Re: Anti-semitism (anti-Judaism) in the sira, koran and hadith
_ G O D _
news:f4cfda8d-434a-40da...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
......<snip>.....irrelevant crap has been carefully removed...........
You must be very ignorant, to make such a stupid equation.
Only a COck-sucking sectarian retard like you would do that....
--
_____________________________________________________
I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
___________________________________________________
--
drahcir
> "cornholio" <andxor...@gmail.com> wrotenews:f4cfda8d-434a-40da...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> ......<snip>.....irrelevant crap has been carefully removed...........
>
> You must be very ignorant, to make such a stupid equation.
> Only a COck-sucking sectarian retard like you would do that....
The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
_ G O D _
news:354bc8cd-2064-4392...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
> sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
_ G O D _
> sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4392...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>
> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may seem,
it appears GOD is a moron.
_ G O D _
news:464e386b-dcba-4160...@w19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
> There is no such thing as "semitism"....
Only a COck-sucking imbecile
like you would assert such crap....
Dermot Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Nov 25, 4:53=A0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4392-a9eb=
>-ac86f...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>>
>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>
>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may seem,
>it appears GOD is a moron.
It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). And
please excuse the change of name (again).
drahcir
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
> >On Nov 25, 4:53=A0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
> >> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4392-a9eb=
>
> >> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
> >> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>
> >> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
> >> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>
> >There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may seem,
> >it appears GOD is a moron.
>
> It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least).
Well, you're right. Here's what it says:
1. Semitic characteristics, esp. the ways, ideas, influence, etc., of
the Jewish people.
2. a word or idiom peculiar to, derived from, or characteristic of a
Semitic language, esp. of Hebrew.
Neither one of the above can be classified as a "dogma".
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:464e386b-dcba-4160...@w19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > There is no such thing as "semitism"....
>
> Only a COck-sucking imbecile
> like you would assert such crap....
Is that any way for GOD to speak? You're not only a moron, you're a
primitive, rude moron.
_ G O D _
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote
news:088eb260-84d9-46a2...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> "_ G O D _" wrote:
> > "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote
>> news:464e386b-dcba-4160...@w19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > There is no such thing as "semitism"....
>>
>> Only a COck-sucking imbecile
>> like you would assert such crap....
>
> Is that any way for GOD to speak? You're not
> only a moron, you're a primitive, rude moron.
I'm just being straight forward with you, COck-sucker.
Because even kindergarteners know what the prefix
"anti" stand for. Hence, the following word must exist...
The dogma of word Semitism is based upon a Bible
fairy tale, where Sem was oldest (of 12) son of Noah....
You see, I'm not a sectarian like you, but know things....
drahcir
Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier. Here's
the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such thing
as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semitism"
means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it means, so
"semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself say
something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the logic of that
being the case is inescapable.
cornholio
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:12:30 GMT, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot
>
>
>
> Goldstein) wrote:
> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
> ><justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Nov 25, 4:53=A0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
> >>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4392-a9eb=
>
> >>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
> >>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>
> >>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
> >>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>
> >>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may seem,
> >>it appears GOD is a moron.
>
> >It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). And
> >please excuse the change of name (again).
>
> Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier. Here's
> the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
> dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such thing
> as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semitism"
> means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it means, so
> "semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself say
> something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the logic of that
> being the case is inescapable.
For the ne0-nazis and islamopigs I also sub-titled the post "Anti-
Judaism"
to head-off just such an argument.
Seon Ferguson
"_ G O D _" <DEM...@TELUS.NET> wrote in message
news:Q8hPm.53514$Db2.19881@edtnps83...
> "cornholio" <andx...@gmail.com> wrote
> news:f4cfda8d-434a-40da...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> ......<snip>.....irrelevant crap has been carefully removed...........
>
> You must be very ignorant, to make such a stupid equation.
> Only a COck-sucking sectarian retard like you would do that....
> --
What kind of a response is that? And if he was gay how does that change the
fact that the Torah and Bible are just fairy tales and the Jewish "Race" is
a myth?
_ G O D _
news:8uydnSvW4ZAhtZPW...@westnet.com.au...
>
>
> "_ G O D _" wrote news:Q8hPm.53514$Db2.19881@edtnps83...
"How" do you ask? The COck-sucking sectarians are not
only trying to distort the nature. They've twisted the history.
They present those fairy tales as facts, and insist that the
Bible was written and given to them by _ G O D _ himself....
Seon Ferguson
"_ G O D _" <DEM...@TELUS.NET> wrote in message
news:C5sPm.55115$PH1.46177@edtnps82...
> "Seon Ferguson" <seo...@gmail.com> wrote
> news:8uydnSvW4ZAhtZPW...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>>
>> "_ G O D _" wrote news:Q8hPm.53514$Db2.19881@edtnps83...
>>> "cornholio" <andx...@gmail.com> wrote
>>> news:f4cfda8d-434a-40da...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>> ......<snip>.....irrelevant crap has been carefully removed...........
>>>
>>> You must be very ignorant, to make such a stupid equation.
>>> Only a COck-sucking sectarian retard like you would do that....
>>> --
>> What kind of a response is that? And if he was gay
>> how does that change the fact that the Torah and Bible
>> are just fairy tales and the Jewish "Race" is a myth?
>
>
> "How" do you ask? The COck-sucking sectarians are not
> only trying to distort the nature. They've twisted the history.
> They present those fairy tales as facts, and insist that the
> Bible was written and given to them by _ G O D _ himself....
> --
Oh he was a cock sucker for saying that myths of the Old Testament happened.
Well it makes him wrong but um gay people have more sense...
Gray Ghost
news:088eb260-84d9-46a2...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
> On Nov 25, 5:07�pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com>
>> wrotenews:464e386b-dcba-4160...@w19g2000yqk.googlegroups.c
>> om...
>>
>>
>>
>> > There is no such thing as "semitism"....
>>
>> Only a COck-sucking imbecile
>> like you would assert such crap....
>
> Is that any way for GOD to speak? You're not only a moron, you're a
> primitive, rude moron.
Well, he is a false God. What do you expect. And the best part is the
punishment the real God has for False Prophets and those that would lead his
Children in the wrong way.
>> --
>> _____________________________________________________
>>
>> I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
>> and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide.
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -----------------
>>
>> "The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
>> Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
>> high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
>> does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
>> undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
>> sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
>> helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
>> reminds them of their responsibility." � ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
>> ___________________________________________________ --
>
--
�Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel
of envy, its inherent value is the equal sharing of misery.� Winston
Churchill
_ G O D _
news:Xns9CCF7342DDC19We...@216.196.97.142...
> drahcir <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:088eb260-84d9-46a2...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>
>>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrotenews:464e386b-dcba-4160...@w19g2000yqk.googlegroups.c
>>> om...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > There is no such thing as "semitism"....
>>>
>>> Only a COck-sucking imbecile
>>> like you would assert such crap....
>>
>> Is that any way for GOD to speak? You're not
>> only a moron, you're a primitive, rude moron.
>
> Well, he is a false God. What do you expect. And the best
> part is the punishment the real God has for False Prophets
> and those that would lead his Children in the wrong way.
You COck-sucking sectarian
retards deserved each-other....
_ G O D _
news:eea63911-d478-4960...@d10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>
> "Stupid equation"? "COck-sucking sectarian retard"? How
> does either of these phrases ameliorate the fact that anti-Judaism
> is part and parcel of your pislamic faith Abdul?
It's not my fault that you are a COco-sucking retard,
and Abdul - is a first name of everybody you know?
_ G O D _
"Jewdas" <Jew...@circumcision.com> wrote
news:7n99t7F...@mid.individual.net...
> cornholio wrote:
>> "_ G O D _" wrote:
>>>
>>> It's not my fault that you are a COco-sucking retard,
>>> and Abdul - is a first name of everybody you know.....
>>
>> It's interesting that you post to alt.prisons.
>> Done any time as a bitch?
>
> Everyone knew that is the NG that you could be found in.
> Are you really looking for others that have spent time as
> a bitch, like you. Actually you still are our NG Bitch!
It's quite obvious from his prison bitch-name that
COrnholio is a COck-sucking sectarian imbecile,
who is looking for "love" outside of prison, where
he apparently did not nave luck to find an "Abdul."
--
---
_____________________________________________________
I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
along with all institutions of the industrialized slavery and genocide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvies, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
_ G O D _
news:b7ff6a02-99d9-4404...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote
>> news:088eb260-84d9-46a2...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > "_ G O D _" wrote:
>> > > "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote
>> >>news:464e386b-dcba-4160...@w19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > There is no such thing as "semitism"....
>>
>> >> Only a COck-sucking imbecile
>> >> like you would assert such crap....
>>
>> > Is that any way for GOD to speak? You're not
>> > only a moron, you're a primitive, rude moron.
>>
>> I'm just being straight forward with you, COck-sucker.
>> Because even kindergarteners know what the prefix
>> "anti" stand for. Hence, the following word must exist...
>
> life", I suppose you think an antibiotic is "against life".
.....<snip>....irrelevant crap has been carefully removed.....
If you are indeed looking for logic, though do not
see a perversion in your totally twisted approach,
then I'm welcoming your choice of explanation of
an obvious mistake of purely grammatical nature....
The meaning, just like purpose of the antibiotics,
indeed, translates into a common expression as
a "bug-killer," or a "virus-fighter," ie. "against life"
(of a virus which is known to cause the sickness)....
Therefore, you indeed, may equate antisemitism
to an antibiotic, because they both fight sickness,
and Jedophobia is only a vehicle of that sickness....
Seon Ferguson
"_ G O D _" <DEM...@TELUS.NET> wrote in message
news:xJTPm.55331$PH1.49632@edtnps82...
>
>
> "Jewdas" <Jew...@circumcision.com> wrote
> news:7n99t7F...@mid.individual.net...
>> cornholio wrote:
>>> "_ G O D _" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It's not my fault that you are a COco-sucking retard,
>>>> and Abdul - is a first name of everybody you know.....
>>>
>>> It's interesting that you post to alt.prisons.
>>> Done any time as a bitch?
>>
>> Everyone knew that is the NG that you could be found in.
>> Are you really looking for others that have spent time as
>> a bitch, like you. Actually you still are our NG Bitch!
>
> It's quite obvious from his prison bitch-name that
> COrnholio is a COck-sucking sectarian imbecile,
> who is looking for "love" outside of prison, where
> he apparently did not nave luck to find an "Abdul."
> --
> ---
Haven't you ever watched Beavis and Butt-head?
And I will take the role of the news groups bitch for the ladies if no one
is interested...
_ G O D _
news:k6CdnfzGBZouO43W...@westnet.com.au...
>
>
> ....I will take the role of the news groups
> bitch for the ladies if no one is interested...
Good for you, Seon. Go ahead, and feel free to
take any role you desire. You don't need to ask
for anyone's approval, in order to assume roles.
I don't watch the show, but know what you mean...
