Mali is both Muslim and one of the poorest nations in the world. To my knowlege, it has not produced as much terrorists as rich nations like Saudi Arabia or hell, even Northern Ireland.

Iran’s per capita GDP is higher than most nations. Every Persian-American I have spoken to considers it a (if you’ll forgive the terminology) First World nation.

And let the record reflect that Jonas does not consider the following things bizzare: a giant talking mouse dancing to songs about AK-47s, an Easter bunny screaming that he will eat Jews, and the fact that said bunny has a cousin who is a bee who goes on a violent jihad. I cannot imagine any readers who do not live inside Alice’s Wonderland would agree.

20% of Israel’s population is Arab. If they are trying to “annihilate the Palestinians” they are doing a pretty poor job of it.

Tomorrow’s Pioneers is not in any way “antisemitic” and I don’t consider it “bizarre” either, but I see how one would have such an opinion. The main controversy over it was nothing – caused by a great error in translation (changing victimization to desiring aggression) – and should have been investigated by the Arabic translators for American news outlets before being spread. The Mickey Mouse lookalike character never said “We want to annihilate the Jews”, but that they want to exterminate Palestinians. While one may not like the binary thinking at play here, it certainly seems like Israel, which proclaims itself “Jewish State” wants to annihilate the Palestinians.

Anyway, this has nothing to do with Hamas, or the Muslim Brotherhood. It is about bigoted Islamophobes propagating hatred.

If by “reality” you mean the ethnocentric views of gentiles…

I may have addressed some of your points in the previous post, which I think was not approved by the moderator until after you wrote yours. If I am mistaken or I did not address a certain statement, feel free to point it out.

I did not address the other anti-Zionist Jews because I was not making the argument that all anti-Zionists were antisemitic. I was just pointing out that using Shahak and Chomsky as examples of non-antisemites may be a mistake.

I do not know how you differentiate between being a “chapter” or “affiliate” and being “of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood”. Forgive me if this strikes one as semantics.

The fact that HAMAS has not amended it’s charter speaks volumes, but that is not the only place where their antisemitism is shown. The strangest example is a children’s TV show on Al-Aqsa TV – a network run by HAMAS – called “Tomorrow’s Pioneers”. It must be seen to be believed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow%27s_Pioneers

More common, less bizarre manifestations of their antisemitism occurs on an almost weekly basis and are too numerous to mention.

No, reality matters. Different sects of Judaism have different ideas about who can be considered a Jew, so even according to belief there is no standard. If someone says “I’m half Jewish”, what is this really saying? It’s like saying that up until their father or mother, they have some unbroken line of ancestry going back to the ancient Hebrews. It’s just as foolish as when neo-Nazis apply the same standards.

I too support the one-state solution – where Palestinians can have equal amounts of land, equal rights, and justice, and do not have to live as second-class citizens, or refugees in other countries because the Zionists expelled them.

There is no reason why right-of-return cannot be a collective right – surely it will not be any more harmful (and indeed, much less so) than the “collective right” of Zionist European Jews to have expelled those demanding that right in the first place.

As for antipathy toward American Jews, I have heard that claim before, but have never seen the source of a quote by him expressing that particular idea; it could have referred to most Zionist Jews, or American ‘Jewish organizations’ like Bnai Brith. It still does not mean that he hates Jews, or is antisemitic. Indeed, Chomsky has in the past said that he was a Zionist, but that his views are today what would be called “anti-Zionist”. I posted on a website called Dissident Voice for over a year, and the commenters there hated Chomsky for that comment, saying that he was a ‘Zionazi propagandist’ for Israel and a Jewish supremacist! And I can see why they feel that way; he opposes BDS, for example.

Also, Uri Avnery, Ilan Pappé, etc. You failed to explain how any of these people were out right racists.

Jonas said:

“Yes, ‘Soldiers of Allah’, were supported by the US, no matter how brutal, as long as the government’s desires were fulfilled. This included Osama Bin Laden and the (ideologically opposite, non-Islamist) Saddam Hussein.”

I responded:

“There is no evidence that the United States supported bin Laden or any of the Arab volunteers fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.”

