Joe said:
Why should I look around?!?!? We are talking about antisemitism... I detest the way debaters like yourself attempt to take sly shots at jews that cry antisemitism by claiming we're "not the only victims"... Many ethnicities have been victim to prologoned genocides - but that doesn't make the jewish suffering less brutal!
Joe, I would not at all seek to denigrate or belittle the suffering of holocaust victims, I acknowledge they are numerous, most of whom didn't survive, I've known holocaust survivors, people with concentration camp tattoos on their arms, and also Jewish people who are decendants of those affected by the holocaust more generally, as well as those who died because of it. I am aware of the suffering.
But to say that there were other victims in no way diminishes the suffering of the Jewish people. Gays suffered too (I have lots of gay friends, and in a different time and place, they would have been persecuted too, I know someone who spent half of his life in China (he's now nearly 40) in fear for his life, because up until about 20 years ago, gays in China were executed, rounded up and shot, and I don't think it diminishes the suffering of the Jewish people to acknowledge what gay people went through as well, especially when I know someone personally who has lived in fear for his life because of his sexuality). Gypsies were also victims of the holocaust and other groups.
Including disabled people, who were also victims of the holocaust, and I sympathise and empathise with their plight (I have Asperger's Syndrome, an autistic spectrum disorder, and my daughter has ADHD, which is also 'on the spectrum', and there's currently genetic research going on that's seeking to eradicate autistic spectrum disorders, and wipe people like me and my daughter off the face of the earth; in 20-30 years' time, there will likely be pre-natal testing and abortions offered, probably testing and disposing of fertilised eggs at the pre-implantation stage, and this is supposed to be 'good' 'acceptable' science, unlike the eugenics practised during the holocaust, although I struggle to see the difference).
I agree with you that none of what happened to other ethnicities or other peoples who have been victims of genocide means that they suffered 'more' than the Jewish people. But that also holds true vice versa. The persecution that the Jewish people suffered during the holocaust was abhorrent, but I wonder where some people's humanity has gone, when they use the suffering experienced during the holocaust of the second world war to justify the oppression of the Palestinian people today?
I'm honestly, truly baffled, and as yet, I've never heard anyone try to argue the position, logically, rationally, coherently, and make a valid believeable argument.
The argument seems to amount to: the Jewish people suffered during the holocaust, so we're entitled to do what we want. But two wrongs don't make a right. How can they?
How can shooting a pregnant Palestinian woman making her way to hospital to have a baby be justified by the holocaust? Or the bombing on a beach of a family having a day out? How can the murder of people like Rachel Corrie, Tom Hurndall, and James Miller be justified by what occurred during the holocaust? And I feel bad about the examples I use, because just as there were many millions of victims of the holocaust whose names I don't know, there are many Palestinian victims of Israeli state oppression and terrorism and war crimes that I don't know, including civilians, women and children alike.
How can a people who have suffered so much, inflict so much suffering on other people? I'm just asking the question, Joe. And please don't give me the standard: But we were victims of the holocaust, and you're antisemitic response. Please try to explain to me how Israel justifies its actions. It's widely, internationally acknowledged, that the suicide bombings and terrorist attacks by the Islamic militants and extremists are unacceptable, but in that context, I can't understand why killing civilians is unacceptable when perpetrated by Islamic militants and extremists, and yet it's seemingly acceptable, to your mind, when carried out by the state of Israel.
Joe said:
And Islamic fundamentalism is what it says on the label - religious fundamentalism, it existed before the state of Israel (as reaction to the demise of the islamic empires and rise of the west) and it exists outside of Islam (look at the bible belt, Satmar Jews, etc.)... Zionism has contributed to jewish/muslim relations as it is packaged with occidental imperialism - but to credit Zionism with the current cultural tension is quite a short sighted statement.
Erm, actually, it's a bit of a misnomer, "fundamentalism", the way it's often used in reference to Islamic militancy/terrorism, and if you notice next time you're watching, say, the BBC, they won't nowadays refer to fundamentalism. You might get some talking head referring to it, but it's unlikely you'll get a journo referring to "fundamentalism", because it's simply incorrect terminology.
An Islamic fundamendalist would be a person who believes in the fundamentals of Islam, the root of which is similar to the Hebrew word "shalom", i.e. the roots of the word Islam are the letters 's', 'l' and 'm', meaning "peace". Someone who practices suicide bombing cannot be said to be an Islamic fundamentalist, in fact suicide is a huge sin in Islam. It's wrong to believe that what's preached and practiced by militants and extremists pertains to the vast majority of muslims, ergo they're not fundamentalists.
Are you based in America Joe? Because "fundamentalist" seems to be a more acceptable expression over there, perhaps the media over there haven't actually thought too much about the accuracy of the term, as it was widely and commonly used some years ago, but that's no longer the case, at least not in the UK media, because it's incorrect.