--
_____________________________________________________
I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
_ G O D _
news:609f48d5-e290-4428...@d21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...>> news:3f3d48b5-b755-48cf...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > "_ G O D _" wrote:
>>
>> >> Therefore, you indeed, may equate antisemitism
>> >> to an antibiotic, because they both fight sickness,
>>
>> > Lots of pretentious blahblah to attempt to mask the fact that your
>> > argument was stupid. Can't expect much more from your ilk.
>>
>> I don't really know to which particular "ilk" you are
>> sorting me inside of your head, but the argument
>> was yours, from the beginning. I just happened to
>> support the fact that the meaning of the antibiotic,
>> as you have inadvertently asserted, is indeed, - a
>> destroyer, or inhibitor, of the life of bacteria which
>> causing the disease. Therefore, if you are looking
>> for someone to blame for "stupid argument," then
>> blame yourself. There's nothing pretentious about
>> the fact that the real culprit (every body should be
>> fighting), is actually a Semitism, not the other way
>> around....
>> --
>
> .... is English your native language Abdul?
Is this just another one of your "valid arguments," or you
are simply a COck-sucking sectarian retard who unable
to understand in the only language you communicate in,
and decided to show me your vial penis breath, instead?
Save it for your butt-buddies, who able to appreciate it...
_ G O D _
news:hesluo$buh$1...@aioe.org...
> Nice post. It is very good at keeping the world hating Jews.
>
The world is hating all of the COck-sucking
sectarian retards from every denomination....
Dermot Goldstein
I tend to disagree...but I would offer a slightly different
definition: Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour that gives rise
to 'anti-semitism'�.
(Please excuse extended absence...this has the makings of an
interesting semantic discussion...)
drahcir
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:48:48 -0500, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:12:30 GMT, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot
> >Goldstein) wrote:
>
> >>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
> >><justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>On Nov 25, 4:53=A0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
> >>>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4392-a9eb=
>
> >>>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make no
> >>>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>
> >>>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
> >>>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>
> >>>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may seem,
> >>>it appears GOD is a moron.
>
> >>It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). And
> >>please excuse the change of name (again).
>
> >Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier. Here's
> >the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
> >dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such thing
> >as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semitism"
> >means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it means, so
> >"semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself say
> >something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the logic of that
> >being the case is inescapable.
>
> I tend to disagree...but I would offer a slightly different
> definition: Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour that gives rise
> to 'anti-semitism'®.
>
> (Please excuse extended absence...this has the makings of an
> interesting semantic discussion...)
Our favorite kind... regarding "semitism" - it's one of those words
that obviously made it by the editors of some dictionaries. As I
stated above, your "definition" is simply the result of a
misapprehension of "anti-Semitism". I have NEVER seen "semitism" in
usage, aside from the #$%^#%'s in this group, of course.
Aaronovich
"Dermot Goldstein" <dgold...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:4b226dae...@news.x-privat.org...
Yes! Yes! I am telling him this so many times. So many other people are
telling him this also. He is not capable of understanding anything his head
tells him is criticism of the Jew or the Jew way of life.
Aaronovich
"drahcir" <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:25645ab1-103e-40e6...@s20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
The world sees Semitism in action every day, Mister backward Richard. You
engage in it now.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 11, 11:08=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:48:48 -0500, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:12:30 GMT, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot
>> >Goldstein) wrote:
>>
>> >>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>> >><justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>On Nov 25, 4:53=3DA0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
>> >>>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4392=
>-a9eb=3D
>> >>>-ac86fb24c...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >>>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and make =
>no
>> >>>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>>
>> >>>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
>> >>>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>>
>> >>>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may seem,
>> >>>it appears GOD is a moron.
>>
>> >>It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). =A0And
>> >>please excuse the change of name (again).
>>
>> >Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier. Here's
>> >the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
>> >dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such thing
>> >as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semitism"
>> >means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it means, so
>> >"semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself say
>> >something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the =A0logic of that
>> >being the case is inescapable.
>>
>> I tend to disagree...but I would offer a slightly different
>> definition: =A0Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour that gives rise
>> to 'anti-semitism'=AE.
>>
>> (Please excuse extended absence...this has the makings of an
>> interesting semantic discussion...)
>
>Our favorite kind... regarding "semitism" - it's one of those words
>that obviously made it by the editors of some dictionaries. As I
>stated above, your "definition" is simply the result of a
>misapprehension of "anti-Semitism". I have NEVER seen "semitism" in
>usage, aside from the #$%^#%'s in this group, of course.
Speaking as an #$%^#%, and as one of the foremost proponents of
'anti-semitism'�, I have absolutely no misapprehensions regarding the
word.
'Semitism' is, of course, a politically incorrect term. Its absence
from common usage stems from the implication that jews are somehow
responsible for 'anti-semitism'� as a result of their behaviour.
Those of us who are aware of these things know, beyond a shadow of
doubt, that this is indeed the case. Without 'semitism',
'anti-semitism'� would not exist.
Let's not forget also that 'anti-semitism'� is merely an anglicised
form of the German noun coined by Wilhelm Marr in the 1800s. Having
been married to no fewer than three jewish women, he was an authority
on the subject. Jews were the only semites in Germany at the time,
hence his choice of wording.
drahcir
Hmm, seems you are trying to convert my thesis that the word is simply
invalid, as demonstrated by its nearly total absence anywhere except
newsgroups, into its being "politically incorrect". Not gonna fly,
rev, sorry. Plenty of politically incorrect terms show up all the time
in normal usage.
Its absence
> from common usage stems from the implication that jews are somehow
> responsible for 'anti-semitism'® as a result of their behaviour.
> Those of us who are aware of these things know, beyond a shadow of
> doubt, that this is indeed the case. Without 'semitism',
> 'anti-semitism'® would not exist.
I am afraid the millions of uses of "antisemitism" would belie that.
Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
perceived group behavior is just one component. Many are such due to
their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs to
be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>
> Let's not forget also that 'anti-semitism'® is merely an anglicised
> form of the German noun coined by Wilhelm Marr in the 1800s.
So?
Having
> been married to no fewer than three jewish women, he was an authority
> on the subject.
LOL! I didn't know that. I am known for occasional gullibility, so I
hope you're not pulling my leg.
Jews were the only semites in Germany at the time,
> hence his choice of wording.
Correct.
drahcir
"Attention"?
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 12, 7:22=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:48:44 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 11, 11:08=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot Goldstein) wrote=
>:
>> >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:48:48 -0500, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:12:30 GMT, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot
>> >> >Goldstein) wrote:
>>
>> >> >>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>> >> >><justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>On Nov 25, 4:53=3D3DA0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
>> >> >>>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-2064-4=
>392=3D
>> >-a9eb=3D3D
>> >> >>>-ac86fb24c...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> >>>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and ma=
>ke =3D
>> >no
>> >> >>>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>>
>> >> >>>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
>> >> >>>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>>
>> >> >>>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may see=
>m,
>> >> >>>it appears GOD is a moron.
>>
>> >> >>It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). =3DA0And
>> >> >>please excuse the change of name (again).
>>
>> >> >Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier. Here'=
>s
>> >> >the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
>> >> >dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such thing
>> >> >as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semitism"
>> >> >means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it means, s=
>o
>> >> >"semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself say
>> >> >something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the =3DA0logic of that
>> >> >being the case is inescapable.
>>
>> >> I tend to disagree...but I would offer a slightly different
>> >> definition: =3DA0Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour that gives r=
>ise
>> >> to 'anti-semitism'=3DAE.
>>
>> >> (Please excuse extended absence...this has the makings of an
>> >> interesting semantic discussion...)
>>
>> >Our favorite kind... regarding "semitism" - it's one of those words
>> >that obviously made it by the editors of some dictionaries. As I
>> >stated above, your "definition" is simply the result of a
>> >misapprehension of "anti-Semitism". I have NEVER seen "semitism" in
>> >usage, aside from the #$%^#%'s in this group, of course.
>>
>> Speaking as an #$%^#%, and as one of the foremost proponents of
>> 'anti-semitism'=AE, I have absolutely no misapprehensions regarding the
>> word. =A0
>>
>> 'Semitism' is, of course, a politically incorrect term.
>
>Hmm, seems you are trying to convert my thesis that the word is simply
>invalid, as demonstrated by its nearly total absence anywhere except
>newsgroups,
and dictionaries....
> into its being "politically incorrect". Not gonna fly,
>rev, sorry. Plenty of politically incorrect terms show up all the time
>in normal usage.
I tried our old friend Google, but of the 4.5 million hits for
Semitism, the first several pages referred (mostly) to
'Anti-semitism'�...I lost interest in looking further...
>Its absence
>> from common usage stems from the implication that jews are somehow
>> responsible for 'anti-semitism'=AE as a result of their behaviour.
>> Those of us who are aware of these things know, beyond a shadow of
>> doubt, that this is indeed the case. =A0Without 'semitism',
>> 'anti-semitism'=AE would not exist.
>
>I am afraid the millions of uses of "antisemitism" would belie that.
Millions of uses...by jews?
>Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
>perceived group behavior is just one component.
Actual group behaviour is another.
>Many are such due to
>their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
>that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
>neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs to
>be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
>are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
>this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
>irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
No, actually, it's not.
>> Let's not forget also that 'anti-semitism'=AE is merely an anglicised
>> form of the German noun coined by Wilhelm Marr in the 1800s. =A0
>
>So?
Merely an observation on the etymology of the word.
>Having
>> been married to no fewer than three jewish women, he was an authority
>> on the subject. =A0
>
>LOL! I didn't know that. I am known for occasional gullibility, so I
>hope you're not pulling my leg.
It's absolutely true!
Dermit Goldstein
I believe it's a technical tool used in network connection testing.
You would ping an IP address and test the delay. On Usenet, it has
been adopted, as you surmised, for the purpose of attracting someone's
attention.
drahcir
I'll tell you what REALLY bugs me about search engines. I should have
power to search for EXACTLY what I want. If I search for " semitism",
I want a return for [space]semitism and NOTHING ELSE. But I know of no
way to make this happen - Google is convinced I am not smart enough to
know what I want.
>
> >Its absence
> >> from common usage stems from the implication that jews are somehow
> >> responsible for 'anti-semitism'=AE as a result of their behaviour.
> >> Those of us who are aware of these things know, beyond a shadow of
> >> doubt, that this is indeed the case. =A0Without 'semitism',
> >> 'anti-semitism'=AE would not exist.
>
> >I am afraid the millions of uses of "antisemitism" would belie that.
>
> Millions of uses...by jews?
Millions of uses, period.
>
> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>
> Actual group behaviour is another.
I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
> >Many are such due to
> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs to
> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>
> No, actually, it's not.
I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If you
get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
Bolt Upright
Et tu, Google! It appears that even the bots have drahcir pegged!
Aaronovich
>newsgroups ...
Your "thesis" fails right there, Mister backward Richard.
The word exists wherever the Jew exists. The Jew labels all he hates as
being anti-Semitic.
