"Do the jews have the basic decency to oppose genocide in Gaza?"
Many individual ones do, and they should be honoured. Some of the most effective opponents of the horrors are Jews. I am surprised that you seem not to acknowledge that.
But on the other hand, so far as I know, all mainstream Jewish organisations (i.e. those not specifically …
"Do the jews have the basic decency to oppose genocide in Gaza?"
Many individual ones do, and they should be honoured. Some of the most effective opponents of the horrors are Jews. I am surprised that you seem not to acknowledge that.
But on the other hand, so far as I know, all mainstream Jewish organisations (i.e. those not specifically consisting of anti-Zionist Jews, or set up to oppose the genocide) appear to be happy to go along with it, often denying that it is even happening. And the prominent Jewish politicians you named have not behaved morally in the slightest, and are entirely typical of such people. So I am not as shocked by your use of the short-hand "Jews" as other people seem to be, though it would be better to mention that there are many exceptions to the rule.
Also I don't go along with the idea presented by your critics that it is just Zionism that is the problem, and that you are ignorantly or immorally confusing it with Judaism. Zionism can only be argued to be the only legitimate reason to criticise Jews as a group if you do what I believe Gilad Atzmon does, and extend the word Zionism to mean all forms of supremacist Jewish hyper-in-group-preference. But that is not the traditional meaning, which is restricted to such in-group-preference when it leads to Jews thinking that their wish to live in Palestine over-rides the right of Palestinians to live there. Anti-Zionist Jews are usually highly moral and also oppose the other forms of unpleasant Jewish anti-Goyism, but they are not logically forced to. It would be theoretically possible for an anti-Zionist Jew to think it right for Jews to rule over Gentiles in the West. You and I would be free to criticise such people, but some of your critics seem to have pre-emptively forsworn the right to do so.
Personally, it is my belief that actual practicing jews are NOT usually highly moral, and any that oppose "jewish supremacy" (LOL) or other forms of unpleasant Jewish anti-Goyism are not legitimate "jews", according to their theology as described in the vile talmud... and traditional jew dogma... much like homosexuals and other LBGTQ freaks serving as "minsters" or "pastors" in "christian" faiths.
I have known and met many fine people who claim to be "jewish"... but are not adherents to the dogma and thus are not, IMO, jews.
BTW: It does not take much research to know that the "holocaust", which enabled the creation of a "jewish state" is a deeply flawed HOAX, and is still being used to justify or excuse much corruption, manipulation, theft and genocide.
I understand what you are saying about the moral people who call themselves Jews not being "real Jews", but it is not the generally accepted definition of what it is to be a Jew, and, more importantly, it is not the definition of being a Jew that they themselves use. For most people, if you are born a Jew, you remain a Jew whatever your opinions. It is theoretically possible to publicly renounce your status as a Jew, but it is a very rare and radical thing to do -- off hand, I can only think of Milton Kapner, Isreal Shamir and Gilad Atzmon. It gets you targeted by the whole power structure. It is not something that you can expect of every moral person who was born into a Jewish identity.
By using your definition of what it is to be a Jew rather than the conventional one, and not explaining it or explicitly allowing for exceptions to your criticism of Jews, you invite the Word Herder's criticism "clearly a bigot and a hater of people he’s never met, hating people simply for what they’re BORN, and have no choice about it". I don't believe that that is actually what you are doing, but your statements make it very easy for well-meaning people who might otherwise be your allies to think that it is.
Noted... I have no problem with what you are saying, I think you know that a very large percentage of "jews" come from Kazarian or European lines that converted to judaism long ago... so they are not even genetically "jewish" in any way... and as I understand it, genetic ties to the ancient Hebrew tribes is important. Few in Israel are. The Palestinians are much more closely related to the ancient Hebrews than are almost all "jews".