It was a conversation about American support for bin Laden and the Arab volunteers, not American support for the anti-Soviet forces as a whole. I asked you to calm down because you were so hyped up that you came to one or more of the following misunderstandings. You either a) confused Arabs with Afghans, b) did not read the conversation between Jonas and I carefully and assumed I was denying American support for anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan, or c) you failed to realize that the Arab volunteers did not play a major role until the 1990s.

http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal.....mrubin.pdf

Every black or Turkish German knows that when s/he hears a crowd of racist skinheads chanting “Germany for Germans”, they are advocating a Germany made up of ONLY light-skinned, German-speaking people whose ancestors spoke German. There is a huge difference between saying a nation is the homeland of a certain ethnicity or that a certain religion should be the state religion of a nation and saying ONLY people of a certain ethnicity or religion should live in an area. Again, if you do not believe in homelands or state religions, that’s fine as long as such a belief is consistent for all religions and ethnicities.

Chomsky’s comments on “deeply totalitarian” American Jews:
Interview, Shmate: A Journal of Progressive Jewish Thought, Summer 1988

“98% control”
Variant, Scotland, Winter 2002

The pro-denial petition
Werner Cohn, “Partners in Hate: Noam Chomsky and the
Holocaust Deniers” (Avukah Press, 1995), pp53-4.

Weber’s connection
Cohn, “Partners in Hate”, 55-56.

Fiscal support for Holocaust denial
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/chomsky/guillaume.html

There is a difference between politely asking for sources and calling someone a liar without evidence. Please learn this difference.

There is a huge, huge difference between defending the free speech rights of the adherents of a belief system and supporting that belief system.

I said:
Claiming Jews cannot be antisemitic is like saying Eddie Long (the closeted preacher) isn’t a homophobe, or H.K. Edgerton (a black neo-Confederate) isn’t racist.

You said:
Good thing nobody even claimed that.

Jonas argued that anti-Zionism is not antisemitic and then listed the names of several Jews, at least two of whom, I would argue, are antisemitic. That is why I brought it up.

When you are talking about a cultural term like “Jewishness” of course the beliefs of Jews matter. It is incredibly arrogant to insist that the definition of “Jew” should be decided by non-Jews.

“Very few states have such [immigration] policies.”

There are many states (including Ireland) that have similar policies, some of which are the split image of Israel’s, though they do not have the same history of persecution. Again, if you oppose all of these laws that’s fine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return

Luckily ENTIRE BOOKS have been written on the subject of US support for Islamists in Afghanistan. And luckily nobody cares what has credibility “in your eyes” because you demonstrate a basic lack of knowledge about countless historical facts. The Dunning-Kruger effect is strong with you.

“The third article is too vague. The consensus of people who have studied the mujaheddin at the time is that the CIA had no contact with bin Laden, a fact that has been confirmed by bin Laden himself.”

It…doesn’t….matter. They supported the insurgency. Do
you think they made it a point to meet and greet every single rebel commander and send him a gift basket?

“Why do you have no objection to Irish or German homelands? Let’s assume your argument (or rather, the Muslim Brotherhood’s) that Israel is made up of “lands taken by force from Muslims”; ignoring the many Palestinian Christians and the fact that such a overstatement is a bit controversial.”

Why do groups like the ADL attack nationalists in Germany or Britain who demand “Germany for the Germans, etc.”? I noticed you ducked that question. Also, Zionist publications often ignore Palestinian Christians, knowing that American Christians would find it easier to hate and revile Muslims rather than Christians.

“Why do they not oppose the existence of similar states that kicked out refugees, like the Czech Republic, Russia, Poland, Croatia, India, Pakistan, ect?”

First of all, Czech, Russia, etc. are not religions. Also these are multi-ethnic nations which extend de jure equality to all ethnicities for their part.

“Ruslan,

First, calm down.”

No, first stop lying. The only shrill one here is you.

“Second, I was simply pointing out to Jonas that, if he wants examples of Jewish anti-Zionists to show that anti-Zionism is not antisemitic, he could do much, much better than Chomsky or Shahak.”

Except you had to lie about Chomsky.

“Chomsky’s work with deniers went far beyond defending their free speech rights. A petition he signed that ostensibly defended deniers on free speech grounds only, called a denier’s activities “findings”; put “Holocaust” in quotes; and was passed around by Mark Weber, a name familiar to many readers of this blog. Chomsky allowed a French denier organization the publishing rights to one of his books, a move the group’s officials say saved them from bankruptcy.”

This is what happens when people believe in absolute free speech. Also I’d like a source for some of your claims, since you’ve demonstrated you have no discrimination when it comes to sources which support your beliefs.