You lie effortlessly, Mister backward Richard. Not very effectively or
convincingly, however.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 12, 11:35=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 06:21:26 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 12, 7:22=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:48:44 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 11, 11:08=3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot Goldstein) =
>wrote=3D
>> >:
>> >> >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:48:48 -0500, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:12:30 GMT, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot
>> >> >> >Goldstein) wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>> >> >> >><justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >>>On Nov 25, 4:53=3D3D3DA0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrot=
>e:
>> >> >> >>>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-206=
>4-4=3D
>> >392=3D3D
>> >> >-a9eb=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >>>-ac86fb24c...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> >> >>>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent and=
> ma=3D
>> >ke =3D3D
>> >> >no
>> >> >> >>>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>>
>> >> >> >>>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
>> >> >> >>>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>>
>> >> >> >>>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it may =
>see=3D
>> >m,
>> >> >> >>>it appears GOD is a moron.
>>
>> >> >> >>It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). =3D3D=
>A0And
>> >> >> >>please excuse the change of name (again).
>>
>> >> >> >Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier. He=
>re'=3D
>> >s
>> >> >> >the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
>> >> >> >dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such thi=
>ng
>> >> >> >as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semitism"
>> >> >> >means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it means=
>, s=3D
>> >o
>> >> >> >"semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself say
>> >> >> >something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the =3D3DA0logic of=
> that
>> >> >> >being the case is inescapable.
>>
>> >> >> I tend to disagree...but I would offer a slightly different
>> >> >> definition: =3D3DA0Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour that gi=
>ves r=3D
>> >ise
>> >> >> to 'anti-semitism'=3D3DAE.
>>
>> >> >> (Please excuse extended absence...this has the makings of an
>> >> >> interesting semantic discussion...)
>>
>> >> >Our favorite kind... regarding "semitism" - it's one of those words
>> >> >that obviously made it by the editors of some dictionaries. As I
>> >> >stated above, your "definition" is simply the result of a
>> >> >misapprehension of "anti-Semitism". I have NEVER seen "semitism" in
>> >> >usage, aside from the #$%^#%'s in this group, of course.
>>
>> >> Speaking as an #$%^#%, and as one of the foremost proponents of
>> >> 'anti-semitism'=3DAE, I have absolutely no misapprehensions regarding =
>the
>> >> word. =3DA0
>>
>> >> 'Semitism' is, of course, a politically incorrect term.
>>
>> >Hmm, seems you are trying to convert my thesis that the word is simply
>> >invalid, as demonstrated by its nearly total absence anywhere except
>> >newsgroups,
>>
>> and dictionaries....
>>
>> > into its being "politically incorrect". Not gonna fly,
>> >rev, sorry. Plenty of politically incorrect terms show up all the time
>> >in normal usage.
>>
>> I tried our old friend Google, but of the 4.5 million hits for
>> Semitism, the first several pages referred (mostly) to
>> 'Anti-semitism'=AE...I lost interest in looking further...
>
>I'll tell you what REALLY bugs me about search engines. I should have
>power to search for EXACTLY what I want. If I search for " semitism",
>I want a return for [space]semitism and NOTHING ELSE. But I know of no
>way to make this happen - Google is convinced I am not smart enough to
>know what I want.
To me, this implies that 'anti-semitism'� and semitism are closely
linked. LOL
>> >Its absence
>> >> from common usage stems from the implication that jews are somehow
>> >> responsible for 'anti-semitism'=3DAE as a result of their behaviour.
>> >> Those of us who are aware of these things know, beyond a shadow of
>> >> doubt, that this is indeed the case. =3DA0Without 'semitism',
>> >> 'anti-semitism'=3DAE would not exist.
>>
>> >I am afraid the millions of uses of "antisemitism" would belie that.
>>
>> Millions of uses...by jews? =A0
>
>Millions of uses, period.
And who is most likely to use the term? Those who have marketed and
promoted it, of course!
But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand of
racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
>> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> Actual group behaviour is another.
>
>I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
Cancerous?
>> >Many are such due to
>> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
>> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
>> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs to
>> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
>> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
>> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
>> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>>
>> No, actually, it's not.
>
>I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If you
>get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
Your faith in the psychiatric industry is both touching and unfounded:
it is absolutely riddled with jew quacks and charlatans. A better
example of semitism would be hard to find.
drahcir
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 09:43:36 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
>
>
I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
frequently by jews than gentiles. However, I'd guess that the word
"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we really
haven't established anything important.
>
> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand of
> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>
> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>
> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>
> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
>
> Cancerous?
Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences between
reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mind.
>
> >> >Many are such due to
> >> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
> >> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
> >> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs to
> >> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
> >> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
> >> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
> >> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>
> >> No, actually, it's not.
>
> >I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If you
> >get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
>
> Your faith in the psychiatric industry is both touching and unfounded:
> it is absolutely riddled with jew quacks and charlatans. A better
> example of semitism would be hard to find.
With an attitude like that, you have little hope of recovery.
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
If you're asking me out on a date, I have to respectfully decline -
let's just say you're not my type and leave it at that, shall we?
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 13, 8:19=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 09:43:36 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 12, 11:35=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote=
>:
>> >> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 06:21:26 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 12, 7:22=3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) w=
>rote:
>> >> >> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:48:44 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Dec 11, 11:08=3D3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermot Goldst=
>ein) =3D
>> >wrote=3D3D
>> >> >:
>> >> >> >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 23:48:48 -0500, drahcir <s...@sgscc.com> wro=
>te:
>> >> >> >> >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:12:30 GMT, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermo=
>t
>> >> >> >> >Goldstein) wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >>On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:57:30 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>> >> >> >> >><justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >>>On Nov 25, 4:53=3D3D3D3DA0pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET>=
> wrot=3D
>> >e:
>> >> >> >> >>>> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrotenews:354bc8cd-=
>206=3D
>> >4-4=3D3D
>> >> >392=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >-a9eb=3D3D3D3D
>> >> >> >> >>>-ac86fb24c...@g26g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> > The above makes no sense, GOD. How can you be omnipotent =
>and=3D
>> > ma=3D3D
>> >> >ke =3D3D3D
>> >> >> >no
>> >> >> >> >>>> > sense? I think I'm losing my faith...
>>
>> >> >> >> >>>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
>> >> >> >> >>>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>>
>> >> >> >> >>>There is no such thing as "semitism", GOD. As strange as it m=
>ay =3D
>> >see=3D3D
>> >> >m,
>> >> >> >> >>>it appears GOD is a moron.
>>
>> >> >> >> >>It's actually in the dictionary (dictionary.com, at least). =
>=3D3D3D=3D
>> >A0And
>> >> >> >> >>please excuse the change of name (again).
>>
>> >> >> >> >Sorry, I was very much in a rush when I replied to you earlier.=
> He=3D
>> >re'=3D3D
>> >> >s
>> >> >> >> >the deal. There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes
>> >> >> >> >dictionaries get it wrong. The reason there CANNOT be any such =
>thi=3D
>> >ng
>> >> >> >> >as semitism is because that would necessitate that "anti-semiti=
>sm"
>> >> >> >> >means being against semitism. Of course, that is not what it me=
>ans=3D
>> >, s=3D3D
>> >> >o
>> >> >> >> >"semitism" must be bogus. I never thought I would hear myself s=
>ay
>> >> >> >> >something in a decent dictionary is bogus, but the =3D3D3DA0log=
>ic of=3D
>> > that
>> >> >> >> >being the case is inescapable.
>>
>> >> >> >> I tend to disagree...but I would offer a slightly different
>> >> >> >> definition: =3D3D3DA0Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour th=
>at gi=3D
>> >ves r=3D3D
>> >> >ise
>> >> >> >> to 'anti-semitism'=3D3D3DAE.
>>
>> >> >> >> (Please excuse extended absence...this has the makings of an
>> >> >> >> interesting semantic discussion...)
>>
>> >> >> >Our favorite kind... regarding "semitism" - it's one of those word=
>s
>> >> >> >that obviously made it by the editors of some dictionaries. As I
>> >> >> >stated above, your "definition" is simply the result of a
>> >> >> >misapprehension of "anti-Semitism". I have NEVER seen "semitism" i=
>n
>> >> >> >usage, aside from the #$%^#%'s in this group, of course.
>>
>> >> >> Speaking as an #$%^#%, and as one of the foremost proponents of
>> >> >> 'anti-semitism'=3D3DAE, I have absolutely no misapprehensions regar=
>ding =3D
>> >the
>> >> >> word. =3D3DA0
>>
>> >> >> 'Semitism' is, of course, a politically incorrect term.
>>
>> >> >Hmm, seems you are trying to convert my thesis that the word is simpl=
>y
>> >> >invalid, as demonstrated by its nearly total absence anywhere except
>> >> >newsgroups,
>>
>> >> and dictionaries....
>>
>> >> > into its being "politically incorrect". Not gonna fly,
>> >> >rev, sorry. Plenty of politically incorrect terms show up all the tim=
>e
>> >> >in normal usage.
>>
>> >> I tried our old friend Google, but of the 4.5 million hits for
>> >> Semitism, the first several pages referred (mostly) to
>> >> 'Anti-semitism'=3DAE...I lost interest in looking further...
>>
>> >I'll tell you what REALLY bugs me about search engines. I should have
>> >power to search for EXACTLY what I want. If I search for " semitism",
>> >I want a return for [space]semitism and NOTHING ELSE. But I know of no
>> >way to make this happen - Google is convinced I am not smart enough to
>> >know what I want.
>>
>> To me, this implies that 'anti-semitism'=AE and semitism are closely
>> linked. =A0LOL
>>
>> >> >Its absence
>> >> >> from common usage stems from the implication that jews are somehow
>> >> >> responsible for 'anti-semitism'=3D3DAE as a result of their behavio=
>ur.
>> >> >> Those of us who are aware of these things know, beyond a shadow of
>> >> >> doubt, that this is indeed the case. =3D3DA0Without 'semitism',
>> >> >> 'anti-semitism'=3D3DAE would not exist.
>>
>> >> >I am afraid the millions of uses of "antisemitism" would belie that.
>>
>> >> Millions of uses...by jews? =3DA0
>>
>> >Millions of uses, period.
>>
>> And who is most likely to use the term? =A0Those who have marketed and
>> promoted it, of course! =A0
>
>I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
>frequently by jews than gentiles.
Of course. And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not is
in reference to its overuse by jews.
> However, I'd guess that the word
>"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we really
>haven't established anything important.
I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't really made
any progress here.
>> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand of
>> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>
>We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be deserving
of a Nobel prize.
>> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
>> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>>
>> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
>>
>> Cancerous?
>
>Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences between
>reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mind.
Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
>> >> >Many are such due to
>> >> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
>> >> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
>> >> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs t=
>o
>> >> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
>> >> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
>> >> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
>> >> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>>
>> >> No, actually, it's not.
>>
>> >I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If you
>> >get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
>>
>> Your faith in the psychiatric industry is both touching and unfounded:
>> it is absolutely riddled with jew quacks and charlatans. =A0A better
>> example of semitism would be hard to find.
>
>With an attitude like that, you have little hope of recovery.
