Nice Germany Argument
 

Diggin in Google ran across a flame regarding Israel and the return of Anti Semitism.

Reminded me of some threads from here.

Check this line.

"Little one, Your above little objurgation is the usual puerile
power fantasy that we all have come to expect and loathe. Your
stridency and hysteria is making You appear even more stupid
than You are."

Pretty good read for you guys who like to argue about this shit,

heheh

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Original thread.

From: Till Poser ([email protected])
Subject: Re: THE RETURN OF ANTI-SEMITISM TO GERMANY: IT NEVER REALLY LEFT
View: Complete Thread (13 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: soc.culture.israel, soc.culture.jewish, soc.culture.german, soc.culture.usa, soc.culture.europe
Date: 2002-09-10 02:31:26 PST


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[email protected] (Markus) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> I would not have taken this article too seriously last week. I
> also lived in West Germany for a short period in the 80's and
> didn't notice anything like this, but I wasn't there that
> long. But I just had an experience on this very newsgroup that
> exactly mirrors what this author describes.

Does the phrase "One swallow does not make a summer." ring any
bell? I thought not.

> I made the argument that Germany should
> really be standing up for Israel right now (along with the
> US). One poster called me a "philo-semite", and the others,
> apparently regulars on this board, seemed to think that was
> perfectly normal, and part of a valid "wall of fire" they
> thought that they were throwing at me.

Spouting out of context again? Allow me to supply You with the
pertinent bits:

\begin{quote}
Message-ID: <[email protected]>:
I wrote:
Markus schrieb:
> > Germany mass murdered 6 million jews less than 50 years ago
> > in an attempt to wipe the jewish race off the face of this
> > earth. This "war on terror" is really more about Israel than
> > the US.
> Nope. Quite a bit is all the US own making.
> > It's
> > Israel that is in the crosshairs of jihad. We have only been
> > dragged into this because we have unwaveringly supported the
> > right of Israel to exist.
>
> Oh, it's the Jews' fault? Did I understand that right? You are
> just along for the ride due to Your pure and unadulterated
> nobility? Supporting morally corrupt regimes with shaky human
> rights records and ousting regimes that would not sit up and
> beg for US economic interests had _absolutely_ nothing to do
> with it?
>
> The mind, she boggles! Attend me, while I dance this little
> jig of despair.
>
> > You can deny it if you want, but it is very obvious that
> > Germany has not exactly been unwavering in its support of
> > Israel in its battle for survival.
>
> Prove it. You must have gotten that imformation from
> somewhere. lest You pulled it out of Your arse, so it might
> stand You well to provide ist with some credible evidence,
> preferably from
> German sources.
>
> Deny if if You want, Germany has been a very solid supporter
> of Israel for, lo, at least the last 35 years or so, since
> Ehrhard established dimplomatic relations with Israel.
>
> > Germany has consistently criticised Israel as they attempt
> > to defend themselves from these maniacs.
>
> Again, prove it. If You can.
> However, yes, Germany did offer criticism, very rarely
> official, which is the only thing that counts in this respect,
> at times when Israel did some things that were shaky even
> under Isreli law. You see, not the concept and the necessity
> of defense was criticised but sometimes the way the defense
> was conducted. And that is just and befitting. What You don't
> seem to understand is that we can support _and_ criticise at
> the same time.
\end{quote}

And as to philo-semitism:

\begin{quote}
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
I wrote:
> Markus wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>> Markus wrote:
>>>> Whether its stopping gruesome practices like abortion and
>>>> experiments on fetuses. Or whether its standing up for
>>>> Israel, or opposing bizarre and threatening world
>>>> organizations like the world criminal court. We need to
>>>> start getting together internationally. They may not be
>>>> posting here, but I believe that there are many Germans of
>>>> principle out there who would agree.
>>> Well, maybe You should contact Dr.Frey of the DVU, Mr.Mahler
>>> of the NPD, Dr.Rolf Schlierer and Mr.Schönhuber of the
>>> Republikaner. I think they would cheerfully accept. And
>>> given Your output here, there is little to differentiate You
>>> from them. Ah, maybe not the stance of Israel, after all
>>> (which in Your case I diagnose as an advanced case of
>>> philo-semitism (Thanks Henryk M.Broder)), but in most of the
>>> other issues, You'll get along just swimmingly.
>>
>> What exactly is this supposed to mean?
> Walked into that one, didn't You. Henryk M.Broder is a German
> journalist and political commentator (www.henryk-broder.de).
> He happens to be Jewish. In one very memorable commentary, he
> classified philo-semitism, the ostentatious and often
> patronisingly concerned attitude towards Israel/Jewish
> concerns, not as the opposite of anti-semitism, but rather the
> other,
> shinier but no less disturbing, face of the same coin. The way
> You used Israel in Your postings is a rather good example, it
> does smack of something unsavoury. That attitude more often
> than not flips onto its darker side if the solicitude shown is
> not rewarded and the concern is unrequited.
\end{quote}

