Jump to content
The Education Forum

Sid Walker “Jewish… conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors”


Len Colby
 Share

Recommended Posts

There is evidence, however, as our world races headlong towards globalization, that Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=60263

Sid do you have any evidence to back this charge which seems straight out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Len

Thank you for providing the link to my original post from which you extracted the quote. The sentence you quoted should be read in its original context.

Thanks also for your question. Yes, sadly, I do indeed believe there is rather a lot of evidence for this proposition.

I assume you purport to disagree. In that case, I have a few questions for you:

Suggest to me which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', plays a key role in international finance, the western /international mass media, entertainment and publishing industries - and international organized crime?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', enjoys automatic right of citizenship to a State formed for its exclusive benefit and (in most cases) exemption from extradition from that State even in cases of serious crime?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', contributes a decisive proportion of campaign donations to both major US political parties and is both feared and revered by most members of Congress?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', is so powerful and aggressive that it has enforced its preferred historical narrative in numerous jurisdictions on pain of imprisonment?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', has had a modern State formed for its exclusive benefit - a State, moreover, that despite its diminutive size and relatively small population now boasts one of the strongest military forces in the world, replete with nuclear, biological and chemical weapons?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', has had a State formed for their exclusive benefit – a State that sports internationally-active 'intelligence agencies' with a license to kill from their political masters?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', has so much influence on popular discourse in the western world that it seeks - with considerable success - to punish anyone who publicly challenges its role and power?

Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', routinely "polices" bulletin boards such as this, seeking to ban, ridicule or otherwise marginalize critics and trying to ensure that debate falls only within boundaries which meet its stamp of approval?

Any ideas Len? Jesuits? Old Etonians? Welsh Nationalists?

Now Len, I realize are a Zionist-conspiracy denier, and on occasion idly wonder if it is your principal profession. So I don't anticipate, in your case, that the penny will drop.

Many intelligent and open-minded folk, however, when appraised of some basic facts relating to 9-11, the assassination of JFK and other shenanigans in recent history concede that the possibility of such a conspiracy should not be rejected out of hand, and should, indeed, be considered along with other plausible hypotheses in order to account for data that are otherwise inexplicable.

Finally Len, to put your delicate sensibilities at rest, you'll be pleased to know that I did not, in that instance, plagiarize the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

If I lift quotations from other sources, I use quotation marks. I was brung up proper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any ideas Len? Jesuits? Old Etonians? Welsh Nationalists?

Could it be nauseating little Australian anti-semites posing as "open minded folk" by any chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Daniel

Some of the "evidence" you claim to seek from me was embedded in my questions to Len.

By all means ask me to back up any of the specific claims I made therein with appropriate references and I'll endeavor to do so.

Andy, you are entitled to your opinion.

Actually, I find myself in quite good company being branded with this most dreaded of slurs (it's the modern equivalent of being branded a leper).

I'd sooner find myself alongside Tam Dalyell, George Galloway and Cynthia McKinney than others whom you doubtless believe are quite beyond reproach in this regard - upstanding righteous ones such as George Bush 2, Tony Blair and Condoleezza Rice.

Incidentally, Andy, and for the record, I found your treatment of Michael Collins Piper during his brief sojourn on this Forum quite remarkable for its vitriol and bias. I have yet to observe another issue that gets you quite so worked up. Lebanon can be taken apart, Gaza smashed, Tsunamis come and go, millions starve each year and England gets knocked out of the World Cup - but none of these topics seem to excite your angst quite as much as the sheer horror of encountering someone on this Forum who is prepared to criticize what Walt and Mearsheimer call the 'Israel Lobby'. Funny that.

My apologies to those on other threads waiting for replies from me. I especially have Stephen and his 9-11 theories thread in mind. I'll aim to do so later in the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sid wrote:

“Suggest to me which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', plays a key role in international finance, the western /international mass media, entertainment and publishing industries - and international organized crime?”

Let’s see Italians, Japanese, Russians, "WASPs".

Provide evidence that Jews in these industries are organized into a conspiratorial groups that are “swallowing up their completion”?

Provide evidence that Jews still play a “key role” in “international organized crime”? I know there’re a good number of Jews in the overseas operation of the “Russian Mafia” but that’s about it AFAIK Lansky and Siegel etc are long dead.

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', enjoys automatic right of citizenship to a State formed for its exclusive benefit…”

Probably none but how does this support your thesis that “Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors”?

“…and (in most cases) exemption from extradition from that State even in cases of serious crime?”