Assuming, of course, that there is something to recover from.
drahcir
<snip>
> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>
> Of course. And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not is
> in reference to its overuse by jews.
Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>
> > However, I'd guess that the word
> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we really
> >haven't established anything important.
>
> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't really made
> any progress here.
Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian". "Naqba"
is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-imposed arab
exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as the arab
Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and probably
even fewer buyers :-).
> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand of
> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>
> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>
> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be deserving
> of a Nobel prize.
Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should register a
complaint with the Nobel Committee.
>
> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
> >> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>
> >> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>
> >> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
>
> >> Cancerous?
>
> >Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences between
> >reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mind.
>
> Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
Um, no. I am suggesting that in certain individuals, perception is not
a reliable indicator of reality.
>
> >> >> >Many are such due to
> >> >> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous as
> >> >> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function of
> >> >> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame needs t=
> >o
> >> >> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although they
> >> >> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over years,
> >> >> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
> >> >> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>
> >> >> No, actually, it's not.
>
> >> >I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If you
> >> >get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
>
> >> Your faith in the psychiatric industry is both touching and unfounded:
> >> it is absolutely riddled with jew quacks and charlatans. =A0A better
> >> example of semitism would be hard to find.
>
> >With an attitude like that, you have little hope of recovery.
>
> Assuming, of course, that there is something to recover from.
Of course. There are actually two components of your problem. The
first is a misperception, and the second is an obsession. They need to
be treated separately.
I've snipped the beginning of this discussion because it was getting
unwieldy, but also because there were a lot of formatting symbols
appearing as text. I don't know if they're coming from you or me.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 13, 9:15=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
><snip>
>> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
>> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>>
>> Of course. =A0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not is
>> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>
>Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
own neurosis.
>> > However, I'd guess that the word
>> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we really
>> >haven't established anything important.
>>
>> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't really made
>> any progress here.
>
>Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian". "Naqba"
>is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-imposed arab
>exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as the arab
>Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and probably
>even fewer buyers :-).
Ah, OK, thank you.
>> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand of
>> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>>
>> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be deserving
>> of a Nobel prize.
>
>Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should register a
>complaint with the Nobel Committee.
Sadly, there is no Nobel prize for marketing/promoting.
>> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff -
>> >> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> >> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>>
>> >> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
>>
>> >> Cancerous?
>>
>> >Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences between
>> >reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mind.
>>
>> Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
>
>Um, no. I am suggesting that in certain individuals, perception is not
>a reliable indicator of reality.
So you agree that actual group behaviour among jews exists...
>> >> >> >Many are such due to
>> >> >> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculous =
>as
>> >> >> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a function =
>of
>> >> >> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame need=
>s t=3D
>> >o
>> >> >> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although th=
>ey
>> >> >> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over year=
>s,
>> >> >> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
>> >> >> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>>
>> >> >> No, actually, it's not.
>>
>> >> >I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If yo=
>u
>> >> >get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
>>
>> >> Your faith in the psychiatric industry is both touching and unfounded:
>> >> it is absolutely riddled with jew quacks and charlatans. =3DA0A better
>> >> example of semitism would be hard to find.
>>
>> >With an attitude like that, you have little hope of recovery.
>>
>> Assuming, of course, that there is something to recover from.
>
>Of course. There are actually two components of your problem. The
>first is a misperception, and the second is an obsession. They need to
>be treated separately.
And you are medically qualified to offer this diagnosis?
>I've snipped the beginning of this discussion because it was getting
>unwieldy, but also because there were a lot of formatting symbols
>appearing as text. I don't know if they're coming from you or me.
I'm not sure either...we've had this problem before, haven't we?
drahcir
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
> >On Dec 13, 9:15=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
> ><snip>
> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>
> >> Of course. =A0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not is
> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>
> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>
> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
> own neurosis.
That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, whereas you
have perceptual problems and are obsessed. Besides, who ever heard of
a neurotic jew?
I suppose "group behavior" could be defined as behavior exhibited by
a significant majority of individuals in a population. Thus, the first
step would be to define the population in question. If speaking about
a large population such as "jews", it is difficult to imagine that
someone might be familiar with a significant majority of individual
behavior in that group, thus the term is irrelevant. It is possible,
however, to pinpoint group behavior if the group is small enough such
that a majority might be known well. For example, I could say "the
jews on my block, of whom I know personally 75%, seem to have a good
sense of humor". I would then say that a group behavior was
ascertained insofar as the jews on my block are concerned, it being
understood that this is a generality and does not necessarily apply to
each and every individual. For all I know, there could be a real crab
around here.
Of course not. I'm a musician. I just enjoy seeing how far I can go by
bullshitting. You must admit I sound pretty good, no?
>
> >I've snipped the beginning of this discussion because it was getting
> >unwieldy, but also because there were a lot of formatting symbols
> >appearing as text. I don't know if they're coming from you or me.
>
> I'm not sure either...we've had this problem before, haven't we?
Yes.
Aaronovich
On Dec 13, 2:38 pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Dec 13, 9:15=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
> ><snip>
> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>
> >> Of course. =A0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not is
> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>
> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>
> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
> own neurosis.
>That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms...
Stop it Mister backward Richard. Stop it now! You make me pee myself. You
are a born comedian.
Aaronovich
You make me laugh, Mister backward Richard. You are a comedian.
Your "type" comes with four legs, I'll bet.
Bolt Upright
"Aaronovich" <aaron...@home.com> wrote in message
news:hg3p2n$69r$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I am quite certain that that is your normal mode of relief.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 13, 2:38=A0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 13, 9:15=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> ><snip>
>> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
>> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>>
>> >> Of course. =3DA0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not =
>is
>> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>>
>> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>>
>> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
>> own neurosis.
>
>That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, whereas you
>have perceptual problems and are obsessed.
Perceptual problems? Obsessed??? That's simply absurd.
> Besides, who ever heard of
>a neurotic jew?
Just about every Gentile, I would imagine.
>> >> > However, I'd guess that the word
>> >> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we really
>> >> >haven't established anything important.
>>
>> >> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't really made
>> >> any progress here.
>>
>> >Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian". "Naqba"
>> >is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-imposed arab
>> >exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as the arab
>> >Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and probably
>> >even fewer buyers :-).
>>
>> Ah, OK, thank you.
>>
>> >> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand of
>> >> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>>
>> >> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be deserving
>> >> of a Nobel prize.
>>
>> >Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should register a
>> >complaint with the Nobel Committee.
>>
>> Sadly, there is no Nobel prize for marketing/promoting.
>>
>> >> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stuff =
You would not expect the majority of a group of 100 Swedes to be
exciteable, nor would you expect the majority of a group of 100
Italians to be dour and humourless. There are valid stereotypes to be
drawn.
>> >> >> >> >Many are such due to
>> >> >> >> >their perception that jews killed the "son of god" (as ridiculo=
>us =3D
>> >as
>> >> >> >> >that may sound). Much antisemitic behavior is actually a functi=
>on =3D
>> >of
>> >> >> >> >neurosis - something happens to an individual for which blame n=
>eed=3D
>> >s t=3D3D
>> >> >o
>> >> >> >> >be assigned, and jews become the convenient scapegoat, although=
> th=3D
>> >ey
>> >> >> >> >are blameless as a group in this incident by definition. Over y=
>ear=3D
>> >s,
>> >> >> >> >this becomes a focal point of contradictory thought, leading to
>> >> >> >> >irrationality. I'd bet that's what's responsible in your case.
>>
>> >> >> >> No, actually, it's not.
>>
>> >> >> >I'm afraid I cannot accept your diagnosis, for obvious reasons. If=
> yo=3D
>> >u
>> >> >> >get such an opinion from a credentialed professional, we can talk.
>>
>> >> >> Your faith in the psychiatric industry is both touching and unfound=
>ed:
>> >> >> it is absolutely riddled with jew quacks and charlatans. =3D3DA0A b=
>etter
>> >> >> example of semitism would be hard to find.
>>
>> >> >With an attitude like that, you have little hope of recovery.
>>
>> >> Assuming, of course, that there is something to recover from.
>>
>> >Of course. There are actually two components of your problem. The
>> >first is a misperception, and the second is an obsession. They need to
>> >be treated separately.
>>
>> And you are medically qualified to offer this diagnosis?
>
>Of course not. I'm a musician. I just enjoy seeing how far I can go by
>bullshitting. You must admit I sound pretty good, no?
Up to a point, yes. But I like to think I'm better at it. Perhaps
because I've been doing it longer...
drahcir
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:30:47 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
>
>
> >On Dec 13, 2:38=A0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Dec 13, 9:15=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
> >> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>
> >> >> Of course. =3DA0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than not =
> >is
> >> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>
> >> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>
> >> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
> >> own neurosis.
>
> >That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, whereas you
> >have perceptual problems and are obsessed.
>
> Perceptual problems? Obsessed??? That's simply absurd.
Neurotics often lack the ability to accurately perceive their
disorder, as often would be expected.
>
> > Besides, who ever heard of
> >a neurotic jew?
>
> Just about every Gentile, I would imagine.
LIGHTEN UP. IT WAS A JOKE. I thought you of all people would get it.
Well, how many Swedes have you met? Italians? How do you determine the
accuracy of your stereotype? In any case, the issue is not whether one
chooses to hold to the idea of stereotypes. The issue is whether one
uses that stereotype to prejudge an individual in a personal setting.
Thanks.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 3:46=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:30:47 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 13, 2:38=3DA0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 13, 9:15=3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) w=
>rote:
>> >> ><snip>
>> >> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
>> >> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>>
>> >> >> Of course. =3D3DA0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often than=
> not =3D
>> >is
>> >> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>>
>> >> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>>
>> >> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
>> >> own neurosis.
>>
>> >That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, whereas you
>> >have perceptual problems and are obsessed.
>>
>> Perceptual problems? =A0Obsessed??? =A0That's simply absurd.
>
>Neurotics often lack the ability to accurately perceive their
>disorder, as often would be expected.
See below.
>> > Besides, who ever heard of
>> >a neurotic jew?
>>
>> Just about every Gentile, I would imagine.
>
>LIGHTEN UP. IT WAS A JOKE. I thought you of all people would get it.
I hoped it was a joke. But, as you say, neurotics are often unaware
of their neuroses.
>> >> >> > However, I'd guess that the word
>> >> >> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we reall=
>y
>> >> >> >haven't established anything important.
>>
>> >> >> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't really m=
>ade
>> >> >> any progress here.
>>
>> >> >Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian". "Naqba=
>"
>> >> >is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-imposed arab
>> >> >exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as the arab
>> >> >Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and probably
>> >> >even fewer buyers :-).
>>
>> >> Ah, OK, thank you.
>>
>> >> >> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own brand =
>of
>> >> >> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >> >> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>>
>> >> >> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be deservin=
>g
>> >> >> of a Nobel prize.
>>
>> >> >Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should register a
>> >> >complaint with the Nobel Committee.
>>
>> >> Sadly, there is no Nobel prize for marketing/promoting.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of stu=
>ff =3D
>> >-
>> >> >> >> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>>
>> >> >> >> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
>>
>> >> >> >> Cancerous?
