Message boards :
Politics :
It's all in the Semantics [the criminal Israeli dictatorship]
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 841 Credit: 990,879 RAC: 0 |
It's all in the Semantics by Matt Giwer, © 2011 [Oct 7] If it is called a humanitarian war instead of Kosovar Secession it is fine to bomb Bosnia. If it is called a war of liberation instead of a war to restore the Kuwaiti monarchy is it OK to bomb Iraq. If it is called a territorial dispute instead of a criminal, dictatorial tyranny is it just swell to oppose freedom from foreign oppression for the Palestinians. It is all in the semantics. If the Palestinians are called terrorists instead of freedom fighters conducting a lawful resistance against a despotic, foreign military occupation in accordance with international law then their lawful human right to self-determination can be rejected. If their human rights can be rejected then the Israeli dictatorship can be made the final authority on the worthiness of Palestinians to have basic human rights even though deprivation of them is a crime against humanity. If Israel's criminal squatter-towns in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are called settlements and the war criminals living in them called settlers then one is not looking at the facts on the ground as they are. For years Israel declares it squatter-towns have a lawful military purpose under the Geneva convention because they are for the defense of Israel against Jordan. For the record everyone who understood military defense requirements snickered at people ignorant enough to believe the claim they were lawful. Giving them a different name after a peace treaty is signed with Jordan does not make them other than the criminal violations of the 4th Geneva Convention they always were. They have always been war crimes. The people who support them, permit them to exist and who live in them for any reason are war criminals needing a trip to the Hague or Nuremberg for the short rope treatment. War crimes do not have a statute of limitations. These criminals can and must be pursued for their crimes to their dying day. The world must show it does not tolerate such crimes even if it means a repetition of Nuremberg. Following orders is not an excuse. Wanting a better life is not an excuse. Religious fervor is not an excuse. Being a Jew should increase the penalties as Jews should know better. It is also semantics in the distinctions which are not made. If the distinction between a domestic tyranny and a foreign tyranny is never made one does not have to address the fact that Israeli has operated a foreign tyranny since 1967. Without the distinction one could pretend Ghaddafi's tyranny was no different from what Israel is doing. Of course it always sounds like a little boy whining, "But Billy's Mom lets him do it," no matter how it is phrased. Nor does it highlight the fact it is the only foreign tyranny in the Arab world and the longest running foreign tyranny in all the world. If the distinction were made then it would be clear Israel has never been singled out for unjust criticism of it despotic tyranny over the Palestinians. It is the only exogenous tyranny in the world. If one mixes meanings such as equating the Palestinians with the Arab countries which have attacked Israel one can talk as though the Palestinians have attacked Israel. It is common for the defense of Israel's crimes Arab countries which have attacked Israel and then switch to the generic term Arab to describe Palestinians. Clever semantics there switching from using Arab as an adjective to a noun to imply the Palestinians made war on Israel which they never have. Another semantic misuse of Arab is to make no distinction between Arab culture and Arabs as a nationality. Egyptians have been Egyptians for six thousand years. They happened to adopt Arab culture a bit over one thousand years ago. So also the Palestinians have been in Palestine for at least 2500 years (Herodotus mentions them by name) while they adopted the culture about the same time as Egypt. Arabs as a group are only those from Saudi Arabia. It was a culture spread not only by the religion of Islam but one readily adopted for its innate superiority at the time. If one simply does not use well defined words like theft one can excuse the theft of Palestinian lands under the absentee owner laws of 1949. Note this is after independence in 1948. Conquest is only sovereignty. It is never ownership. The two concepts are regularly deliberately confused by apologists for jewish land theft in Palestine in the past and on-going land theft in the West Bank and Jerusalem today. The theft under color of law can appear reasonable unless one also says those who tried to return to their property were murdered as infiltrators. This even applied to the Palestinians forced into ghettos by the Jews. If they were found outside their ghettos after curfew they were also murdered. This makes it theft under color of law. Similar thefts were from Jews during WWII for which Jews rightfully demand justice for themselves but not for the victims of the Jews. I have introduced the most powerful semantic confusion of all. I have used Jews not Zionists and not Israelis and I have not used the unnecessary qualifier of some. This is very politically incorrect. It is also accurate and correct. I said forced into ghettos by Jews not Israelis and not Zionists and not by some Jews. All the Zionists were Jews. The terms are interchangeable. All the Israelis were not Jews so Israelis is not interchangeable. Should I not say some Jews? The Jewish monologue on Israel never says only some Arabs want to drown Jews in the sea. Semantics can be both corrected and misused in the same manner to the same effect. Either the use of some is not necessary or it is necessary in all cases. Selective use is sows advantageous semantic confusion when political correctness governs the selectivity. In fact when it comes to the despotic, military dictatorship over the Palestinians it is also perfectly correct to describe it as as despotic, jewish, military dictatorship. Israel insists it is a Jewish state so it is only following Israel's insistence to use Jewish and Israeli interchangeably. It is not an Israeli dictatorship as only Jewish Israelis support it. Because of the non-Jewish minority Israel is less Jewish than the US is Christian. Calling the dictatorship Jewish is what Israel wants it to be called. Despite the running hypocrisy there are only a few fringe, jewish groups such as Naturei