I invite a lot of hate... as I don't bother to put much of a filter on myself... try to speak truth... and low-IQ mouthy sheep/clowns like Word Herder are really nothing more than uninformed, inconsequential nobodies... so why not have a little fun tormenting them? Did he sound "well-meaning" to you? 😉
"Do the jews have the basic decency to oppose genocide in Gaza?"
Many individual ones do, and they should be honoured. Some of the most effective opponents of the horrors are Jews. I am surprised that you seem not to acknowledge that.
But on the other hand, so far as I know, all mainstream Jewish organisations (i.e. those not specifically consisting of anti-Zionist Jews, or set up to oppose the genocide) appear to be happy to go along with it, often denying that it is even happening. And the prominent Jewish politicians you named have not behaved morally in the slightest, and are entirely typical of such people. So I am not as shocked by your use of the short-hand "Jews" as other people seem to be, though it would be better to mention that there are many exceptions to the rule.
Also I don't go along with the idea presented by your critics that it is just Zionism that is the problem, and that you are ignorantly or immorally confusing it with Judaism. Zionism can only be argued to be the only legitimate reason to criticise Jews as a group if you do what I believe Gilad Atzmon does, and extend the word Zionism to mean all forms of supremacist Jewish hyper-in-group-preference. But that is not the traditional meaning, which is restricted to such in-group-preference when it leads to Jews thinking that their wish to live in Palestine over-rides the right of Palestinians to live there. Anti-Zionist Jews are usually highly moral and also oppose the other forms of unpleasant Jewish anti-Goyism, but they are not logically forced to. It would be theoretically possible for an anti-Zionist Jew to think it right for Jews to rule over Gentiles in the West. You and I would be free to criticise such people, but some of your critics seem to have pre-emptively forsworn the right to do so.
Windy, but well said. ;-)
Personally, it is my belief that actual practicing jews are NOT usually highly moral, and any that oppose "jewish supremacy" (LOL) or other forms of unpleasant Jewish anti-Goyism are not legitimate "jews", according to their theology as described in the vile talmud... and traditional jew dogma... much like homosexuals and other LBGTQ freaks serving as "minsters" or "pastors" in "christian" faiths.
I have known and met many fine people who claim to be "jewish"... but are not adherents to the dogma and thus are not, IMO, jews.
BTW: It does not take much research to know that the "holocaust", which enabled the creation of a "jewish state" is a deeply flawed HOAX, and is still being used to justify or excuse much corruption, manipulation, theft and genocide.
I understand what you are saying about the moral people who call themselves Jews not being "real Jews", but it is not the generally accepted definition of what it is to be a Jew, and, more importantly, it is not the definition of being a Jew that they themselves use. For most people, if you are born a Jew, you remain a Jew whatever your opinions. It is theoretically possible to publicly renounce your status as a Jew, but it is a very rare and radical thing to do -- off hand, I can only think of Milton Kapner, Isreal Shamir and Gilad Atzmon. It gets you targeted by the whole power structure. It is not something that you can expect of every moral person who was born into a Jewish identity.
By using your definition of what it is to be a Jew rather than the conventional one, and not explaining it or explicitly allowing for exceptions to your criticism of Jews, you invite the Word Herder's criticism "clearly a bigot and a hater of people he’s never met, hating people simply for what they’re BORN, and have no choice about it". I don't believe that that is actually what you are doing, but your statements make it very easy for well-meaning people who might otherwise be your allies to think that it is.
Noted... I have no problem with what you are saying, I think you know that a very large percentage of "jews" come from Kazarian or European lines that converted to judaism long ago... so they are not even genetically "jewish" in any way... and as I understand it, genetic ties to the ancient Hebrew tribes is important. Few in Israel are. The Palestinians are much more closely related to the ancient Hebrews than are almost all "jews".
I invite a lot of hate... as I don't bother to put much of a filter on myself... try to speak truth... and low-IQ mouthy sheep/clowns like Word Herder are really nothing more than uninformed, inconsequential nobodies... so why not have a little fun tormenting them? Did he sound "well-meaning" to you? 😉