>>
>> >> >> >Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences between
>> >> >> >reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mind.
>>
>> >> >> Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
>>
>> >> >Um, no. I am suggesting that in certain individuals, perception is no=
>t
>> >> >a reliable indicator of reality.
>>
>> >> So you agree that actual group behaviour among jews exists...
>>
>> > I suppose "group behavior" could be defined as behavior exhibited by
>> >a significant majority of individuals in a population. Thus, the first
>> >step would be to define the population in question. If speaking about
>> >a large population such as "jews", it is difficult to imagine that
>> >someone might be familiar with a significant majority of individual
>> >behavior in that group, thus the term is irrelevant. It is possible,
>> >however, to pinpoint group behavior if the group is small enough such
>> >that a majority might be known well. For example, I could say "the
>> >jews on my block, of whom I know personally 75%, seem to have a good
>> >sense of humor". I would then say that a group behavior was
>> >ascertained insofar as the jews on my block are concerned, it being
>> >understood that this is a generality and does not necessarily apply to
>> >each and every individual. For all I know, there could be a real crab
>> >around here.
>>
>> You would not expect the majority of a group of 100 Swedes to be
>> exciteable, nor would you expect the majority of a group of 100
>> Italians to be dour and humourless. =A0There are valid stereotypes to be
>> drawn.
>>
>Well, how many Swedes have you met? Italians?
Many of each; jews too.
> How do you determine the
>accuracy of your stereotype?
Based on the size of the sample.
>In any case, the issue is not whether one
>chooses to hold to the idea of stereotypes. The issue is whether one
>uses that stereotype to prejudge an individual in a personal setting.
If it's an accurate stereotype then, statistically, its use in
prejudging an individual is valid.
drahcir
You have no way of determining whether your stereotype is accurate, as
you have implicitly admitted that your sample is by definition small.
The odds against flipping a coin six times in a row and getting heads
each time are not particularly high. Nevertheless, it would be a
mistake to conclude from a sample of six flips that coins are one-
sided. Prejudging an individual is NEVER valid, according to the
definition of prejudice, as well as according to statistics.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 9:02=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:55:01 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 14, 3:46=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:30:47 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 13, 2:38=3D3DA0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) w=
>rote:
>> >> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Dec 13, 9:15=3D3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldste=
>in) w=3D
>> >rote:
>> >> >> ><snip>
>> >> >> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used more
>> >> >> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>>
>> >> >> >> Of course. =3D3D3DA0And I suspect its use by gentiles more often=
> than=3D
>> > not =3D3D
>> >> >is
>> >> >> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>>
>> >> >> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>>
>> >> >> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of your
>> >> >> own neurosis.
>>
>> >> >That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, whereas you
>> >> >have perceptual problems and are obsessed.
>>
>> >> Perceptual problems? =3DA0Obsessed??? =3DA0That's simply absurd.
>>
>> >Neurotics often lack the ability to accurately perceive their
>> >disorder, as often would be expected.
>>
>> See below.
>>
>> >> > Besides, who ever heard of
>> >> >a neurotic jew?
>>
>> >> Just about every Gentile, I would imagine.
>>
>> >LIGHTEN UP. IT WAS A JOKE. I thought you of all people would get it.
>>
>> I hoped it was a joke. =A0But, as you say, neurotics are often unaware
>> of their neuroses.
>>
>>
>>
>> >> >> >> > However, I'd guess that the word
>> >> >> >> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we re=
>all=3D
>> >y
>> >> >> >> >haven't established anything important.
>>
>> >> >> >> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't reall=
>y m=3D
>> >ade
>> >> >> >> any progress here.
>>
>> >> >> >Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian". "Na=
>qba=3D
>> >"
>> >> >> >is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-imposed ar=
>ab
>> >> >> >exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as the ar=
>ab
>> >> >> >Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and probabl=
>y
>> >> >> >even fewer buyers :-).
>>
>> >> >> Ah, OK, thank you.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own bra=
>nd =3D
>> >of
>> >> >> >> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >> >> >> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>>
>> >> >> >> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be deser=
>vin=3D
>> >g
>> >> >> >> of a Nobel prize.
>>
>> >> >> >Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should register a
>> >> >> >complaint with the Nobel Committee.
>>
>> >> >> Sadly, there is no Nobel prize for marketing/promoting.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots of =
>stu=3D
>> >ff =3D3D
>> >> >-
>> >> >> >> >> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just now.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Cancerous?
>>
>> >> >> >> >Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences betw=
>een
>> >> >> >> >reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mind.
>>
>> >> >> >> Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
>>
>> >> >> >Um, no. I am suggesting that in certain individuals, perception is=
> no=3D
>> >t
>> >> >> >a reliable indicator of reality.
>>
>> >> >> So you agree that actual group behaviour among jews exists...
>>
>> >> > I suppose "group behavior" could be defined as behavior exhibited by
>> >> >a significant majority of individuals in a population. Thus, the firs=
>t
>> >> >step would be to define the population in question. If speaking about
>> >> >a large population such as "jews", it is difficult to imagine that
>> >> >someone might be familiar with a significant majority of individual
>> >> >behavior in that group, thus the term is irrelevant. It is possible,
>> >> >however, to pinpoint group behavior if the group is small enough such
>> >> >that a majority might be known well. For example, I could say "the
>> >> >jews on my block, of whom I know personally 75%, seem to have a good
>> >> >sense of humor". I would then say that a group behavior was
>> >> >ascertained insofar as the jews on my block are concerned, it being
>> >> >understood that this is a generality and does not necessarily apply t=
>o
>> >> >each and every individual. For all I know, there could be a real crab
>> >> >around here.
>>
>> >> You would not expect the majority of a group of 100 Swedes to be
>> >> exciteable, nor would you expect the majority of a group of 100
>> >> Italians to be dour and humourless. =3DA0There are valid stereotypes t=
>o be
>> >> drawn.
>>
>> >Well, how many Swedes have you met? Italians?
>>
>> Many of each; =A0jews too.
>>
>> > How do you determine the
>> >accuracy of your stereotype?
>>
>> Based on the size of the sample.
>>
>> >In any case, the issue is not whether one
>> >chooses to hold to the idea of stereotypes. The issue is whether one
>> >uses that stereotype to prejudge an individual in a personal setting.
>>
>> If it's an accurate stereotype then, statistically, its use in
>> prejudging an individual is valid.
>
>You have no way of determining whether your stereotype is accurate, as
>you have implicitly admitted that your sample is by definition small.
My initial sample (above) was 100 Swedes and 100 Italians. I've
probably met far more of each, this is Europe, after all.. I don't
think that's a small sample.
>The odds against flipping a coin six times in a row and getting heads
>each time are not particularly high. Nevertheless, it would be a
>mistake to conclude from a sample of six flips that coins are one-
>sided.
Sorry, not a valid analogy,
> Prejudging an individual is NEVER valid, according to the
>definition of prejudice, as well as according to statistics.
Let's suppose that all muggers are young black males (which of course
they are). You are going down a dark street and you see two young
black males approaching. A taxi is approaching. Would you prejudge
the two black young males and take the taxi or rely on your hypothesis
above?
drahcir
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:46:17 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
>
>
Compared with the respective populations?
>
> >The odds against flipping a coin six times in a row and getting heads
> >each time are not particularly high. Nevertheless, it would be a
> >mistake to conclude from a sample of six flips that coins are one-
> >sided.
>
> Sorry, not a valid analogy,
Why not?
>
> > Prejudging an individual is NEVER valid, according to the
> >definition of prejudice, as well as according to statistics.
>
> Let's suppose that all muggers are young black males (which of course
> they are). You are going down a dark street and you see two young
> black males approaching. A taxi is approaching. Would you prejudge
> the two black young males and take the taxi or rely on your hypothesis
> above?
I would assess the appearance of the people approaching, their look,
how they were interacting, etc.. If based on that, my instinct told me
to take the cab, I would. But that's not prejudging. That's making an
assessment based on limited data, and that data is not simply skin
color. I'd make the same assessment were they white or hispanic. It is
not at all unfathomable to, given your scenario, imagine an instance
where I'd be more afraid of whites than blacks.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 11:39=A0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:46:17 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 14, 9:02=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:55:01 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 14, 3:46=3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) w=
>rote:
>> >> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:30:47 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Dec 13, 2:38=3D3D3DA0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldste=
>in) w=3D
>> >rote:
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >On Dec 13, 9:15=3D3D3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Go=
>ldste=3D
>> >in) w=3D3D
>> >> >rote:
>> >> >> >> ><snip>
>> >> >> >> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is used m=
>ore
>> >> >> >> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Of course. =3D3D3D3DA0And I suspect its use by gentiles more =
>often=3D
>> > than=3D3D
>> >> > not =3D3D3D
>> >> >> >is
>> >> >> >> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>>
>> >> >> >> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>>
>> >> >> >> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function of y=
>our
>> >> >> >> own neurosis.
>>
>> >> >> >That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, whereas =
>you
>> >> >> >have perceptual problems and are obsessed.
>>
>> >> >> Perceptual problems? =3D3DA0Obsessed??? =3D3DA0That's simply absurd=
>.
>>
>> >> >Neurotics often lack the ability to accurately perceive their
>> >> >disorder, as often would be expected.
>>
>> >> See below.
>>
>> >> >> > Besides, who ever heard of
>> >> >> >a neurotic jew?
>>
>> >> >> Just about every Gentile, I would imagine.
>>
>> >> >LIGHTEN UP. IT WAS A JOKE. I thought you of all people would get it.
>>
>> >> I hoped it was a joke. =3DA0But, as you say, neurotics are often unawa=
>re
>> >> of their neuroses.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> > However, I'd guess that the word
>> >> >> >> >> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So we=
> re=3D
>> >all=3D3D
>> >> >y
>> >> >> >> >> >haven't established anything important.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't re=
>all=3D
>> >y m=3D3D
>> >> >ade
>> >> >> >> >> any progress here.
>>
>> >> >> >> >Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian". =
>"Na=3D
>> >qba=3D3D
>> >> >"
>> >> >> >> >is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-imposed=
> ar=3D
>> >ab
>> >> >> >> >exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as the=
> ar=3D
>> >ab
>> >> >> >> >Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and prob=
>abl=3D
>> >y
>> >> >> >> >even fewer buyers :-).
>>
>> >> >> >> Ah, OK, thank you.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's own =
>bra=3D
>> >nd =3D3D
>> >> >of
>> >> >> >> >> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be de=
>ser=3D
>> >vin=3D3D
>> >> >g
>> >> >> >> >> of a Nobel prize.
>>
>> >> >> >> >Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should registe=
>r a
>> >> >> >> >complaint with the Nobel Committee.
>>
>> >> >> >> Sadly, there is no Nobel prize for marketing/promoting.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lots =
>of =3D
>> >stu=3D3D
>> >> >ff =3D3D3D
>> >> >> >-
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just no=
>w.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Cancerous?