Karta which truly oppose the actions of Jewish Israel. I know of none that demand the Palestinian refugees receive the same justice regarding the property stolen from them by jewish Israelis as Israel demands for Jews from Germany, Poland, Hungary and a host of other countries involved in WWII. Hypocrisy is seeing Jews position themselves as champions of minority rights in countries where they are a minority making it a matter of self-interest. As the majority in Israel they debate the best way to get rid of the non-Jewish minorities. Everything but using cattle cars as a means of expulsion has been openly discussed in the Israeli political arena. Perhaps that is to be expected but it does not excuse the existence of jewish advocacy groups for minority rights in every country but Israel where they promote only the Jewish majority. What country would defend the rights of Jews around the world and demand respect for their customs, traditions and sacred places while building a Museam of "Tolerance" on a confiscated Muslim graveyard? That is a problem but the solution is also in the semantics. Pretend the subject is not minorities in a country. Lets change the context for using minority but only for propaganda benefit to Jewish Israel. Lets change from minority in a country to minority in the world. Jews are a minority in the world so its rampant Jim Crow laws and discriminatory housing laws that are criminal in the US are just fine for Israel. In fact because there is only one jewish nation in the world it is a minority and therefore cannot be held to the standards of democracies. It cannot be held to the standard that a democracy is a nation for all of its people. Israel is for Jews making it not both Jewish and Democratic but a jewish democracy a hypocritic imitation of the real thing. It is like declaring the US is a White, Christian nation. According to Jewish Israel it cannot be held to any higher standard than the worst country in the world. If they can find a country which practices slavery Israel can have slavery too. In fact white slavery is as common in Israel as were Speakeasys in the US during prohibition. And if the different semantics of minority can apply around the world then it can apply throughout history. For example Americans cannot object to stealing land from the Palestinians because of what was done to the Indians. Perhaps this is more guilt trip than semantics but as what was done to the Indians is today considered genocide this appears to be an admission that Jews are committing genocide and apparently proud of it. But the semantics considers acts in the past to prohibit present day critcism. The genocide of the Palsetinians cannot be criticized by Americans because it was done to the Indians. This is also a good riff to pocket for the future so that when the Jews enslave the Palestinians they can say America once had slavery so Americans cannot object. It is acceptable in jewish political discourse in Israel to refer to Palestinians as slaves using the bible euphemism "carriers of water and hewers of wood." This gets us back to the semantics of race. It is also acceptable in political discourse to refer to the Arabs as a race and Jews as a race. The majority of both are Caucasians and thus the same race. Again, were they different races the crime against humanity of Apartheid would apply. So anyone who disagrees is accusing jewish Israelis of Apartheid both in the occupied territories and inside Israel itself. The meaning is governed by the convention not by trivial differences. This is why Zionism is not racism; Palestinians and Jews are the same race. Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult |
Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 841 Credit: 990,879 RAC: 0 |
I have always predicted that any 3rd World War will start in the Middle East. Your post just convinces me more that I am proably right. Apocalyptic visions aside there was never a credible basis to claim the US and the SU would engage in a nuclear exchange over Israel. Now that the SU is gone there is no longer any imaginable two sides to make a nuclear exchange. No one but red neck, fundies including fundies Jews really gives a rat's ass about theocratic Israel and its criminal military dictatorship over millions of non-Jews. Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult |
Dr Imaginario Send message Joined: 10 Aug 11 Posts: 172 Credit: 22,735 RAC: 0 |
I read that article and at the end is just semantics and the opinion of the author that in some parts make a distorcion of historical facts to justify the existence of palestine as a state. The only thing he forgot to mention is in 2500 of history people have changed, religion have changed, and even geography have changed. Wars start just because a few want power and are corrupted by it. Middle east and north of africa are the fuse of a new world war. There will be a point in time that the poor will all want to come to europe. Then the dogs of war will be unleashed. It's inevitable. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Writing it here ain't worth jack. |
Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 841 Credit: 990,879 RAC: 0 |
I read that article and at the end is just semantics and the opinion of the author that in some parts make a distorcion of historical facts to justify the existence of palestine as a state. What do you think is distorted? Palestinians are ruled by the Israeli army. That makes it a military dictatorship. That it acts to the benefit of jewish Israelis permitting land and water theft makes it despotic. Living is occupied territory has been a war crime since people were hanged for it at Nuremberg. That makes the squatters war criminals. The only thing he forgot to mention is in 2500 of history people have changed, religion have changed, and even geography have changed. I am talking about the criminal occupation which exists today. The history of the region has no bearing upon the crimes under the 4th Geneva convention. Wars start just because a few want power and are corrupted by it. All the more reason to end the longest running criminal occupation in the world. Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult |
Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 841 Credit: 990,879 RAC: 0 |
Writing it here ain't worth jack. This is far from the only place it is posted. Feel free to repost it any place. The URL is http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/all-in.phtml Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.