“Claiming Jews cannot be antisemitic is like saying Eddie Long (the closeted preacher) isn’t a homophobe, or H.K. Edgerton (a black neo-Confederate) isn’t racist.”

Good thing nobody even claimed that.

“Re Muslim states:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S….._countries”

Wikipedia scholarship again? Many countries claim to be “Muslim countries”, but if that were true there would be no reason for them to join under a unified state, even if they are not contiguous. Political and ethnic reality stand in the way of that pipe dream.

“Yes, that’s Casey with the Afghan mujahedeen. Again, that’s Casey with the AFGHAN mujahedeen. Afghans and Arabs are not the same.”

This may be one of the most idiotic comments I have seen on here. What do you think the Arabs were there for? Are you really going to try to claim that the CIA had nothing to do with this, when Zbigniew Brzezinski has publicly bragged about their involvement in the insurgency?

“I said criticism of Israel may cross the line when the critic “only attacks the idea of a Jewish nation state without contesting the idea of [nation-states for other ethnic and religious groups.]” If you want to argue that the nation-state is passe, fine. I would only ask that you recognize the difference between someone stating “I believe areas with religious/ethnic group X deserves independence” and someone stating “I believe area X should be wiped clean of all people not belonging to religious/ethnic group X”. When X = Jews, the former is a Zionist, the latter is a bigot and many of their organizations are banned in Israel.”

Strawmen destroyed.

“The “right of return” focuses on an alleged collective right, not an individual right. Non-Jews can, and do, immigrate to Israel just like non-Germans can immigrate to Germany and non-Irish can immigrate to Ireland. In fact, the immigration laws, though far from perfect, are much more liberal than most Arab lands.
Ian said, ”

Jews have an easier time immigrating to Israel, even if those who have no roots in the region, than Palestinians who were driven out. This is the problem.

“Many Jews believe that Jewishness is an ethnicity, not a religion. Many Israeli Jews are secular. There are even atheist rabbis.”

Oh gee if they BELIEVE something than it must be true!!

:I have less in common with most people living in Helsinki that your Birobidzan has with the average Israeli, yet according to Finnish law all I have to do is show that I have Finnish ethnicity and I am on the fast track to citizenship. Any fair criticism of Israel must be aware that there are dozens of nations with the same system.”

Very few states have such policies. I can easily prove my Irish roots(at least as far as the UK), but it’s not going to fast-track me anywhere.

The question you ducked was why pro-Zionists like the ADL attack nationalists who claim “X COUNTRY FOR X NATIONALITY”, while playing the “why can’t we have a Jewish state” game.

I am all for the existence of one state in Palestine(perhaps called Israel still)- so long as it extends full equality to all citizens regardless of religion, and applies this to immigration as well.

http://www.shj.org/default.htm

I have less in common with most people living in Helsinki that your Birobidzan has with the average Israeli, yet according to Finnish law all I have to do is show that I have Finnish ethnicity and I am on the fast track to citizenship. Any fair criticism of Israel must be aware that there are dozens of nations with the same system.

The first “Time” article contains one brief sentence on the topic. The second article’s apologetic for the pre-invasion communist government makes it loose all credibility in my eyes.
http://www.paulbogdanor.com/le.....ildren.pdf
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f.....nted=print

The third article is too vague. The consensus of people who have studied the mujaheddin at the time is that the CIA had no contact with bin Laden, a fact that has been confirmed by bin Laden himself.

Jason Burke, Al-Qaeda (Penguin, 2003), p59; Steve Coll, Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the
CIA, Afghanistan and Bin Laden (Penguin, 2004), p87; Peter Bergen, The Osama bin Laden I Know
(Free Press, 2006), pp60-1.

HAMAS’ covenant states “The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine.”

I’ll post a link to HAMAS’ charter and let the readers read Article 22 and decide if the comment about the French and Russian Revolutions was intended as a compliment.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

Why do you have no objection to Irish or German homelands? Let’s assume your argument (or rather, the Muslim Brotherhood’s) that Israel is made up of “lands taken by force from Muslims”; ignoring the many Palestinian Christians and the fact that such a overstatement is a bit controversial. Why do they not oppose the existence of similar states that kicked out refugees, like the Czech Republic, Russia, Poland, Croatia, India, Pakistan, ect?

But if you want to go with a more limited definition of antisemitism, go with the words of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the Brotherhood’s spiritual leaders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HStliOnVl6Q

Ruslan,

First, calm down.