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the differences b=
>etw=3D
>> >een
>> >> >> >> >> >reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic mi=
>nd.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
>>
>> >> >> >> >Um, no. I am suggesting that in certain individuals, perception=
> is=3D
>> > no=3D3D
>> >> >t
>> >> >> >> >a reliable indicator of reality.
>>
>> >> >> >> So you agree that actual group behaviour among jews exists...
>>
>> >> >> > I suppose "group behavior" could be defined as behavior exhibited=
> by
>> >> >> >a significant majority of individuals in a population. Thus, the f=
>irs=3D
>> >t
>> >> >> >step would be to define the population in question. If speaking ab=
>out
>> >> >> >a large population such as "jews", it is difficult to imagine that
>> >> >> >someone might be familiar with a significant majority of individua=
>l
>> >> >> >behavior in that group, thus the term is irrelevant. It is possibl=
>e,
>> >> >> >however, to pinpoint group behavior if the group is small enough s=
>uch
>> >> >> >that a majority might be known well. For example, I could say "the
>> >> >> >jews on my block, of whom I know personally 75%, seem to have a go=
>od
>> >> >> >sense of humor". I would then say that a group behavior was
>> >> >> >ascertained insofar as the jews on my block are concerned, it bein=
>g
>> >> >> >understood that this is a generality and does not necessarily appl=
>y t=3D
>> >o
>> >> >> >each and every individual. For all I know, there could be a real c=
>rab
>> >> >> >around here.
>>
>> >> >> You would not expect the majority of a group of 100 Swedes to be
>> >> >> exciteable, nor would you expect the majority of a group of 100
>> >> >> Italians to be dour and humourless. =3D3DA0There are valid stereoty=
>pes t=3D
>> >o be
>> >> >> drawn.
>>
>> >> >Well, how many Swedes have you met? Italians?
>>
>> >> Many of each; =3DA0jews too.
>>
>> >> > How do you determine the
>> >> >accuracy of your stereotype?
>>
>> >> Based on the size of the sample.
>>
>> >> >In any case, the issue is not whether one
>> >> >chooses to hold to the idea of stereotypes. The issue is whether one
>> >> >uses that stereotype to prejudge an individual in a personal setting.
>>
>> >> If it's an accurate stereotype then, statistically, its use in
>> >> prejudging an individual is valid.
>>
>> >You have no way of determining whether your stereotype is accurate, as
>> >you have implicitly admitted that your sample is by definition small.
>>
>> My initial sample (above) was 100 Swedes and 100 Italians. I've
>> probably met far more of each, this is Europe, after all.. =A0I don't
>> think that's a small sample.
>
>Compared with the respective populations?
Opinion polls work on precisely this basis. Admittedly, they usually
state what the margin of error is.
>> >The odds against flipping a coin six times in a row and getting heads
>> >each time are not particularly high. Nevertheless, it would be a
>> >mistake to conclude from a sample of six flips that coins are one-
>> >sided.
>>
>> Sorry, not a valid analogy,
>
>Why not?
Too small a sample, compared to all the coins in existence.
>> > Prejudging an individual is NEVER valid, according to the
>> >definition of prejudice, as well as according to statistics.
>>
>> Let's suppose that all muggers are young black males (which of course
>> they are). =A0You are going down a dark street and you see two young
>> black males approaching. =A0A taxi is approaching. =A0Would you prejudge
>> the two black young males and take the taxi or rely on your hypothesis
>> above?
>
>I would assess the appearance of the people approaching, their look,
>how they were interacting, etc.. If based on that, my instinct told me
>to take the cab, I would. But that's not prejudging. That's making an
>assessment based on limited data, and that data is not simply skin
>color.
True, it's skin colour, sex and age. If it were two elderly black
ladies, presumably there would be no need for any kind of assessment.
>I'd make the same assessment were they white or hispanic.
Why, given that all muggers are young black males?
>It is
>not at all unfathomable to, given your scenario, imagine an instance
>where I'd be more afraid of whites than blacks.
Not if it was a mugging you were apprehensive about.
BTW split infinitive...LOL...Merry Channukah!
drahcir
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:50:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
>
>
ehhhh, I'm not convinced of what you say, but I'll let it go.
>
> >> > Prejudging an individual is NEVER valid, according to the
> >> >definition of prejudice, as well as according to statistics.
>
> >> Let's suppose that all muggers are young black males (which of course
> >> they are). =A0You are going down a dark street and you see two young
> >> black males approaching. =A0A taxi is approaching. =A0Would you prejudge
> >> the two black young males and take the taxi or rely on your hypothesis
> >> above?
>
> >I would assess the appearance of the people approaching, their look,
> >how they were interacting, etc.. If based on that, my instinct told me
> >to take the cab, I would. But that's not prejudging. That's making an
> >assessment based on limited data, and that data is not simply skin
> >color.
>
> True, it's skin colour, sex and age. If it were two elderly black
> ladies, presumably there would be no need for any kind of assessment.
>
> >I'd make the same assessment were they white or hispanic.
>
> Why, given that all muggers are young black males?
Take a stroll in the south bronx sometime and see if you are still of
that opinion.
>
> >It is
> >not at all unfathomable to, given your scenario, imagine an instance
> >where I'd be more afraid of whites than blacks.
>
> Not if it was a mugging you were apprehensive about.
>
> BTW split infinitive...LOL...Merry Channukah!
And Happy Christmas to you. Yes, it was clumsy, but I type these
things quickly. It was quite astute of you to, however, catch that.
Dermit Goldstein
<justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 14, 1:33=A0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:50:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>>
>>
>> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Dec 14, 11:39=3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) wrote=
>:
>> >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 07:46:17 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 14, 9:02=3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldstein) w=
>rote:
>> >> >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 05:55:01 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Dec 14, 3:46=3D3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Goldste=
>in) w=3D
>> >rote:
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:30:47 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >On Dec 13, 2:38=3D3D3D3DA0pm, dgoldst...@charter.net (Dermit Go=
>ldste=3D
>> >in) w=3D3D
>> >> >rote:
>> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:16:32 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>>
>> >> >> >> >> <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >On Dec 13, 9:15=3D3D3D3D3DA0am, dgoldst...@charter.net (Derm=
>it Go=3D
>> >ldste=3D3D
>> >> >in) w=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >rote:
>> >> >> >> >> ><snip>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >I would guess that on a per capita basis, the word is use=
>d m=3D
>> >ore
>> >> >> >> >> >> >frequently by jews than gentiles.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Of course. =3D3D3D3D3DA0And I suspect its use by gentiles =
>more =3D
>> >often=3D3D
>> >> > than=3D3D3D
>> >> >> > not =3D3D3D3D
>> >> >> >> >is
>> >> >> >> >> >> in reference to its overuse by jews.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >Those suspicions are simply a function of your neurosis.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Your assumption that I have a neurosis is merely a function o=
>f y=3D
>> >our
>> >> >> >> >> own neurosis.
>>
>> >> >> >> >That's simply ridiculous. I exhibit no neurotic symptoms, where=
>as =3D
>> >you
>> >> >> >> >have perceptual problems and are obsessed.
>>
>> >> >> >> Perceptual problems? =3D3D3DA0Obsessed??? =3D3D3DA0That's simply=
> absurd=3D
>> >.
>>
>> >> >> >Neurotics often lack the ability to accurately perceive their
>> >> >> >disorder, as often would be expected.
>>
>> >> >> See below.
>>
>> >> >> >> > Besides, who ever heard of
>> >> >> >> >a neurotic jew?
>>
>> >> >> >> Just about every Gentile, I would imagine.
>>
>> >> >> >LIGHTEN UP. IT WAS A JOKE. I thought you of all people would get i=
>t.
>>
>> >> >> I hoped it was a joke. =3D3DA0But, as you say, neurotics are often =
>unawa=3D
>> >re
>> >> >> of their neuroses.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> > However, I'd guess that the word
>> >> >> >> >> >> >"naqba" is used more by pallies than non-pallies, etc. So=
> we=3D
>> > re=3D3D
>> >> >all=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >y
>> >> >> >> >> >> >haven't established anything important.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> I don't know what "naqba" or "pallies" mean, so we haven't=
> re=3D
>> >all=3D3D
>> >> >y m=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >ade
>> >> >> >> >> >> any progress here.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >Sorry. I type "pallie" because I'm too lazy for "Palestinian=
>". =3D
>> >"Na=3D3D
>> >> >qba=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >"
>> >> >> >> >> >is arabic for "catastrophe", refers to the largely self-impo=
>sed=3D
>> > ar=3D3D
>> >> >ab
>> >> >> >> >> >exodus from Israel in the forties, and has been marketed as =
>the=3D
>> > ar=3D3D
>> >> >ab
>> >> >> >> >> >Holocaust, even though there were very few casualties (and p=
>rob=3D
>> >abl=3D3D
>> >> >y
>> >> >> >> >> >even fewer buyers :-).
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Ah, OK, thank you.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> But to give credit where credit is due, to have one's o=
>wn =3D
>> >bra=3D3D
>> >> >nd =3D3D3D
>> >> >> >of
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> racism was a stroke of marketing genius!
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >We didn't invent the word, as you have observed.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> True, but to have adopted it and used it as noted would be=
> de=3D
>> >ser=3D3D
>> >> >vin=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >g
>> >> >> >> >> >> of a Nobel prize.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >Well, since one hasn't been awarded, perhaps you should regi=
>ste=3D
>> >r a
>> >> >> >> >> >complaint with the Nobel Committee.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Sadly, there is no Nobel prize for marketing/promoting.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Antisemites draw conclusions about jews based on lo=
>ts =3D
>> >of =3D3D
>> >> >stu=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >ff =3D3D3D3D
>> >> >> >> >-
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >perceived group behavior is just one component.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Actual group behaviour is another.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >I'm not in the mood for an ontological discussion just=
> no=3D
>> >w.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Cancerous?
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Um, no. I was referring to a discussion of the difference=
>s b=3D
>> >etw=3D3D
>> >> >een
>> >> >> >> >> >> >reality and perceived reality, especially in the neurotic=
> mi=3D
>> >nd.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Are you disputing the existence of actual group behaviour?
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >Um, no. I am suggesting that in certain individuals, percept=
>ion=3D
>> > is=3D3D
>> >> > no=3D3D3D
>> >> >> >t
>> >> >> >> >> >a reliable indicator of reality.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> So you agree that actual group behaviour among jews exists...
