From: Cathy Reason <Cathym.nul> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 18:42:21 +0100 Archived: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:01:58 -0400 Subject: Re: Anti-Semitism And Ufology >From: Michael Hughes <michaelmhughes.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:34:41 -0400 >Subject: Re: Anti-Semitism And Ufology >As the person who has probably talked about this topic the most >on this List in recent history (in my comments about Jeff >Rense), I, too, find McGonagle's statements unsettling. And >images like these go way over the top: >http://tvoyic.blogspot.com I take it the images you're referring to here, are the one depicting a Nazi swastika on an Israeli flag, and the one depicting Ehud Olmert as an SS officer with a Hitler mustache. >As others have noted, saying, "Not all Israelis are bad", is a >very bad way to start a discussion. What's interesting to me is that, in commenting on an article riddled with factual errors and dubious assertions (not the least of which, to my mind, is the claim that living through the IRA campaign of the 1970s has given the entire UK population a first-hand knowledge of what it is like to be subjected to regular and indiscriminate artillery bombardment from another country) you have chosen to concentrate on a first line which says essentially nothing, and on a pair of images which are at best fatuous and at worst merely pointless. It's this sort of liberal walking on eggshells which I find so objectionable - the refusal to name names and admit what one is really talking about, and instead to hide behind euphemisms, half-truths and evasions. >But I'd wager a large sum of money that Joe isn't an anti- >Semite. He's justifiably outraged at the most egregious >activities of the Israeli government. Notice I said "Israeli >government". The second word is important. I'm not going to wager any money either way on whether Joe is an anti-semite, since I don't know him. But if Joe had intended to express outrage at the activities of the Israeli government, then he had ample opportunity to do so in his own words. Instead he has chosen to say something else. >Language is crucial when discussing contentious issues. >"Israelis" are a diverse population, a large portion of whom do >not approve of their government's activities. And, as we've all >seen with people like Rense, real anti-Semites use such blanket >generalizations, and soon "Israelis" is changed to "Zionists" >and then "Zionists" becomes "all Jews" . I'm wondering who this statement is supposed to be directed at, because anyone who needs to be told this is probably incapable of understanding it to begin with. Once again, it all sounds to me like liberals walking on eggshells. >Language - it makes all the difference. Certainly it makes all the difference if people are in the habit of saying things they don't mean and meaning things they don't say. Saying what you mean is in no way enhanced by liberal self-censorship. And incidentally, my comments in this thread were in the first instance dircted not at Mr McGonagle but at Mr Pope - in particular his odious remark about "a desperately sad situation in which there's fault on all sides". This is the sort of liberal cant I find particularly repulsive, because not only does it say absolutely nothing but it attempts so make it impossible for anyone else to say anything either. If there's fault on all sides then of course no-one is to blame and no-one can ever be held responsible for anything - but it's all desperately sad, so we can show how much we care about it all without actually having to do anything about it. I have nothing but contempt for this sort of nonsense. Cathy Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp