Germans Enraged by Merkel’s Grovelling Goy Show
By Mike James in Germany
20 March 2008
As Angela Merkel this week genuflected in an obscene show of gratuitous and fawning grovelling before the bandit state of Israel, a ‘nation’ born in a sea of blood and built upon the corpses of murdered Palestinians and desecrated centuries-old orange groves, the people of Germany, privately, or after-hours in local cafes and taverns among trusted friends and neighbours, seethed with barely repressed rage.
"She said we only exist to enrich them, or words to that effect," a usually reserved and mild-mannered local restaurateur told me as I dropped by for cigarettes. "Why doesn’t she just move there? The Israelis can keep her because we don’t need her. She’s done nothing for us!"
The proprietor looked out across the empty tables that, eight years ago, were all fully booked from Monday through to Sunday. Despite an up tick during the World Football Championship year of 2006, she’s running at a loss again. She wonders how much longer she can keep her family business going. She wonders why the German government has betrayed her by attacking the middle class.
"All they care about is Israel. Nothing’s too good for them, especially my taxes."
Merkel got a good press this week. Germany’s best-selling tabloid gave her the Schindler treatment. She pretty much apologised for being German, for even daring to set foot on such holy, immaculate ground. Just think of the poor Jewish microbes that must have died underfoot as she strolled around Tel Aviv on the last leg of her visit. Six million of them? Prophecy fulfilled? One shudders to think.
"The [alleged] holocaust fills us Germans with shame," she told a jubilant Knesset on Tuesday last, onion in hand.
Well, I’m sorry to break the news to you, Mrs Merkel, but that’s simply not true. It’s your capitulation to the dark, Satanic forces of Zionist evil that fills the German people with shame.
"The security of Israel is for me as German Chancellor never negotiable," Merkel went on.
Unlike the security of the German people who increasingly find themselves living in fear of gangs of marauding immigrants who have taken up Federal Republic passports yet can barely speak one word of the German language, or of the thousands of hardened criminals, burglars and drug mules who have crossed the line from the east unchecked, thanks to the treasonous Schengen Agreement and the recent abolition of proper border controls.
"Compassion arises from taking responsibility for the past," she continued.
Was she about to mention the demonically violent theft of Palestine by the Stern Gang and Irgun terror squads, the Zionist’s 1948 bombing of the King David Hotel, the vicious Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, the Sabra and Shatilla massacres of Palestinian women and children as they lay sleeping in their tents, the illegal and murderous invasion of Lebanon, and the continuing genocide of the Palestinian people who are being starved to death and used as moving skeletal targets by sadistic Israeli soldiers and airmen?
Don’t hold your breath, folks.
"Only if Germany admits to her Nazi [ethnic nationalist] past can the future be humane," she declared without any reference to the apartheid, ethnic nationalist state of Israel. Not even a wry smile, the slightest smirk, or a telling nod and a wink to the Shining Ones in the front row.
"Anti-Semitism [criticism of the state of Israel and the perniciously evil ideology of Zionism] must never be tolerated in Germany or in Europe," she went on, adding that ‘holocaust denial’ [the practice of asking troubling, science-based questions about anomalies in historical reportage] must be punished wherever it’s found.
Well, you can start with this writer, Mrs Merkel. You know where I am.
More:
Stumble It!
Good form or not I am compelled to direct the readers attention to the above article by Ted Pike
..."One would think that religious literature so centrally important to one of the world’s great religions would be easily located in local libraries. It is certainly easy to find the Bible or Koran.
Not so the Talmud."...
You seem to subscribe to the theory that "the Jews" are causing all kinds of trouble in the world and are manipulating governments and other institutions to advance a supremacist agenda. Is that a fair characterization of your views? If not, please set me straight.
What would you consider an acceptable and just solution to what you consider the "Jewish problem"? What steps should governments and the world community at large take to resolve these issues? What role can/should individual Jews or Jewish organizations play in this solution, if any? What should happen to Israel/Palestine and the people of various faiths living there?
There's nothing up my sleeve, Dio. I've reacted to some of your posts in the past in a knee-jerk manner, but I really want to understand where you're coming from on this. I tend to have a better understanding of what Vive posters oppose or *don't* want than of what they desire or support as an alternative. I'd like to know what an ideal end-state for you is with regard to the Jewish people and their place in the world.
If I can understand better where you're coming from, I'll be less likely to judge your posts unfairly. I suspect there are others on Vive who are similarly uncertain about how to regard your contributions on this topic and would be similarly helped by some clarification.
These have always been the societies who have invented the economic theories to colonize, enslave and extort in the name of some god, whether they've been pounding Bibles the Koran, or whatever, as scriptural justification for criminal actions, including ethnic cleansing and mass murder.
Much of Europe was once occupied by the Turkish empire waving the swords of the Holy Jihad, demanded by Allah. The traces of these murder campaigns are still going on in the Balkans, but let's not forget Ireland and the Indian continent.
The solution is to tell all religious fanatics,and crooks, to bugger off. Regardless whether they call themselves Zionists, or the factions of Muslims and Christians. Some years ago I've read some kind of a Southern Baptist publication, urging the invasion of communist Canada to stop the assembly and training of Chinese communist troops already here, getting ready to invade the USA.
Many Jews are against what the Zionists are doing, the same as many Canadians oppose the actions of the present pimp Reform Party governments, selling Canada under various disguises. Like BC Liberals and Conservatives.
Ed Deak.
To set you straight,(using the same phrase) I have never believed in any characterisations prefaced with the word “The”, nor should you.
There are factions within that is known as “Jewry” who have been well documented in what I present.
I have answered you in the past with a quote from Thomas Pynchon,
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers”
I see many of your questions as wrong in as much as they push to be answered in a specific manner, and one I refuse to take part in.
As to parts of the “what should be done” the answer is clear: exposure, critical thought and honest questioning without interference and threats from the ADL and similar organisations.
Censorship of thought or expressed views ought not to be tolerated as those actions are reprehesnible in any society that trumpets freed in one hand and uses the courts to silence in the other.
What I am underling here (http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2008/ ... -morality/) is the fact that there are Jews who hold opinions quite separte from the Zionist state
"Anyway, back to our Jewish friend here, Mr. Heineman. He was shot in the head because he dared to follow a higher power, meaning his God-given conscience by protesting the brutality inflicted by Israel against the Palestinians. For this he was rewarded with a bullet to the head."
I agree with the fact that critical thought and honest questioning should always be allowed, regardless of what group we're talking about. I oppose left-wing political correctness for much the same reason you oppose what you see as censorship and intimidation by Jewish groups.
I understand your reluctance to answer specific questions or present specific solutions or scenarios. I'm still struggling to understand, so I'll try another question, which I'm hoping you'll find less objectionable.
What would have to change for you to no longer feel motivated to write or make reference to criticisms of "Jewry"?
You may consider this the "wrong question", but I consider it very relevant. Let me state again that I'm not looking for an opening to attack. I want to understand your views better so I don't midjudge your posts going forward.
And there is the crux of the matter, behind every question posed by either of us is some belief we hold to be true for ourselves.
"I understand your reluctance to answer specific questions or present specific solutions or scenarios."
the reluctance is NOT to not answer specific questions or senerios. It is a flatout refusal to go where you want to lead, and here is why,
I am not in the same place as the opinions you expressof me and therefore cannot repond to where I am not.
I, too, would much rather have civil discourse
I may have held what I saw as christian views that are confused with a wing of politicial thought. And Now I see what psses for political thought anywhere on the spectrum causes me to shake my head in disbelief.
All of my life people have been trying to pin me down , get a handle on me classift me and understand me,
maybe a couple have
This I do know
I am not responsible for how people hold me as they will arrive at whatever conclusions suit them.
okay far to long winded here
what is relevant or even very relevant to you is not to me with respect to the asked questions
Will you and I ever satisfy each others questions?
It had better happen soon cause my time is short
respectfully. Dio
8:14 pm My time friday
there may be a healthy or unhealthy dollop of the following in both of us
There is an old joke about a therapist who operated on the theory that all
problems could be traced to dreaming about fish. A patient came to him
complaining about his lackluster sexual relations with his wife. Here's a
"transcript" of their first session together...