Second, I was simply pointing out to Jonas that, if he wants examples of Jewish anti-Zionists to show that anti-Zionism is not antisemitic, he could do much, much better than Chomsky or Shahak.

Chomsky’s work with deniers went far beyond defending their free speech rights. A petition he signed that ostensibly defended deniers on free speech grounds only, called a denier’s activities “findings”; put “Holocaust” in quotes; and was passed around by Mark Weber, a name familiar to many readers of this blog. Chomsky allowed a French denier organization the publishing rights to one of his books, a move the group’s officials say saved them from bankruptcy.

Claiming Jews cannot be antisemitic is like saying Eddie Long (the closeted preacher) isn’t a homophobe, or H.K. Edgerton (a black neo-Confederate) isn’t racist.

Nepal used to be a Hindu state. I was not referring to India.

Re Muslim states:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S....._countries

“Yes, that’s ex-CIA director William Casey with the Afghan Mujahedeen”

Yes, that’s Casey with the Afghan mujahedeen. Again, that’s Casey with the AFGHAN mujahedeen. Afghans and Arabs are not the same.

I said criticism of Israel may cross the line when the critic “only attacks the idea of a Jewish nation state without contesting the idea of [nation-states for other ethnic and religious groups.]” If you want to argue that the nation-state is passe, fine. I would only ask that you recognize the difference between someone stating “I believe areas with religious/ethnic group X deserves independence” and someone stating “I believe area X should be wiped clean of all people not belonging to religious/ethnic group X”. When X = Jews, the former is a Zionist, the latter is a bigot and many of their organizations are banned in Israel.

The “right of return” focuses on an alleged collective right, not an individual right. Non-Jews can, and do, immigrate to Israel just like non-Germans can immigrate to Germany and non-Irish can immigrate to Ireland. In fact, the immigration laws, though far from perfect, are much more liberal than most Arab lands.

And then there’s this train wreck: “Finnish state, a Hindu state, a Mongolian state, a Muslim state, a Korean state, a German state, an Irish state, etc, etc. The Muslim Brotherhood can clearly be accused of all of the above.”

Ok first of all, there is no “Hindu state or Muslim state”, even if there are people who want them. India is home to several religions which enjoy formal equality. Islamic states ruled by sharia law to varying degrees still have political differences and different ethnicities. The idea that there will ever be a “Muslim” state made up of Muslims is a pipe dream in the mind of fanatics.

Now, what about Finland, Germany, Mongolia, etc. Well first of all, Jewish is a religion, not a “race” or nation. The idea that Jews around the world share some bond beyond their religion is ludicrous, and actually smacks of anti-Semitism(anti-semites typically believing in a “Jewish” race or nation which supersedes boundaries). Even the way Jews practice their religion in different countries is not the same. The idea that a Jew from New York(descending several generations) has such a profound bond with a Jew from say, Birobidzan, is absurd.

And this brings us to the question of a German state, a French state, etc. The ADL monitors nationalist groups around the world, the very same groups who shout “Germany for the Germans,” “Finland for Finns”, and so on. They condemn groups which attack immigrants, support discrimination against immigrants, and claim that they are being out-bred by immigrants. Yet they use these same arguments when it comes to things like a right of return for Palestinians.

The nation is a transitory phase in human society. “Germany” today once consisted of various small states and principalities, and they had a very different ethnic make-up than they have today. In the late 19th century to WWI, they had significant Slavic and French populations, whereas today they have immigration from Turkey, Poland, Africa and so on. So if you are saying that Germans allegedly have the “right” to have a “German” nation, you are basically throwing in your lot with the nationalists and right-wingers in Germany who would like to send those groups packing.

Nations have not existed for all eternity(in fact they are relatively new in human history), and they will not last forever. If groups like the ADL want to condemn nationalist parties in Europe(and indeed they deserve condemnation for constant scapegoating), they must abide by this same standard when it comes to Israel.

“There is no evidence that the United States supported bin Laden or any of the Arab volunteers fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.”

What can I say about this statement? I’m trying to decide on either “sheer idiocy or ignorance.”

Have a look at this:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vW1G.....-16011.jpg

Yes, that’s ex-CIA director William Casey with the Afghan Mujahedeen. It is an indisputable fact that the US funneled funds to the Pakistani dictatorship of Zia, and the CIA used the Pakistani ISID(intelligence agency) to fund the Afghan rebels. Money that got to Bin Laden went through the ISID to the Maktyab al Khidimat or (Services Bureau).

