means there is limited space in your brain or mine available for sorrow, and therefore if you use it for the Palestinians, there is nothing left for the Jews, if you use it for the Tutsis, there is nothing left for the Cambodians, and so on.Interviewer: So at some point, we do have to compare degrees of the victims?You have to compare different things. So the Cambodian genocide is different from the Tutsi genocide, which is different from the Armenian, which is different from the Holocaust.It’s true that in terms of military resources, the democrats cannot intervene, cannot help all the victims of all the atrocities of the world. This is a truism. It is not competition of victims; it is realism. You cannot—America, France, Germany, Spain, the few democracies in the world—cannot help at the same time the Burmese, the Chinese, Darfuris, and so on. It’s policy. Policy is the art of the possible, what is doable, and so on. Nothing to do with competition of victims. Competition of victims says something else. Competition of victims relies on the idea that what is scarce is not a scarcity of resources but is the scarcity of the ability of mankind to cry, to sympathize, and to have sorrow. The theory of the competition of victimhood means there is limited space in your brain or mine available for sorrow, and therefore if you use it for the Palestinians, there is nothing left for the Jews , if you use it for the Tutsis, there is nothing left for the Cambodians, and so on. And this is completely untrue; it is the contrary. The military resource, that—of course—you are probably right. But the capacity for sorrow, the pity capital, these work in a different way. The more you feel sorrow for the Tutsis, the more you will be able to feel for the Jews. The more for this, the more for that. The proof of that is that it is always the same; those who mobilize themselves for Darfur, those who get immediately what is happening in Rwanda, those who see the red light in Burundi, they are always—no exception—those who know exactly what happened with the Holocaust.I see it in myself. I would probably not have become aware so quickly of what was happening in Bosnia if I didn’t have the memory—and more than the memory: the concern—of what happened in the Holocaust. It’s true. I know that it would have taken me much more time to catch what was going on in Darfur if I’d never had Bosnia, Rwanda, and the Jewish experience in mind. So it is not this or that. It is that because of this. This is why this argument of competition of victims is just untrue and stupid.Bernard-Henri Lévy on Israel, Palestine, and the Competition of Victimhood
Oh my, Bernard Henri-Levy is laying out the sinister spiel of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks that Jews are nearly always moral paragons of virtue so any condemnation of actions taken by Jews, or at least "good Jews", is ipso facto "Anti-Semitism". Can you see where this logic leads? I don't think in terms of what is anti-Semitic or not but rather in terms of good and evil, right versus wrong.
By the way isn't Bernard Henri-Levi the lad who claimed that the essence of Judaism was to "preach at Nineveh", Nineveh being the capital of course of the Assyrian Empire who were the most blood thirsty in the ancient world and who took away the Northern tribes into exile as well being where the Prophet Jonah was sent by God to preach repentance to (he refused, hence his adventures in the sea monster's belly).
Meh, Jews are one of the most powerful groups on the planet, they aren't victims anymore. Having people dislike you or be suspicious of you, or even just find some of your beliefs distasteful isn't anti-Semitism.
The Nazis used to say the very same thing. How strange that the Zionists and the Nazis are a mirror image of each other.
Bernard Henri Levi is a war criminal, who has the blood of thousands of innocent Libyan and Syrian people on his hands. And now he is trying to stir up yet another Holocaust in Ukraine. He is the Julius Streicher of Zionism.
Henri-Levi is a regime-clown.
You gotta laugh at some of these snowflakes getting into a tizzy over some satirical cartoons. They tell the truth, that's their problem.
The answer to that is very clear. The cartoons are meant to show that because a Holocaust was perpetrated on you does not give you a licence to perpetrate Holocaust on other innocents.
When you're carrying out a Holocaust on innocent people, you do become paranoid about anyone holding up the mirror to you.
That's why your pal, the war criminal Assad, is so touchy about it....
What a pity there is no deal to remove Israel's illegal stock pile of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.
Ah, now this is unexpected bad news for the Zio-Dotard:
Republicans pull back on Iran deal legislation in setback for Trump
"A top Senate Republican is shelving draft legislation that would have triggered nuclear-related sanctions back on Iran over its ballistic missile activity, acknowledging it cannot garner the 50 votes required for passage and would ostracize foreign allies, The Jerusalem Post has learned."
Rothschild's boy is starting to do his master's bidding:
Good man you have taken sides in the Shia Sunni dispute
If Iran and Israel ever soften their stances against each other you will jump ship to the Saudis
You are so transparent
He really reminds me of Tony Blair so much. Let's hope for all our sakes he doesn't turn out to be quite so evil.
I took a firm stance on the Shia side was 18/19, this was after meeting Muslims from both camps as well as reading up on the whole complexity of the situation and have never looked back, in fact I have only been strengthened in that position with the unfolding of time. We have more in common with them culturally and Spiritually so it is only natural that we would take their side.