Patient: My wife and I just aren’t getting along, doctor, you know, in bed.
Between my work schedule and her dealing with the kids, it just feels like
the magic's gone.
Therapist: Hmmmm... tell me, do you ever dream?
P: Uh - sure, I dream.
T: Tell me of your most recent dream.
P: Well, I don't remember much. I was walking down a city street and there
were lots of tall buildings and cars but no people.
T: Had it been raining?
P: Not sure - I guess it might have been.
T: So there were puddles?
P: I guess there could have been puddles.
T: And, I'm just guessing here, might there have been fish in those puddles?
P: Wow - I suppose there might have been...
T: (triumphant) Ah ha! Just as I suspected - fish in the dreams!
While most of our own biases are not so obvious and don't seem so silly (at
least to us), the point is that if you're listening for something specific,
you'll tend to find it. Listen for hesitation in the voice of your partner
and boom, you've "caught" him lying to you. Listen for warning signs of
trouble in your relationship and before you know it, they'll be everywhere.
The problem isn't so much to do with what you're listening for, but what
you'll miss by listening for it. Whether it's the affection in your
partner's voice, the look of love in her eyes or the sadness in your child's
heart when they're telling you about their day, if you're looking too hard
for something else, you're liable to miss what's actually there.
As Abraham Maslow once said, "To the man who only has a hammer in the
toolkit, every problem looks like a nail." But when you expand your
listening pallet, you will be able to hear more and more.
I assume you speak your truth and there is a mismatch between what you hold as truth and what I do
It's difficult to navigate the grey area between hating someone for what they do versus hating them for who they are - because people who hate a group of people for who they are will attempt to justify their feelings (after the fact, of course) based on claims of what members of that group do.
It's the difference between judging someone objectively by the evidence at hand and simply "digging up dirt" to support the stance you've already decided upon. It's an easy thing to do, because every possible grouping of humanity contains members who do bad things. Even Canadians, despite our "choirboy" rep on the world stage, have some skeletons (literally) in our closets.
I was trying to get a handle on what could change in the world such that you wouldn't feel the need to attack Jews anymore. But you non-answer (and the way in which you made it) suggest to me that you don't want to stop attacking Jews, regardless of what changes take place. But remember that your right to free speech doesn't give you the right to silence those who consider you a bigot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naeim_Giladi
You may listen for that evidence until the cows come home and you will never hear it, quite simpley it does not exist.
I don't have time for for hate it is a self destructive emotion.
There may be hope for you yet indie,
"It's the difference between judging someone objectively by the evidence at hand and simply "digging up dirt" to support the stance you've already decided upon. It's an easy thing to do, because every possible grouping of humanity contains members who do bad things. Even Canadians, despite our "choirboy" rep on the world stage, have some skeletons (literally) in our closets."
Are you able to apply the above yardstick to your self, as well?
"I was trying to get a handle on what could change in the world such that you wouldn't feel the need to attack Jews anymore. But you non-answer (and the way in which you made it) suggest to me that you don't want to stop attacking Jews, regardless of what changes take place. But remember that your right to free speech doesn't give you the right to silence those who consider you a bigot."
Fish in dreams Bro, fish in dreams.
I will "attack" bullies and morale cowardness where Im see it. Read the infor at the above addresses
Begin to comprehend it is not Jews, as if that word became an unbrella for saintlt some are,some ain't,get over it!
to be contiued
and now has become the wors of choice
so here's some info
http://www.israelect.com/reference/Will ... ordJew.htm
"It is an incontestible fact that the word "Jew" did not come into existence until the year 1775. Prior to 1775 the word "Jew" did not exist in any language on earth. The word "Jew" was introduced into the English language for the first time in the 18th century when Sheridan used it in his play "The Rivals," Chapter 2, p. 1, "She shall have a skin like a mummy, and the beard of a Jew." Prior to this use of the word "Jew" the word "Jew" had not become a word.
