Vicious 'anti-Zionist' (ha ha) suspended from UKIP

Post Reply New Topic

The question didnt say name one of these elite Jews, it said, name one of these "elite Zionists", maybe you havent heard of Christian Zionists? and their belief that the Jews taking over Palestine today is a fulfillment of Bible prophesy and therefore Gods will?
There are probably a lot more Christian Zionists than Jewish ones, and the Jewish ones dont look like they have a hell of a lot of Semitic blood in them to me anyway.

Maybe you would like to make yourself look better now on WP by apologising?

... Ilian Pappe has been shown to lie about historical facts before for political reasons (he falsified and used prominently a 'quote' purportedly said by David Ben-Gurion in 1937 which his sources don't back up). Benny Morris excoriated

Pappe last year, saying that "at best, Ilan Pappe must be one of the world’s sloppiest historians; at worst, one of the most dishonest. In truth, he probably merits a place somewhere between the two."

Perhaps worth a read: [url=http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/coexistence.htmlhttp://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/coexistence.html[/u[/url]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Time_ ... _criticism

Noam Chomsky: "... As soon as the book [From Time Immemorial] appeared, it was just demolished, it was blown out of the water. Every major journal, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review, the Observer, everybody had a review saying, this doesn't even reach the level of nonsense, of idiocy. A lot of the criticism used Finkelstein's work without any acknowledgment, I should say—but about the kindest word anybody said about the book was "ludicrous," or "preposterous."

....David and Ian Gilmour in The London Review of Books (February 7, 1985)[13] heavily criticized Peters for ignoring Arab sources and "censorship of Zionist sources that do not suit her case". They also present examples that in their view show that Peters misuses the sources which she does include in her work. They accuse Peters of basic errors in scholarship, such as the citation of Makrizi, who died in 1442, to support her statements about mid-nineteenth century population movements. ...

Oxford University historian, Albert Hourani, (1985); "The whole book is written like this: facts are selected or misunderstood, tortuous and flimsy arguments are expressed in violent and repetitive language. This is a ludicrous and worthless book, and the only mildly interesting question it raises is why it comes with praise from two well-known American writers."

... Robert Olson dismissed the book in the American Historical Review (April 1985): "This is a startling and disturbing book. It is startling because, despite the author's professed ignorance of the historiography of the Arab-Israeli conflict and lack of knowledge of Middle Eastern history (pp. 221, 335) coupled with her limitation to sources largely in English (absolutely no Arab sources are used), she engages in the rewriting of history on the basis of little evidence"

... In The New York Times, Israeli historian Yehoshua Porath described the book as a "sheer forgery,"

A quick word of warning to Tequila.

I am in contact with members of UKIP who are well aware of your presence on WP and have been before I joined last year. They have no idea who you are but they take it in good faith that you are a paid up member of UKIP rather than a supporter posing as a member. All of them express concern that you regularly post material that highlights your views as being extremist, and in some cases, are out on a limb compared to the more conventional UKIP ideology. The volume of your postings makes you look like a propagandist and the question of where you find all the time to search news sources for material to post on WP needs an answer. Do you lead a double life - one whilst in the real world and another under a pseudonym on the internet - or do other UKIP members approve of what you post on WP? So far these UKIP members have kept the knowledge of your presence on WP to themselves and a few other trusted individuals but they could take it to a higher level in the party in the future because they think you have a potential to be a liability.

I wouldn't even dignify it by calling it a 'line of enquiry'.
Still, I love reminding my other half about how he not only controls Hollywood and the press, but also the entire financial system. He's been very ill lately, should make him feel a bit better.

If you want to express your disagreement with Nambo's opinion on this subject, that sort of sarcastic response is a pretty illogical way to go about it, to be honest. I mean, you rarely hear people using the fact that millions of Chinese people live in poverty to argue against the idea that the Chinese are a world power.

The Jews seem to have had a pretty rough time of it in both Christian and Islamic countries.

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/29320

The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated. And so on.

According to some calculations, the Indian (subcontinent) population decreased by 80 million between 1000 (conquest of Afghanistan) and 1525 (end of Delhi Sultanate).

http://bedejournal.blogspot.co.uk/2011/ ... usade.html

In the 13th century the Cathars of southern France embraced the Albigensian heresy, according to which there are two gods, one of good and one of evil. An infuriated papacy, in collusion with the king of France, sent waves of armies to the region, which killed around 200,000 of them ... The reason you have never met a Cathar is that the Albigensian Crusade exterminated them.

People don't as often dehumanise Chinese people the same way people do with 'the Jews'. Jews have always been the most fashionable people to make dehumanising conspiracy theories about (though Muslisms are catching up with that) - reminding people with humour that Jews are actually people is necessary.

Translation: the Jews are special, therefore I can use different rules of logic when talking about them.