This exemption (and I’m not defending it) only applies to people (including non-Jews I believe) who were citizens before they committed their crimes. Jews with criminal records from their home countries are normally barred from citizenship. According to the NY Times “Most European countries do not extradite their citizens” [ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...751C0A96F958260 ] IIRC many European countries while they don’t automatically grant citizenship to people with their ancestry, give them preferential treatment. This “exemption” is a relatively rare occurrence; the only case that I know about is that of Samuel Sheinbein. His father was born in Israel which I why the Israeli Supreme Court ruled (3-2) that he was a citizen [ ibid ]. He wouldn’t have been granted citizenship if he didn’t have an Israeli parent. Most counties (including the US) grant citizenship to children of their citizens even when the other parent is not a citizen and the child born overseas. If his father were European and he had escaped to his father’s homeland the result MIGHT well have been the same. He was sentenced to 24 years in an Israeli prison [ http://www.uniset.ca/naty/maternity/wp_sheinbein.htm ].

But in any case how does this support your thesis that, “Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors”?

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', contributes a decisive proportion of campaign donations to both major US political parties and is both feared and revered by most members of Congress?

Please offer evidence to support this claim.

Please offer evidence that this supposed power is used to influence anything other than US policy towards Israel but rather a furtherance of a Jewish plot “to win out over - or swallow up - their competitors.”

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', is so powerful and aggressive that it has enforced its preferred historical narrative in numerous jurisdictions on pain of imprisonment?”

I presume by “preferred historical narrative” you are euphemistically referring to the Holocaust which a far as I know isn’t doubted by any trained historian. Are you venturing into Holocaust denial now? Most if not all these laws are part of human right laws which protect many groups including Muslims and Arab. FYI they normally prohibit denying other genocides so in this case you can and Rwandans*, Roma, Armenians etc. to your list. What evidence do you have these laws under coercion from the Jews? How do such laws further the Jewish plot “to win out over - or swallow up - their competitors”?

*[Nothing worse than those pushy Rwawandans, they're such cheapskates too!]

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', has had a modern State formed for its exclusive benefit”

Croats, Bosnians etc. you already made that point.

“…a State, moreover, that despite its diminutive size and relatively small population now boasts one of the strongest military forces in the world…”

This is a complex issue, independent of who is right or wrong, Israel was (is) surrounded by numerous hostile states/groups.

“…replete with nuclear, biological and chemical weapons?”

They probably do but this hasn’t been proven. It they do they’re not the only ones

http://cns.miis.edu/research/cbw/possess.htm

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', has had a State formed for their exclusive benefit – a State that sports internationally-active 'intelligence agencies' with a license to kill from their political masters?”

Deplorable as targeted assassinations are what evidence do you have that Israel’s intelligence agencies target anyone other than leaders of terrorist groups responsible for killing civilians? Any evidence that these agencies further the, “Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks (that) are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors”?

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', has so much influence on popular discourse in the western world that it seeks - with considerable success - to punish anyone who publicly challenges its role and power?”

Examples / evidence?

“Which other network of individuals, self-identifying as an 'in-group', routinely "polices" bulletin boards such as this, seeking to ban, ridicule or otherwise marginalize critics and trying to ensure that debate falls only within boundaries which meet its stamp of approval?”

Examples / evidence?

Right minded people object to bigotry whether it is directed against a group they are part of or not. Bigotry directed at any group would not get a good reception here, but of course people are more sensitive to prejudice directed at them. I imagine if someone said all Australians were @$$holes many member would object but Evan, Mark Stapleton, John Dolva and you would probably be most vocal. Obviously if some would make anti-Black, Latino, Asian comments on a forum with members of those races/nationalities those members would object

Dan and Andy aren’t Jewish, Andy, Owen, John Dolva, and Tim Gratz aren’t Jewish but they objected to Herr Piper’s presence here. AFAIK I was the only Jewish member who posted on this part of this forum at the time and I defended his right to join. Jews often defended the free-speech rights of anti-Semites.

-The ACLU lawyer who defended the right of American Nazi Party’s right to march in Skokie, IL home to America’s largest community of Holocaust survivors was Jewish.

-Deborah Lipstadt and Noam Chomsky defended the free speech rights of Holocaust deniers.

In any case, how does this support your thesis that “Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors”?

“Now Len, I realize are a Zionist-conspiracy denier, and on occasion idly wonder if it is your principal profession. So I don't anticipate, in your case, that the penny will drop.”

People with irrational beliefs always think that those who disagree with them are in denial or “agent provocateurs”

“Many intelligent and open-minded folk, however, when appraised of some basic facts relating to 9-11, the assassination of JFK and other shenanigans in recent history concede that the possibility of such a conspiracy should not be rejected out of hand, and should, indeed, be considered along with other plausible hypotheses in order to account for data that are otherwise inexplicable.”