>>
>> >> >> >> > I suppose "group behavior" could be defined as behavior exhibi=
>ted=3D
>> > by
>> >> >> >> >a significant majority of individuals in a population. Thus, th=
>e f=3D
>> >irs=3D3D
>> >> >t
>> >> >> >> >step would be to define the population in question. If speaking=
> ab=3D
>> >out
>> >> >> >> >a large population such as "jews", it is difficult to imagine t=
>hat
>> >> >> >> >someone might be familiar with a significant majority of indivi=
>dua=3D
>> >l
>> >> >> >> >behavior in that group, thus the term is irrelevant. It is poss=
>ibl=3D
>> >e,
>> >> >> >> >however, to pinpoint group behavior if the group is small enoug=
>h s=3D
>> >uch
>> >> >> >> >that a majority might be known well. For example, I could say "=
>the
>> >> >> >> >jews on my block, of whom I know personally 75%, seem to have a=
> go=3D
>> >od
>> >> >> >> >sense of humor". I would then say that a group behavior was
>> >> >> >> >ascertained insofar as the jews on my block are concerned, it b=
>ein=3D
>> >g
>> >> >> >> >understood that this is a generality and does not necessarily a=
>ppl=3D
>> >y t=3D3D
>> >> >o
>> >> >> >> >each and every individual. For all I know, there could be a rea=
>l c=3D
>> >rab
>> >> >> >> >around here.
>>
>> >> >> >> You would not expect the majority of a group of 100 Swedes to be
>> >> >> >> exciteable, nor would you expect the majority of a group of 100
>> >> >> >> Italians to be dour and humourless. =3D3D3DA0There are valid ste=
>reoty=3D
>> >pes t=3D3D
>> >> >o be
>> >> >> >> drawn.
>>
>> >> >> >Well, how many Swedes have you met? Italians?
>>
>> >> >> Many of each; =3D3DA0jews too.
>>
>> >> >> > How do you determine the
>> >> >> >accuracy of your stereotype?
>>
>> >> >> Based on the size of the sample.
>>
>> >> >> >In any case, the issue is not whether one
>> >> >> >chooses to hold to the idea of stereotypes. The issue is whether o=
>ne
>> >> >> >uses that stereotype to prejudge an individual in a personal setti=
>ng.
>>
>> >> >> If it's an accurate stereotype then, statistically, its use in
>> >> >> prejudging an individual is valid.
>>
>> >> >You have no way of determining whether your stereotype is accurate, a=
>s
>> >> >you have implicitly admitted that your sample is by definition small.
>>
>> >> My initial sample (above) was 100 Swedes and 100 Italians. I've
>> >> probably met far more of each, this is Europe, after all.. =3DA0I don'=
>t
>> >> think that's a small sample.
>>
>> >Compared with the respective populations?
>>
>> Opinion polls work on precisely this basis. =A0Admittedly, they usually
>> state what the margin of error is.
>>
>> >> >The odds against flipping a coin six times in a row and getting heads
>> >> >each time are not particularly high. Nevertheless, it would be a
>> >> >mistake to conclude from a sample of six flips that coins are one-
>> >> >sided.
>>
>> >> Sorry, not a valid analogy,
>>
>> >Why not?
>>
>> Too small a sample, compared to all the coins in existence.
>
>ehhhh, I'm not convinced of what you say, but I'll let it go.
OK, thanks. This discussion has gone as far as it's going to go, I
think. No doubt something more interesting will turn up soon.
>> >> > Prejudging an individual is NEVER valid, according to the
>> >> >definition of prejudice, as well as according to statistics.
>>
>> >> Let's suppose that all muggers are young black males (which of course
>> >> they are). =3DA0You are going down a dark street and you see two young
>> >> black males approaching. =3DA0A taxi is approaching. =3DA0Would you pr=
>ejudge
>> >> the two black young males and take the taxi or rely on your hypothesis
>> >> above?
>>
>> >I would assess the appearance of the people approaching, their look,
>> >how they were interacting, etc.. If based on that, my instinct told me
>> >to take the cab, I would. But that's not prejudging. That's making an
>> >assessment based on limited data, and that data is not simply skin
>> >color.
>>
>> True, it's skin colour, sex and age. =A0If it were two elderly black
>> ladies, presumably there would be no need for any kind of assessment.
>>
>> >I'd make the same assessment were they white or hispanic.
>>
>> Why, given that all muggers are young black males?
>
>Take a stroll in the south bronx sometime and see if you are still of
>that opinion.
The South Bronx has changed beyond recognition. All the burned out
buildings are gone (I actually went looking for them a few years ago).
It almost looks liveable now.
>> >It is
>> >not at all unfathomable to, given your scenario, imagine an instance
>> >where I'd be more afraid of whites than blacks.
>>
>> Not if it was a mugging you were apprehensive about. =A0
>>
>> BTW split infinitive...LOL...Merry Channukah!
>
>And Happy Christmas to you. Yes, it was clumsy, but I type these
>things quickly. It was quite astute of you to, however, catch that.
Another one! Is this the beginning of a new habit?
drahcir
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:53:15 -0800 (PST), drahcir
>
>
>
That one was on purpose.
> ...
>
> read more »
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Nov 25, 4:53 pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
Clip to cut to the chase.
> There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
Semitism or pro-Semitism is a Jewish doctrine also found among some
non-Jews. An example of the latter category would be our own DoD.
Irrespective of what may be in dictionaries, the appended examples
show Semitism being acted out by Jews and cumulatively demonstrate
the doctrine's existence:
G-d's relationship with the Jews in the Torah reflects Semitism
Zionism reflects Semitism.
Jewish/Israeli exceptionalism reflects Semitism.
Jewish/Zionist racism reflects Semitism.
Jewish circumcision reflects Semitism.
The European Jewish incursion into Arab Palestine reflects Semitism.
The corruption of the American Congress on behalf of Israeli Jews
reflects Semitism.
Jewish teachings against intermarriage reflect Semitism.
The Bar Mitzvah ceremony reflects Semitism.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Nov 25, 4:57 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 25, 4:53 pm, "_ G O D _" <DEMI...@TELUS.NET> wrote:
>
> Clip to cut to the chase.
>
> > There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
>
> Semitism or pro-Semitism is a Jewish doctrine also found among some
> non-Jews. An example of the latter category would be our own DoD.
Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
"Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Dec 15, 12:16 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Clip to cut to the chase.
Ratner:
> > > There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
HHW:
Sure there is. It's a doctrine, an "ism". The doctrine must exist by
operation of elementary logic. For example It either exists or the
doctrine anti-semitism can have no opposite. Why struggle to add pro
or philo to semitism when semitism alone is more than sufficient to
convey the meaning? We certainly know that anti-Semitism exists as you
use it daily. Why do you struggle to deny it an opposite doctrine?
The doctrine of Semitism has equivalents in the language, viz., philo-
semitism and Jewish exceptionalism, the latter being more obviously
specific to my meaning.
Here's what I wrote yesterday *changed* so that you can not pretend to
escape comprehension:
:
Philo-semitism is usually applied to non-Jews who have great love,
respect or sympathy for the Jewish people, their history and
traditions, e.g., our own DoD. Jewish exceptionalism is a near
universal belief found among Jews, e.g., our own drahcir a/k/a Richard
Ratner, your very self. Do a search for "Jewish exceptionalism". You
will discover that Semitism in that form has a very large usage.
Irrespective of what may be in dictionaries, the appended examples
show Semitism/Jewish exceptionalism being acted out by Jews and
cumulatively demonstrate the doctrine's existence:
The God of the Jews' relationship with the Israelites in the Torah
reflects Semitism/Jewish exceptionalism.
Zionism reflects Semitism/Jewish exceptionalism.
Jewish/Israeli exceptionalism reflects Semitism, the opposite of anti-
Semitism.
Jewish/Zionist anti-Palestinian racism, as reflected in Deborah's
Palestinian Kid recipe and her "Fakestinian" comments reflect Semitism/
Jewish exceptionalism.
Jewish circumcision reflects Semitism/Jewish exceptionalism.
The European Zionist incursion into Arab Palestine reflects Semitism/
Jewish exceptionalism.
The corruption of the American Congress on behalf of Israeli Jews
reflects Semitism/Jewish exceptionalism.
Jewish teachings against intermarriage reflect Semitism/Jewish
exceptionalism.
The Bar Mitzvah ceremony reflects Semitism/Jewish exceptionalism.
So do that search and let's talk abut Semitism. It has caused the
American and Middle Eastern peoples great bloodshed and misery. It
needs to be analyzed.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Dec 15, 12:39 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 15, 12:16 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Clip to cut to the chase.
>
> Ratner:
>
> > > > There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
Here's what this loon snipped, from my last post:
Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
"Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
*****
Not only was our poor H not able to produce 5 examples, he was so
intimidated he snipped away the request! I do believe this proves him
yet again a liar, and implicitly suggests he's an antisemite. The
icing on the cake is that his "clippage" proves him to be a lowly
coward as well.
Thanks, H!
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
Clip unresponsive and ad hominem material.
Did you search "Jewish exceptionalism"? It's a term equivalent to
Semitism. Yet you say Semitism doesn't exist. To which I responded:
> > Sure (it does). It's a doctrine, an "ism". The doctrine must exist by
coaste...@yahoo.com
> On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 15, 12:39 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 15, 12:16 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Clip to cut to the chase.
>
> > Ratner:
>
> > > > > There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
>
> Here's what this loon snipped, from my last post:
>
> Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
> blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
> bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
> the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
> "Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
> mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
> succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
> decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
> also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
I've proved the actual existence of Semitism. So does Wiki. I'm not
going to honor any demand you make. I don't do that for miscreants
such as you. Semitism lives, Ratner, in your own wizened bosom.
coaste...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Back under your rock, Ratner? Don't want to talk about Jewish
exceptionalism just now? Previously you have, often in fact. Surely
you remember all those boasts about the myriad accomplishments of Jews
and, essentially, why America should, therefore, support Israeli war
crimes against Palestinians! You're a very big Jewish exceptionalist/
Semitist. It's too bad your personal qualities have prevented your
making any contributions to the Jewish rep. Get the hell out of the
West Bank, Ratner. You can't have it just because you are Semitic and
want it. No, you've blown it. It's almost over.
drahcir
>
> > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
>
> Clip unresponsive and ad hominem material.
LOL! You think no one sees that the stuff you're "clipping" is the
stuff you're afraid to attempt to answer?
Let's see what readers think - I'll just replace what you're so afraid
of:
Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
"Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
********
The ball stays in your court, H, whether or not you pretend it's not
there. Regarding your "unresponsive" attribution of the above, what
thought process led to it is anyone's guess.
>
> Did you search "Jewish exceptionalism"? It's a term equivalent to
> Semitism. Yet you say Semitism doesn't exist. To which I responded:
Your response is bullshit. It's just more of you blathering for a
change. You obviously cannot supply even five examples of this term in
normal usage, or else you would have. All of your below is just more
meaningless drivel.
drahcir
Did you change your name to "Ratner"?
Don't want to talk about Jewish
> exceptionalism just now?
"Exceptionalism".... that's almost as good as "Semitism".
Previously you have, often in fact. Surely
> you remember all those boasts about the myriad accomplishments of Jews
> and, essentially, why America should, therefore, support Israeli war
> crimes against Palestinians! You're a very big Jewish exceptionalist/
> Semitist. It's too bad your personal qualities have prevented your
> making any contributions to the Jewish rep. Get the hell out of the
> West Bank, Ratner. You can't have it just because you are Semitic and
> want it. No, you've blown it. It's almost over.
