+hermanessences I say: Jew after Jew after Jew after Jew, and not a word about THAT! I am of pure British ancestry in the US, grew up in an all-British New England family, but I want to exclusive private schools full of the children of rich Jews.It is crystal-clear by their facial features who most of these men are by their exotic, non-British faces.
+Hamish Allan I have no problem in believing there are honourable Jews, amongst whom Zak Goldsmith may be counted. He appears to be a very genuine chap who is (belatedly?) agreeing there was a cover-up of some very shady dealings. However nor do I have any difficulty in recognising the overwhelming frequency of Jews associated with a number of catastrophic events, including 9/11. Nor that when one applies the test of 'who benefits' it is consistently them and Israel that appear NOT Muslims or their states, which by any analysis have been uniformly disadvantaged and devastated. That surely should tell us SOMETHING?
+Tim Veater Oh and PLEASE do not throw the 'anti-semitic' thing at me (as someone was just itching to do above). It is as corny as the second charge of 'conspiracist' and strange how they go in pairs isn't it? This is not to deny that both have been used most effectively by political and media elites to prevent a factual discussion of the events referred to. It can not be irrelevant that David Cameron (a dedicated 'Friend of Israel) has given public notice he intends to criminalise both. When eventually the population of these islands are eventually freed from these propagandist and guilt ridden chains, we may be able to acknowledge at last the true causes and intentions blamed on unsuspecting and innocent Muslims. (This of course is not to say that Muslims have not been involved in violent activity in different parts of the world but we should be careful to distinguish between the often Delphian contributory issues)
+Tim Veater It's perfectly possible to be anti-Zionist without being anti-Semitic, but you appear to be pretty blasé about blurring the lines between the State of Israel and "Jews". Yes, the people in charge of international capital are in charge of this world and yes, many of those people are Jewish, but not all Jews are money-lenders, and not all money-lenders are Jews, so why do you not focus your complaints on "money-lenders" rather than "Jews"?
There are strong societal pressures not to refer to 'Jews'. This to some extent is understandable, given their history at the hands of others, perhaps mainly 'Christians', certainly in the last Century at least. But note the change of 'aura' and defensiveness around the two religious descriptors. Yes it is now politic to distinguish between 'Jew' and 'Zionist' as indeed it might be between 'Christian' and 'Fascist' but why should any of these terms be equated to terms of abuse and therefore proscribed? If a person claims to be a Christian or Jew (or any other religion or philosophical persuasion) why should the mention of it be automatically condemned? What we are dealing with here is the policing of thought and expression. If it was equally applied it may be defensible. It is applied unequally and arbitrarily, the clear purpose being to protect some and injure others in the arena of public opinion, so important to policy makers and political leaders. Religion is full of paradoxes and contradictions. What we may term 'the West' is predominantly of 'Christian' heritage and persuasion, yet it would be a brave person to claim that Christian principles are necessarily evident in either its domestic or foreign policy despite the fact they are often appealed to. We should not feel restrained in our ability to be critical of Tony Blair's decisions (for example) because he is a committed Roman Catholic or prevented from questioning how the one affects the other. And just as ambiguities exist within faiths they exist between them. Thus Christianity and Judaism have much in common but also many points of difference and antipathy. In this context it is interesting how practising Christians, particularly in America, have been overwhelmingly supportive of Israel, even when it can be seen to be practising unfair and inhuman acts. So in conclusion and I apologise for going on - "I didn't have the time to be more concise" - I reject the tactic used by powerful clandestine forces to stifle any criticism of persons or nations that claim to be Jewish simply by labelling it 'anti-semitic'. (It cannot be defended that there are persons currently in the news, that have apparently used it to their advantage to avoid criminal prosecution) Similarly Israel has used the ploy to avoid the sanctions that would otherwise be justified. I am no more anti-Jew than I am anti-Christian, but neither term can be allowed to stand in the way of discussing objective fact.
+John de Nugent Well, no, shit man, noone is denying that these people are Jewish, the point is that you're racist conspiracy nuts. Do you wanna know why there are so many Jews in high positions? Because Jews tend to have pretty high IQs, which is partly genetic, and well-documented. But my prediction is that you will not investigate this and integrate it into your worldview like any honest person would, but you'll rather stick to your nutty beliefs.
hermanessences14:14 How about the 'nutty belief' that 19 Muslims flew four planes on 9/11 when subsequently at least 10 were discovered alive and well (apart of all the other intractable problems). Who propagated and maintained that?
+Tim Veater Straw man. I didn't try to police your expression, I didn't take exception to your use of the term "Jew", I didn't say you were anti-Semitic for using the term, I simply pointed out that it includes vast swathes of people who are nothing to do with the international banking system. So why not use a different term, if that's what your problem is with?
+hermanessences i guess you missed the recent revelation. turns out, and you can look this up on many sources, that 'conspiracy theorists' are and have been right all along. as a side note of relevance the term 'conspiracy theorist' and other discrediting tactics were coined and implemented by the CIA(where George H.W. Bush worked at the time, you might remember him, the 'no new taxes' liar who had close ties with sadam hussein and osama bin laden and the people behind the iran-contra scandal) for the sole purpose of making those asking pointed, hard to answer questions about the JFK assassination, out to be crazy and not worth listening to. conspiracies exist, there have been conspiracies for as long as our species has existed and people such as yourself who decry those demanding answers to the very serious questions and allegations being levied are helping the murderous bastards get away with atrocities to make a horror movie buff sick enough to swear off the genre.
+mouserr "you can look this up on many sources" I've already looked up many sources and have found no such thing. If you want to make a case, you have to actually reference substance, not just hearsay.
+hermanessences Jews have high IQs? The hypocrisy. It was you that was accusing someone else of being racist and then you come up with this nonsense. So it turns out that you are a supremacist of the worst kind. Judaism is a religion for a start and not something genetic.