I find it laughable that someone in 2011 would actually be denying these historical facts. I suggest you read Through our Enemies Eyes and Imperial Hubris by Michael Scheuer(CIA veteran of the Afghan campaign in the 80s) and Charlie Wilson’s War.

Damn.

Does the Muslim Brotherhood oppose “the idea of a Jewish nation state ” or does it simply oppose the establishment of such a state on lands taken by force from Muslims? Is the US “anti-Japanese” because it once invoked stereotypes etc.? Does the Muslim Brotherhood continue invoking anti-semitic stereotypes or is this something that happened in the past which you find impossible to forgive? Am I “anti-white” because I oppose the establishment of a “white homeland” in Idaho even though I have no objection to a German state in Germany, an Irish state in Ireland, etc. etc.?

Is there evidence that Hamas is a “chapter” of the Muslim Brotherhood or that the brotherhood “spawned” Egyptian Islamic Jihad?

Though its support of terrorism is mostly limited to advocacy, many Muslim Brotherhood members are connected to terrorism. The organization spawned Egyptian Islamic Jihad and HAMAS.

Many neoconservatives and others have pointed out the Saudi government’s support of terrorism.

There is no evidence that the United States supported bin Laden or any of the Arab volunteers fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.

While there is indeed nothing automatically antisemitic about criticizing Israel, it is also inaccurate to say that no criticism of Israel is antisemitic. HAMAS, a chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood, clearly crosses that line when it quotes the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and accuses Jews of starting the French and Russian Revolutions with the help of the Freemasons. Dislike of Israel clearly crosses the line into antisemitism when a) the critic invokes anti-Jewish myths, conspiracies, and stereotypes; b) the critic ignores the much bigger flaws of gentile states; or c) the critics only attacks the idea of a Jewish nation state without contesting the idea of a Finnish state, a Hindu state, a Mongolian state, a Muslim state, a Korean state, a German state, an Irish state, etc, etc. The Muslim Brotherhood can clearly be accused of all of the above.

Your list of Jews opposing Zionism is a bit suspect. Noam Chomsky called Jewish Americans “deeply totalitarian” and claimed they want “total control, not just 98% control” of the United States. He has also worked closely with Holocaust deniers and has been praised by antisemites like the Institute for Historical Review and Radio Islam. Shahak has accused religious Jews of worshiping Satan, defended the Khmelnytsky pograms because “Jews profited from [the peasent's] state of slavery and exploitation”, and stated that Holocaust memories “are a fake” (in an article called “The Jews Who Run USA” no less). He has been praised by David Duke and Zundel.

Taqiyya is not “lying to the infidel”. Taqiyya, if you bother to read its actual definition, is a practice that was historically used by SHI’A Muslims when open admission of their religion could cause them death, to hide their Islam. Compare “crypto-Jew”. It is not, nor has it ever been, used by the majority of Muslims (Sunni) or any other sect but Shi’ites. I am by no means a Muslim, Shi’a, Sunni, or otherwise. I’m not religious at all.

One can be vehemently anti-Zionist, and find Zionism to be an inherently racist concept, but – like the Jews Joe Slovo, Noam Chomsky, and Ilan Pappé – not be antisemitic at all. Prof. Israel Shahak, in addition to many others in the past and present, was a Jew who opposed Zionism and Israel’s existence. Whether by “pathologically anti-semitic when it comes to Israel” you mean that being opposed to Israel is antisemitic or that the Brotherhood’s views on Israel oppose the state because it was a Jewish creation- is quite unclear. But unless you can provide evidence for your claims, none of this is true.

Well, why not? Is that not a relevant detail? Otherwise, why tie the DOJ cases to the percentage of Muslims in the U.S. population?

We have discussed in this forum the part that one’s environment plays in the development of one’s viewpoints. Is that not the case with religiously-based extremism as well? It seems to me that a Muslim living in the U.S. would be less susceptible to religiously-motivated extremism than someone who lived in a country with an indifferent government, limited economic opportunities, and anti-American teaching unchecked by vigorous debate.

More up-to-date, some of the Libyan rebels have revealed ties to Al Qaeda and the insurgency in Iraq, yet the US and NATO are supporting their military effort with airstrikes.

The capitalists do indeed create their own grave-diggers.

We are in agreement.

Statistically you have more to worry about from lightning storms. Some people love being afraid, but they fear the wrong things.

A rebuttle by the IPT:

http://www.investigativeprojec.....sc/292.pdf