General Antisemitism

Antisemitism below the line at CiF: Jewish control of US policy, & Jews’ insidious practice of usury


Simon Tisdall’s “Drumbeat of war with Iran has a familiar sound“, CiF, Feb. 24, included these passages:

A recent analysis of US public opinion revealed deeply ambivalent attitudes on Iran, with the majority of Americans apparently favouring diplomatic solutions. Yet as Republican presidential candidates exploit the issue, as the Israelis lobby America, and as Iranian factions manoeuvre ahead of parliamentary polls, the likelihood grows that doves and doubters will again be either converted or ignored.

Netanyahu’s belief that Israel faces an imminent, existential threat is visceral rather than fact-based.

Tisdall’s piece elicited this on the Gaza “concentration camp” and the Jewish state’s violation of the Ten Commandments. 

Ed Husain’s CiF commentary, “GOP debate foreign policy: prolific proliferators of confusion“, warned that GOP Presidential candidates’ bellicose rhetoric on the Iranian nuclear issue was evidence of an “Israel-centric” bias.

Husain’s piece elicited these:

On Israel’s manipulation of U.S. government policy, and a bonus reference to the conspiratorial belief, still popular among antisemitic sites, that Israel intentionally sank the USS Liberty.

Zionist lobbies dictate what the US believes about the Middle East.

Another commenter on Zionist control of U.S. foreign policy.

Finally, there was ‘sThe story of the Afghan Jews is one of remarkable tolerance“, Feb. 28, which included this passage:

The Afghans’ isolation from the rest of the world was a blessing in disguise for the Jewish community because being cut off from global political trends meant that ordinary Afghans were untouched by the raging, European-led, antisemitism of the early 20th century. Even at the height of the Nazi influence in Kabul of the 1930s, it was Afghan nationalism rather than antisemitism that led the government to introduce economic measures that bankrupted Jewish money-lending families.

Arbabzadah’s piece elicited this, on the Jewish practice of usury, and the Jewish domination of the financial industry.

38 replies »

  1. ‘Usury’. Now there’s a word dug up from the depths.

    When WASPS do it, I believe that’s called ‘finance’.

    • “‘Usury’. Now there’s a word dug up from the depths.”

      Yep, the Middle Ages, when all other professions than money-lending were barred to the Jews because they required a Christian oath.

      Ironically, the one event that could end all the things about Jews they don’t like, namely, the event of all the Jews moving to a nation-state of their own, is precisely that which these scum oppose.

      “Usurers” outside Palestine, “land-thieves” in Palestine—what exactly do they want the Jews to do, then? Yes, that was a rhetorical question.

      • In more modern times the evil genius Ezra Pound blamed the world’s ills on usury which he called usura, When Faber & Faber refused to print antisemitic passages in Canto LII Pound insisted that they print black bars on the page to show the omissions. Faber complied.

        His antisemitc broadcasts for Mussolini are still quoted by the far right.

  2. These well known Jewish usurers must be condemned with the sharpest possible words: The Tolomei family from Siena, The Bardis of Florence, the Suyvesants, the Rockefellers and naturally the Morgans.

  3. Careful with he irony, guys! Some simple-minded lurkers on here will think the above-mentioned really *are* Jewish..

    • Well, plenty of people already think the Rockefellers are Jewish. Rather to the annoyance of the Rockefellers, I hear. (I think folks confuse them with the Rothschilds.)

    • Much like a certain brand of racist here in the U.S., they want to be able to hold bigoted beliefs without being criticized for them. If you criticize, you’re oppressing them.

  4. There’s a very unusual blogger who is an Israeli Water Engineer. He reported on German monitoring of the Gaza aquifer which had gone on for seven years by 2008, His words make it very clear that the Jew-haters don’t know what epoch their lies refer to:

    The study confirms that we all know. Palestinian agriculture uses little chemical fertilizers, it is all “organic” and “bio”. Animal manure and untreated human sewage are being used as fertilizers, which lixiviates into the aquifer. Given high freatic water levels, no self-healing denitrification is taking place in Gaza. Local groundwater is therefore unfit for drinking (Israel supplies all of Gaza’s drinking water).

    To say it in non-technical way, let say that German scientists have documented that our Arab neighbors in Gaza are defecating in their wells and fouling the water.

    Before Israel evacuated (good word) Gaza, the world and the United Nations maintained that the destruction of Gaza’s water resources was direct consequence of the military occupation, as if Israeli soldiers were forcing Arabs to shit in the wells and the wadis. I dont know what they are saying now.

        • It was a joke, and the laughed-at was Pretzelberg. 🙂

          Except for the Pretzelbergs and Sencars on this forum, it is safe to say we all love you. 🙂

          • Well, I’m blushing. But I did know you were making a point and I wish to punch p’s silly nose virtually if he turns up here.

            The Israeli Water Engineer is worth reading. I think he knew that horrible antisemite Kevin McDonald as an undergraduate. The engineer seems tolerant of him!

            • Pretzl,

              I wonder how many times I need to say it for you to understand. What the heck, I’ll try again: You have yet to convince me that it was anything worse than poor phrasing, if at all. I know you’re bullish on assigning conclusive guilt here, but you need to realize not everybody shares your assumption in this case.

              But I didn’t respond just to address your particular complaint. There’s a general point that needs making, and this looks like as good a place as any to make it: The R-word is flung about too freely, even by those who aren’t conscious users of that sordid Far Left tactic.

              It’s a big problem. How big, well, consider that just a few threads back, I got sucked into a fruitless debate over allegations of racism with andrew r. I should know better than that, I’m well aware that the best thing to do with this lowly, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” type of game, is not to play it—that you lose the moment you consent to play.

              If CiFWatch operates under the banner of anti-racism, then there’s nothing much I can do on the issue of people abusing the R-word for the purpose of anti-Zionism and shutting down resistance to Islamic imperialism. Their focus is their choice, including whatever advantages and disadvantages that choice brings out in a debate. Once again—to ward off a baseless accusation, for what else is new?—I must emphasize I’m speaking only for myself: I think any opening left for the R-word to get a foot in the door of a discussion is a big mistake, because the R-word tends to draw to itself all the resources of the discussion much like a black hole sucks in all light.

              In other words, I regard all this kerfuffle as one big hijack and derailment of the issue in question. The issue in question is whether anyone has a right, for any reason, to oppose the Jewish nation’s exercising of political sovereignty and unlimited inhabitation of the Land of Israel a.k.a. Palestine. As one can glean from any random post of mine—on CiFWatch and elsewhere—my stance on this is a flat-out negative, but that’s not my point here; my point here is that this is the issue, this and not the R-word carelessly (either that or maliciously) lobbed about, distracting, derailing and generally depleting time, brains and finger-power.

              • In other words, I regard all this kerfuffle as one big hijack and derailment of the issue in question.

                i.e. racist comments towards Arabs = irrelevant
                i.e. racist comments towards Jews = relevant

                Fantastic.

                You have yet to convince me that it was anything worse than poor phrasing, if at all.

                Strange. I don’t see you on CiFWatch threads about anti-Semitic comments telling people “hey, don’t overreact, it might have just been poorly phrased”.

                • “i.e. racist comments towards Arabs = irrelevant
                  i.e. racist comments towards Jews = relevant”

                  No, this is not my standard. Right in the post you responded to, I made it quite clear my standard is both single and quite different: It is not “racism” (whatever that word means nowadays after maxing out the Race Card) and “racist” comments against Jews that bothers me, but anti-Zionism and Jew-hatred in whatever form they might take. Nor am I motivated by a general anti-racist view (though I don’t think genetic determinism is a good thing, and I hold it to be factually false). My sole motivation is defense of my nation, the Jewish nation.

                  Comments to the effect that the Arabs are genetically predisposed to some mental characteristic—those I reject, seeing as I reject genetic determinism. But this rejection is just part of the views I’ve always held, not an integral part of this debate. Once again, the reason I’m incensed at your accusation of Ariadne is that you single-handedly dragged down at least one thread away from the issue of the Jewish claim to the Land of Israel, and into the side-topic of “racial equity.” That was simply despicable.

                  Yes, I know, the Marxist trolls here do this all the time. But I have no expectations from them. It’s you who call yourself level-headed, and in many cases you really are (even if I don’t always agree with you); the fact that you have seen it fit to take a leaf from the Marxist playbook with your latching onto the R-word reflects very poorly on you.

                  “I don’t see you on CiFWatch threads about anti-Semitic comments telling people ‘hey, don’t overreact, it might have just been poorly phrased’.”

                  That’s because at least 95% of Jew-hating comments (on CiFWatch and elsewhere) are so explicit as to leave no room for doubt as to their intended meaning. Where a remark is a borderline case, I say so even if it’s against my side. I definitely recall it having happened at least once, but I can’t remember specifically right now. It probably started with me saying, “To be fair…”, so I may well fish out such an example later.