And with the above, somehow HHW cannot see that everyone else sees
that he is merely trying like a child to distract from this, from
above:
Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
"Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
********
Obviously, he cannot supply even FIVE examples of a word he maintains
is valid. So much for our silly H's contention.
Bolt Upright
On Dec 16, 12:17 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Dec 15, 10:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
>
> Clip unresponsive and ad hominem material.
LOL! You think no one sees that the stuff you're "clipping" is the
stuff you're afraid to attempt to answer?
Let's see what readers think - I'll just replace what you're so afraid
of:
Indeed, let's do so. Does *anyone* out there support drahcir and his
travelling smoke and mirror show? All POV's are invited to declare
themselves either way.
drahcir
wrote:
> On Dec 15, 10:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 15, 12:39 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 15, 12:16 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Clip to cut to the chase.
>
> > > Ratner:
>
> > > > > > There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
>
> > Here's what this loon snipped, from my last post:
>
> > Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
> > blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
> > bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
> > the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
> > "Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
> > mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
> > succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
> > decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
> > also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
>
> I've proved the actual existence of Semitism.
Yes, and you're also having an affair with Michelle Pfeiffer and
leading the Denver Broncos in rushing this season. Senility does have
its advantages.
> So does Wiki. I'm not
> going to honor any demand you make.
Gee, what a surprise. That's ok, H, I knew you couldn't do it. No one
can. The term does no exist in common usage. You just lied again and
got caught again. No biggie.
> don't do that for miscreants
> such as you.
Oooh, "miscreant", that's heavy, almost as good as "Missy". Let me
tell you something, H. Look back into my posts to you. I NEVER refer
to you as senile unless you do a senile thing or say something
idiotic. I NEVER refer to you as a liar unless you lie. Addressing me
with such a florid term as "miscreant" is about as effective as if you
called me a doodyhead.
> Semitism lives, Ratner, in your own wizened bosom.
Nope. Not there, not anywhere, unless you can prove it.
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2946982a-ffb7-49c8...@u37g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 16, 12:17 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 15, 10:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
>
> > Clip unresponsive and ad hominem material.
>
> LOL! You think no one sees that the stuff you're "clipping" is the
> stuff you're afraid to attempt to answer?
>
> Let's see what readers think - I'll just replace what you're so afraid
> of:
>
> Indeed, let's do so. Does *anyone* out there support drahcir and his
> travelling smoke and mirror show? All POV's are invited to declare
> themselves either way.
Howsabout we start with you? The issue is not "supporting" me or some
imaginary show of yours - the issue is very simple and clear, namely,
why does iconoclast, aka HHW, aka Cazador, keep snipping away my
request that he presents only five examples of "Semitism" in common
usage. I say it's because he can't do it and is afraid to admit it.
You seem to believe he's snipping for a different reason, but are
being coy about what you think that reason is. C'mon, Bolt, don't you
have the courage to let the group know what YOU think the reason is
that HHW continually snips this request?
Bolt Upright
On Dec 16, 5:40 pm, "Bolt Upright" <HughGRect...@merde.com> wrote:
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2946982a-ffb7-49c8...@u37g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 16, 12:17 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 15, 10:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
>
> > Clip unresponsive and ad hominem material.
>
> LOL! You think no one sees that the stuff you're "clipping" is the
> stuff you're afraid to attempt to answer?
>
> Let's see what readers think - I'll just replace what you're so afraid
> of:
>
> Indeed, let's do so. Does *anyone* out there support drahcir and his
> travelling smoke and mirror show? All POV's are invited to declare
> themselves either way.
Howsabout we start with you?
Sorry to disappoint, Missy. As I've already told the group, I have neither
interest nor inclination to engage in dialogue with you.
Your statement was "Let's see what the readers think", so let's do exactly
that.
M
> Your statement was "Let's see what the readers think", so let's do exactly
> that.
I beleive the readers think all this is cross-posted incomprehensible
garbage.
Bolt Upright
"M" <mc...@pitt.edu> wrote in message
news:fb0ed554-7c7e-4a64...@19g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
When I reply to a post that includes several groups, I don't trim it as I
have no way of determining the originating group. Obviously, with posts
which I originate I am more selective.
drahcir
> "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9468258f-fea2-4fbc...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 16, 5:40 pm, "Bolt Upright" <HughGRect...@merde.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "drahcir" <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:2946982a-ffb7-49c8...@u37g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
> > On Dec 16, 12:17 am, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 15, 10:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
>
> > > Clip unresponsive and ad hominem material.
>
> > LOL! You think no one sees that the stuff you're "clipping" is the
> > stuff you're afraid to attempt to answer?
>
> > Let's see what readers think - I'll just replace what you're so afraid
> > of:
>
> > Indeed, let's do so. Does *anyone* out there support drahcir and his
> > travelling smoke and mirror show? All POV's are invited to declare
> > themselves either way.
>
> Howsabout we start with you?
> Sorry to disappoint, Missy.
BWAHAHAHA!! How predictable!! On the contrary, Bolt, you have
completely confirmed my expectations by dodging the request and
straining your pea brain to try to mask that dodging. That's anything
but disappointing!
As I've already told the group, I have neither
> interest nor inclination to engage in dialogue with you.
Psst - 1) you are clearly choosing to be in dialogue with me, and 2)
when I said "howsabout we start with you", there was no request for
dialogue - it was a request that you simply participate in the poll
that you wished to initiate. By proving that you are incapable of
participating in it, I have also proven that your poll was bullshit -
an idiotic ploy.
> Your statement was "Let's see what the readers think", so let's do exactly
> that.
Well, Bolt, we're back to square one, so I'll try again. You're a
reader, so I agree, "let's do exactly that" - howsabout we start with
you? It's a rhetorical question - of course, you won't do it, Bolt,
because you know I'm right about HHW, but you thought you'd open your
stupid trap and twist around a bit and it would be gone. It's not gone
- now the ball is in your court as well as H's. So are you going to
fulfill your own request and state your opinion as to why H constantly
snipped my request of him, or are you too "shy"? If the latter, one
can only assume that you agree with me. Let's see what you can do with
the ball except dribble not with it, but on it.
RabbiJoekerr
> On Dec 16, 8:54 pm, "Bolt Upright" <HughGRect...@merde.com> wrote:
>
The cabal of cowards all ran away in another thread with dumb ocean
licking up the rear bwahahahar!
drahcir
wrote:
> On Dec 15, 10:03 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 15, 8:36 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 15, 12:39 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 15, 12:16 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Clip to cut to the chase.
>
> > > Ratner:
>
> > > > > > There is no such thing as "semitism" (Clip gratuitous ad hominem comment)
>
> > Here's what this loon snipped, from my last post:
>
> > Hey, cutting to the chase, now there's a novel idea for our resident
> > blabbermouth. Let's do just that, shall we? Prove your case. Don't
> > bullshit about "reflections" as you do below - it's nothing more than
> > the world according to you. Cite just FIVE examples of the word
> > "Semitism" as you are describing it, in common usage, from a
> > mainstream source, NOT a nazi website, NOT from usenet. Should you
> > succeed, I will agree that it is an acceptable term. Should you
> > decline, you will not only be proven yet again a liar, but you will
> > also be proven an antisemite. Ball's in your court.
>
> I've proved the actual existence of Semitism. So does Wiki.
Because I skim HHW's silly posts with great speed so as to waste
minimal time with them, I overlooked this gem. What could he possibly
mean by "so does Wiki"? By "Wiki", does this senile oaf mean
"Wikipedia". If we assume so, what does he mean by this grammar-school
sentence? Does he mean "so does the appearance of "Semitism" in
Wikipedia prove "Semitism's" existence? This is all I can make out of
his gibberish - whether he was being deliberately deceptive, or just
his usual senile self is anyone's guess. However, what IS interesting
is the Wikipedia entry for "Semitism". Yes, there is one. Here's what
it consists of:
Semitism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Semitism may refer to:
* Philo-Semitism
* Semitic language
* Semitic people
Clicking on "Philo-Semitism" yields
Philo-Semitism, Philosemitism, or Judeophilia is an interest in,
respect for, and appreciation of the Jewish people, their historical
significance and the positive impacts of Judaism in the history of the
western world, in particular, generally on the part of a gentile.
So Philo-Semitism is a characteristic of the GENTILE. Thus it is
clear, the other two references being self-evident, that Semitism as
HHW wants to use the word IS NOT MENTIONED BY WIKIPEDIA. Thus, if I
have interpreted his sloppy prose correctly, he has once again
attempted to deceive.
M
Wikipedia is hardly a valid source for something liek this anyhow.
Also, both the Jews and the Arabs are Semitic people, so teh idea of
"anit-semitism" is a little unclear in that context.
drahcir
One must acknowledge that sometimes a word is not simply the sum of
its parts. "Anti-Semitism" cannot be construed as being against
"Semitism", since that makes no sense. "Anti-Semite" might be
construed as one who is against Semites, but that would be incorrect,
since its proper definition is one who is against Jews. I always like
to use the analogy of "antibiotic". "Biotic" means "pertaining to
life", so the sum of its parts would mean that "antibiotic" means
"against life". Of course, antibiotics are pro-life, except as they
relate to bacteria.
_ G O D _
news:hfv1no$dgp$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "Dermot Goldstein" <dgold...@charter.net> wrote
> news:4b226dae...@news.x-privat.org...
>> drahcir <sg...@sgscc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> dgold...@charter.net (Dermot
>>>Goldstein) wrote:
>>>
>>>> drahcir <justrich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "_ G O D _" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where exactly do you see an opposition to a false
>>>>>> dogma of Semitism in the opposition to Judaism?
>>>>>
>>>>>There is no such thing as "semitism"
>>>>
>>>>And please excuse the change of name (again).
>>>
>>>There is no such thing as "semitism" - sometimes dictionaries get it wrong.
>>
>> I tend to disagree...
>> Semitism is the kind of jewish behaviour
>> that gives rise to 'anti-semitism'.
>
> Yes! Yes!
In defense of the anti-semitists, I'd have to (again !!!!)
explain the deliberate misinterpretation of the term of
"semitism," which COck-sucking sectarian imbeciles
are using to support their false dogma of creationism,
in opposition to the Darwin's theory of evolution which
is more solid and reasonable than a Bible's fairy tales....
The tale about Sem was written in Hebrew long before
someone has wrongly decided to stereotype and label
this language in the capacity of Semitic. Because this
tale is as old as an Old Testament itself. The fairy tale
of Noah and his 12 sons, who populated the world - is
the bone of the Semitism - upon which the earlier laws
were built. Some of those laws have survived until our
days - thanks to blatant support of superstitious nature,
and perpetuated by the followers of their religious cults.
Those laws are conflicting with modern laws designed
to improve the life of contemporary generation - where
dignity and equality - are overweighing the importance
of the primitive political structure. Hence, the sectarian
antagonism, which is based on their resentment of the
fact that their false dogma of superstitious nature can't
be a pivotal doctrine for a contemporary law of society...
--
---
_____________________________________________________
I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
along with all institutions of the industrialized slavery and genocide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvies, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
___________________________________________________
--