I think the quotes do speak for themselves. Little one, You
dragged Israel into this debate as the ultimate argument for
unwavering and unquestioning support for the war plans of the
USA. You belaboured the point with incessant moralising, naming
Germany the sole reason for the creation of Israel:

\begin{quote}
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

I wrote:
> Markus wrote:
>> Now I understand that modern
>> germans have largely repudiated the Nazis, but the historical
>> fact remains that it was what Germany did during WWII that
>> directly lead to the creation of the modern state of Israel,
>> and hence to the conflict that we are now embroiled in.
>
>1) What do You mean, "largely repudiated"? That would lend
>itself to the interpretation that parts of Nazi-ideology still
>had official credibility in Germany, wouldn't it? Please
>clarify.
>
>2) There were more ingredients to this particular embroglio,
>such as the British mandate of Palestina. The Zionist movement,
>and I use that word advisedly here, started immigration to what
>they perceived as their homeland all through the early 20th
>century.
>
>3) Israel has always been through history, at least in their
>wishes and dreams, the "secret" homeland of a good many Jews.
>"Next year in Jerusalem" had its meaning.
>
>4) The way You describe it, Israel is the creation of Adolph
>Hitler. I doubt that the Israelis would like that particular
>distinction.
>
>5) The way You phrase it, Israel is the sole reason for unrest
>in the Middle East. That is demonstrably _not_ true. Saddam
>Hussein, just for starters, was an US-backed upstart that got
>in when old Idris Shah didn't bow to US oil interests. Khomeni
>got into power when the USA dropped support for Rheza Pahlevi.
>And
>so forth, and so forth.
\end{quote}

Not that You, my dear fool, addressed any of these points in
Your later postings, though. Instead You became ever more
strident, moralisng and sanctimonious.

> I believe this article has substance.

About as much substance as a mild fog.

> We in the US need to
> maintain a very strong military, that is the best answer.

Getting hysterical now, aren't You, little one? Well, it's Your
money, Your privilege and Your pleasure. However, I am somewhat
comforted that for all Your bluster, Your influence on any
political matter, whether in the US or in elsewhere, is at best
zero. People tend to recognize hysterical pipsqueaks, You know?

> Germany is not
> as wealthy as they seem and certainly not as wealthy as the
> US, and their entrance into the EU I think will weaken them
> rather than strengthen them in the long run.

And that is just fine and dandy, though You got it
ass-backwards. Germany is in the company of friends and partners
and the German military does not have a field unit above
division which is strictly a national unit. And that is just the
way we like it.

> Europe has no military to speak of and
> cannot afford to start building one as their economies are
> floundering.

Well, if the EU were forced to resurect the plans for a
EU-military, of course sizable portions of the national military
budgets would have to be devoted to building it. With 15
countries that would be on the 200 billion Euro mark, possibly
even more, and that is with the current, relatively low budgets.
The plans have been drawn up and updated since the end of the
'50ies, but with NATO and the UN, there never was a reason to
activate them.

Do You want to have them activated?

> Germany was also not as great a military power as they seemed
> even in the 1940's. They could not even take out Russia, and
> Russia was not exactly a superpower then. (And they weren't
> really later either.) We need to stay strong and keep an eye
> on them, but we can easily take them out if we need to.

Oh, the US could even do better than that, my pointy-headed
friend. They could stay friends and even take part in the
amalgamtion, for instance, to build up a real and palpable
_international_ military force with enough clout to make any of
the threats You've been harping about so hysterically tread very
warily. Of course, it could not be under the jurisdiction of the
US (cue outraged screams of the
black-helicopter-NWO-conspiracy-orbiting-mind-control-laser-tinfo
il-lined-beanie brigade).

Little one, Your above little objurgation is the usual puerile
power fantasy that we all have come to expect and loathe. Your
stridency and hysteria is making You appear even more stupid
than You are.

> Building SDI is still a good idea.

Your pleasure. Your money. Snookums, apart from France and the
UK, nobody in the EU has either nuclear weapons nor delivery
systems. Apart from China and Russia, nobody else has. And as it
has been pointed out even in the US, even the most sophisticated
SDI system is quite irrelevant in case of a nuclear terrorist
sneak attack or a depressed launch attack. Of course, the US
will have to tear up yet another few international treaties to
do so, but they've been getting some practise by now. So by all
means, if You need to pour down money into that rathole in the
sky, it's Your privilege. Me, I think I could have more fun
tearing up the banknotes under a cold shower and sprinkling
myself with the resultant confetti.

> Keeping troops stationed
> there is also probably not a bad idea.

Oh, but You see, You must stay good friends and allies for that,
You know? The US presence here is based on the NATO-treaty. That
is fine and well, and I would not change it. Provided, of
course, that the NATO still exists in its present form.

> My thinking has very much
> changed on this.

Translated: You have encountered heavy criticism about what You
so laughably call Your ideas and are now in deep funk and petty
sulk, heavily laced with hysteria and bewilderment. You did
expect that Your pseudo-elder-statesman like blather would be
received with adulation and respect, didn't You?

Ho hum, so what else is new on USENET? Has it occurred to You
that it might be Your ideas that are at fault, or the way You
deliver them, and not the criticism? Naaah, I didn't think so.
You are a hypocritical fool, little one, and a transparent one
at that.

As transparent, by the way, as Your pathetic attempts of
enlisting support from the readership. "Hellllp! They are
ganging up on meee! They are picking on meee! I didn't do
anything, Mom!". But You did, my dear fool, You did. You jammed
Your foot down Your gullet, leaving just enough room in there to
shoot Yourself into it, standing in that ridiculous
flamingo-pose in the way of the creampies that You deserved for
Your ridiculous performance.

> It is very true that as one gets older one realizes that
> the more things change, the more they really do just stay the
> same.

Yes, indeed. Reactionaries and bigots and fools stay the same
everywhere.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBPX27UTDMWmGNkofSEQKJAgCfZUII2DJf7G4EAEeZQRU5/jjGrisAniwL
pBaTyGyKtWo4kXdQ5ZNFXPMG
=hEgS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Till Poser


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

whats all this jibba jabba!

i pity da foo

:thumbsup

^^^^^
anyone read it ?

is there a short version Fletch?