                  Also note that I don’t usually accuse someone of being a Jew-hater or even an anti-Zionist upon first offense. For example, if they were to say, “You greedy Jews must stop stealing land,” usually I react by writing that it is by definition impossible for Jews to be stealing land in Palestine (because the Jews are the only true Palestinians, et cetera, et cetera), and only if the poster persists following that attempt at correction, it’s gloves off. I’m saying this because you should know that I lob neither accusations of “racism” nor allegations of Jew-hatred casually.

                  And that’s the whole point. Though there is great overlap between anti-Zionism and Jew-hatred, there’s no need for any incessant linking of the two to make the point that anti-Zionism is illegitimate, just as the Race Card isn’t a valid argument against resisting Arab/Islamic imperialism. If I had time to keep a forum of my own, the use of the Race Card would be a bannable offense on it, because it turns every discussion into a pool of molasses.

                  • Also note that I don’t usually accuse someone of being a Jew-hater or even an anti-Zionist upon first offense.

                    But you are a supporter of a site where a “nuke the Arabs” comment won almost universal approval.

                    Where a remark is a borderline case, I say so even if it’s against my side.

                    Where?

  5. What do you mean by “”Arab””, “Ariadne”? And what the hell “?” really means?

    Flabbergastedly yours.

    • I just meant Arab, SerJew. Not Turk, not Scots, not Kurd, not Zulu, etc,

      AR, whom Infidel and I knew very well online was adamant that Arabs were and are the problem. And it has been said even in the rotten press that Arabs lorded it over other Muslims. Pakistanis came here not knowing a thing about the Middle East but now they are swallowed up by the fantasiya.

      AR went to Israel very young as a Holocaust survivor. Talked about the denuded hills and the little black sheep but worked on olive oil pressing with Arabs. Lived in a tent. Gave me that lovely word “fantasiya”. It’s so
      à propos.

      That merges with the years of history that can be found even online which keep one straight about which side is righteous.

      I do use “?” sometimes but not for the pre-1960s period. No mention of the word in UNSCR 242 is good enough for me.

      But “Ariadne” I use all the time. Except when someone else has claimed it first.

      Love from Ariadne

  6. I keep thinking back to an encounter I had some time ago. I was jogging one early morning and I heard someone screaming at me. I turned and saw a man living in a cardboard box screaming incoherently. This is what I think of these anti-Semites- psychotics screaming incoherently. For someone to seriously believe that Joos control Wall Street, the media, fill in the blank, almost requires a psychotic break from reality. What a world.

    • pretzelberg,

      The issue with commentators like pencilandpaper’s is that they are allowed to post numerous insulting and factually incorrect comments before the moderators start to remove their posts.

      This results in the real comments about the articles observations / conclusions being drowned in a sea of off-topic abusive rubbish.

      What I find more disturbing is that so many anti-Semitic posters do not have their commenting privileges removed, especially when some of the more passionate pro-Israeli commentators have their privileges removed for comments that are nowhere near as rude as the comments posted by the likes of Berchman, Dennisthebeaton or Teacup.

      • The issue with commentators like pencilandpaper’s is that they are allowed to post numerous insulting and factually incorrect comments before the moderators start to remove their posts.

        In many cases you are right, and the same applies to less incendiary (and not outright racist) comments – on either side.

        But in the case of pencilandpaper, they were universally condemned and swiftly deleted.

        What about posters with anti-Arab/Muslim sentiments – on both CiF and on this very website? Do you find that likewise disturbing?

        • pretzelberg,

          I have no time for comment made by any poster which is designed to be anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim / Arab. Yet it is in my opinion the anti-Semitic commentators who are most visible on the CiF pages, I imagine that you believe the Guardian moderators get it about right with their deleting of offending posts, yet the very fact that Berchman who has had hundreds of posts removed over the years has still kept his posting rights whilst others with comments less offensive than Berchman have had all rights removed. I think this is called hypocrisy and I cannot understand how you can defend this behavior.

      • “so many anti-Semitic posters do not have their commenting privileges removed, especially when some of the more passionate pro-Israeli commentators have their privileges removed for comments that are nowhere near as rude as the comments posted by the likes of Berchman, Dennisthebeaton or Teacup.”

        Exactly. There is a clear element of protection of commenters like these.

        • Exactly. There is a clear element of protection of commenters like these.

          There are proportionately far more anti-Arab comments “protected” on CiFWatch than anti-Jewish posts on CiF.

          • How perceptive of Pretzelberg. How moral of him. It is always essential to maintain equivalence and parity between anti-white/anti-German/anti-Arab criticism and anti-black/anti-Jewish/anti-Israeli criticism.

            ?

          • pretzelberg,

            I cannot believe you wrote that with a straight face, just a quick scan of any Israeli or Palestinian article shows how demonstrably force such a claim is.