Contrary to what most people believe Shakespeare never saw the word "Jew" nor did he ever use the word "Jew" in any of his works, the common general belief to the contrary notwithstanding. In his "Merchant of Venice," V, III, I, 61, Shakespeare wrote as follows "what is the reason? I am a Iewe; hath not a Iewe eyes?" You see there was not even a letter "j" or "J" until the middle of the 18th century. Check any encyclopedia you wish for proof of this."
When a woman has a bias against radical feminism is she a self loathing woman?
The questions are not moot to those of us who seriously question the motivations’ of Zionism. I believe man is a organising creature and must be able to somehow make sense of what passes before him, especially when it does not match his model of reality. I see logical fallacies of the non sequitur at play with the above thinking,
There are Jews (a word I’ve never been comfortable with) who adhere and become slaves of the ideology of Zionism I have found there are other Jews, orthodox Jews, who rally against Zionism. I join with them in their cause and that labels me , mostly by Zionists as an anti-Semitic. What utter tripe!
That Individualist can only see my exposing the Zionists for their hatred and long history of deceit shows me his opinion is based not on fact but on emotional beliefs he seems to not be able to move beyond
When he claimed, “There’s nothing up my sleeve, Dio.” I immediately suspected otherwise and then fought that down to give him what he claimed to give me, the benefit of doubt. I should have gone with my initial suspicions. Indie has it hardwired into his consciousness, or so it appears, that I hate Jews and were it possible for G*d to whisper in his ear that I an not, the reaction most likely would be that G*d was now in collusion with me.
Now that is FIRM belief to falsity
I had started this about 12 hours ago but computer crashed , my own laziness and daily events prevented me from doing so
Now that it is done I want the attacks on me from indie to stoop. And they will not, they cannot it is his nature, or so it appears.
That's the first sensible thing you've said in a while.
If you and the authors you cut-and-paste from simply said "Zionists", I wouldn't have a problem. Zionism is an ideology (really just a type of ethnic nationalism), and just as legitimate a target as any other ideological movement. I wouldn't have a problem with "Jewish extremists", "Jewish supremacists" any other sufficiently clear term. "Jewry" doesn't pass the test of specificity, just as generalizing the Bush gang as "the Americans" or the Taliban as "the Arabs" wouldn't.
Do many Zionists play the game of calling anyone who opposes them "anti-Semitic"? Undoubtedly they do, and I disapprove of that, for the same reasons.
You yourself play a dishonest game by claiming that I oppose your criticizing Zionism. Zionists and the Israeli leadership are both legitimate targets. The danger is generalizing guilt and responsibility beyond the boundaries of the relevant set. It is that collectivization of people that leads to both the racism of the fascists and the political correctness of the left.
"When a man has a justifieded bias against radical feminism does it follow he will have a bias against all women?"
That's the first sensible thing you've said in a while.
If you and the authors you cut-and-paste from simply said "Zionists", I wouldn't have a problem. Zionism is an ideology (really just a type of ethnic nationalism), and just as legitimate a target as any other ideological movement. I wouldn't have a problem with "Jewish extremists", "Jewish supremacists" any other sufficiently clear term. "Jewry" doesn't pass the test of specificity, just as generalizing the Bush gang as "the Americans" or the Taliban as "the Arabs" wouldn't.
Do many Zionists play the game of calling anyone who opposes them "anti-Semitic"? Undoubtedly they do, and I disapprove of that, for the same reasons.
You yourself play a dishonest game by claiming that I oppose your criticizing Zionism. Zionists and the Israeli leadership are both legitimate targets. The danger is generalizing guilt and responsibility beyond the boundaries of the relevant set. It is that collectivization of people that leads to both the racism of the fascists and the political correctness of the left.
Like i said trying to make sense to you is much like muddwrestling a pig but then you think that of me so i suppose we are in a stalemate for you to even hint at you are playing the honest game becomes a greater dishonesty
You insist I state "I hate Jews" when I do not to asign emotions to me I do not have is honest?
Nope! it is bullying and always on point for the flaws of others while indicating youhold a higher ground.
get over yourself or not
There is a vast differnce between what you occassionaly see as
sensible, Ish kabibble,* and what is sensible
enjoy your Easter?
"Stay Calm, Be Brave, Wait for the Signs".
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ish_Kabibble