It was more than hot air.
The program 'The Big Question' decided to encourage discussion between
the Israeli lobby and the anti Israel group regarding the current
arguments surrounding Ken Livingston's comments about Zionism and the
discussions its leaders had with Hitler and the repatriation of the Jews
to the emerging state of Israel in 1933.
If it were meant to be discussion then it failed. If it were meant to illustrate the depth of hate between people who, for no other reason than a idiosyncratic position regarding the state of Israel vis a vis Palestine, a political issue, actually bordered on the fanatical.
The case of Palestine and the Israeli homeland is pockmarked with emotive issues which a reading of the history does little to capture the true feelings of the participants.
Opportunities squandered by politicians who were feeding their own particular followers with a story they wanted to hear.
Less than rigorous pressure applied by the US, Israel's paymaster, to insist on concessions.
The intransigence of the Arab lobby which saw itself numerically superior, with a large swath of world opinion on its side, particularly as the Israeli side has continued to colonise the West Bank against the United Nations mandate.
The shouting match which took over discussion was broken momentarily by the the Bishop of Manchester who quietly observed that it was sad that "people in boxes only see what's in their own box". The intolerance shown by both sides was unusual, given that, in our society we do all it can to avoid conflict, appeasement is much more our thing but in this matter it's better to keep the knifes in the drawer.
"The Jews are not a people they are a religion".
If it were meant to be discussion then it failed. If it were meant to illustrate the depth of hate between people who, for no other reason than a idiosyncratic position regarding the state of Israel vis a vis Palestine, a political issue, actually bordered on the fanatical.
The case of Palestine and the Israeli homeland is pockmarked with emotive issues which a reading of the history does little to capture the true feelings of the participants.
Opportunities squandered by politicians who were feeding their own particular followers with a story they wanted to hear.
Less than rigorous pressure applied by the US, Israel's paymaster, to insist on concessions.
The intransigence of the Arab lobby which saw itself numerically superior, with a large swath of world opinion on its side, particularly as the Israeli side has continued to colonise the West Bank against the United Nations mandate.
The shouting match which took over discussion was broken momentarily by the the Bishop of Manchester who quietly observed that it was sad that "people in boxes only see what's in their own box". The intolerance shown by both sides was unusual, given that, in our society we do all it can to avoid conflict, appeasement is much more our thing but in this matter it's better to keep the knifes in the drawer.
"The Jews are not a people they are a religion".
That
was a statement which for me clarified everything. The Jews are the
embodiment of their faith. The American Jew is an American following
the Jewish faith. The Jew living in London is an Englishman who attends
the synagogue. Therefore the activities that are going on in Israel are a
'national' event and do not effect the Jewish faith, other than they
are Jewish people who hold opinions about the matter of Israel.
As a collective, under the banner of a religious faith, much like the Muslim, the Jews are indefinable other than by their faith. Their faith not only defines them but binds them together in a much more powerful combination than say nationality. The rules of religious observance are stronger than national ones because they are specifically for the individual, a direct correlation between him/herself to God. There is no such relationship in a secular society and when we use the word Jew or Muslim, Hindu or Christian we have to differentiate them from ourselves because we are not comparing like with like.
Of course just as Muslims are now linked to ISIS and suicide bombings, Jews are linked to Wall Street and abnormal banking practices.
The theory of Jewish world domination (the Protocols of the Elders of Zion) through finance, fed by their inclination to be money changers and as such, crucially to control the thing which binds us all, money.
Goldman Sachs is the epitome of a super powerful, Jewish run, self serving bank, who's part in the downfall of the banking system in 2007/8 was accentuated when its chairman, Lloyd Blankfein said to the American Congressional Committee, "that the financial rigging", which lay at the bottom of the 'Derivative'/ 'Credit Default Swap', fraud in ordinary man's language, but in Blankfeins world it was "a method of trade between consenting adults".
As a collective, under the banner of a religious faith, much like the Muslim, the Jews are indefinable other than by their faith. Their faith not only defines them but binds them together in a much more powerful combination than say nationality. The rules of religious observance are stronger than national ones because they are specifically for the individual, a direct correlation between him/herself to God. There is no such relationship in a secular society and when we use the word Jew or Muslim, Hindu or Christian we have to differentiate them from ourselves because we are not comparing like with like.
Of course just as Muslims are now linked to ISIS and suicide bombings, Jews are linked to Wall Street and abnormal banking practices.
The theory of Jewish world domination (the Protocols of the Elders of Zion) through finance, fed by their inclination to be money changers and as such, crucially to control the thing which binds us all, money.
Goldman Sachs is the epitome of a super powerful, Jewish run, self serving bank, who's part in the downfall of the banking system in 2007/8 was accentuated when its chairman, Lloyd Blankfein said to the American Congressional Committee, "that the financial rigging", which lay at the bottom of the 'Derivative'/ 'Credit Default Swap', fraud in ordinary man's language, but in Blankfeins world it was "a method of trade between consenting adults".
It
could of course be compared to people who place a bet on the roulette
wheel in the casino knowing their chance of winning is low and yet still
place the bet. But there are very stringent government imposed rules
placed upon the casino not to rig the wheel. In the case of Goldman
Sachs the wheel was replaced by the value of mortgages which were
deliberately tinkered with, to make them appear what they were not and
therefore making the whole process, in my eyes at least, fraudulent.
Why is this anything to do with the Jewish community you ask when we have agreed that the term Jew refers to the religion. But if there are enough people carrying on in such a manner from such a specific segment of society, than guilt by proxy is enough for most people.
Jewish exclusivity doesn't help. Like the Masons they are seen to promote their own interests to the exclusion of others and so is it any wonder they are viewed with suspicion developing the sort of heated debate we saw this morning.
Why is this anything to do with the Jewish community you ask when we have agreed that the term Jew refers to the religion. But if there are enough people carrying on in such a manner from such a specific segment of society, than guilt by proxy is enough for most people.
Jewish exclusivity doesn't help. Like the Masons they are seen to promote their own interests to the exclusion of others and so is it any wonder they are viewed with suspicion developing the sort of heated debate we saw this morning.
No comments:
Post a Comment