I’ve never said that such ideas should be denied “out of hand” but I think it’s hardly a coincidence that most people who push these ideas have anti-Semitic histories. The evidence that 9/11 was an inside job what ever the race or ethnicity of the proposed villains is weak. As for a Jews being major players in the JFK assassination Piper’s case, at least presented in the two chapters he posted here, was quite weak as well. He admitted to being intellectually dishonest and his postings here often confirmed that admission. I don’t have time or inclination to research every CT on earth (some of which I find credible or believe proven, most not) once I hear that known JFK researchers think it has some merit maybe I’ll find the time.

“Finally Len, to put your delicate sensibilities at rest, you'll be pleased to know that I did not, in that instance, plagiarize the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

Never suggested you were a plagiarizer.

One that you just don’t get is that identifying Jews as a “network of individuals” is itself inherently racist; it assumes that Jews work (plot) together as a cohesive group. To put your paranoid prejudiced sensibilities to rest we don’t get together to plan to take over the world. Except for supporting Israel (and this doesn’t include all Jews) and fighting anti-Semitism, Jews don’t act as a network anymore or less than any other ethnic group. There were in fact a couple of elections in the US in which Jewish Republican candidates ran against non-Jewish Democrats and most Jewish voters voted the Democrat.

What other ethnic, racial or religious group would you identify as being a “network of individuals”? I imagine that Australia is like the rest of the world and members of most “minority groups” have a strong ethnic identity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I find myself in quite good company being branded with this most dreaded of slurs (it's the modern equivalent of being branded a leper).

I'd sooner find myself alongside Tam Dalyell, George Galloway and Cynthia McKinney than others whom you doubtless believe are quite beyond reproach in this regard - upstanding righteous ones such as George Bush 2, Tony Blair and Condoleezza Rice.

Great a fan of Galloway friend of Uday Hussein

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/01/25...uday/index.html

It's not like there is no middle ground.

Incidentally, Andy, and for the record, I found your treatment of Michael Collins Piper during his brief sojourn on this Forum quite remarkable for its vitriol and bias. I have yet to observe another issue that gets you quite so worked up. Lebanon can be taken apart, Gaza smashed, Tsunamis come and go, millions starve each year and England gets knocked out of the World Cup - but none of these topics seem to excite your angst quite as much as the sheer horror of encountering someone on this Forum who is prepared to criticize what Walt and Mearsheimer call the 'Israel Lobby'. Funny that.

I think that Andy objects to bigotry rather that criticism of the "Israel Lobby" I don't remember him posting on Owen's "The US favors the PLO" thread.

My apologies to those on other threads waiting for replies from me. I especially have Stephen and his 9-11 theories thread in mind. I'll aim to do so later in the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Andy objects to bigotry rather that criticism of the "Israel Lobby" I don't remember him posting on Owen's "The US favors the PLO" thread.

For the record, I no longer support that thesis. :P I still think the Mearsheimer/Walt paper is (very) shoddy and the influence of the "Israel Lobby" is overrated vis a vis U.S. foreign policy.

I am also still waiting for Mr. Walker's denunciation of Israel "Blood Libel" Shamir in addition to a clarification of his recent comments about the Jewish "preferred historical narrative."

Edited by Owen Parsons
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sid, Owen, Dan and Len,

Sid, kudos--admirable restraint. While I'm uncertain about the existence of a wider global conspiratorial network, I'm fairly certain there's a powerful Jewish lobby in America dragging US foreign policy, and more specifically Middle Eastern policy, around by the nose. I believe this will ultimately be to the detriment of the US.

Btw, the book by Antony Lowenstein which was discussed in the aforementioned thread, namely "My Israel Question" is due for release here in Australia on August 1:

http://antonyloewenstein.com/blog/

I saw him last night in a TV debate with a representative of Israel. The issue was Israel's current war in Lebanon. Lowenstein is very young and extremely articulate.

Edited by Mark Stapleton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally, Andy, and for the record, I found your treatment of Michael Collins Piper during his brief sojourn on this Forum quite remarkable for its vitriol and bias.

Your response does much to confirm my concerns about your particular world view.

You are correct, much of the conspiracy rubbish that appears on this forum leaves me stone cold for I am a teacher who set up this board for teachers to discuss and forward education and matters pertaining to education not crackpot speculation and gossip.

As a history teacher I do much in my professional work to counter prejudice and bigotry amongst the young. However when I encounter the peddling of the oldest and foulest conspiracy theory of all by adults, adults who presumably have achieved some level of education, I am left in despair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see whenever the I-word is mentioned the discussion very quickly degrades into a labelling and name-calling match. It seems no-one is allowed to even discuss the activities of one nation in the world for fear of being referred to as a bigot (I wonder how that happened - as they appear to have no international influence at all).

My personal opinion is that Sid is entitled to have an opinion without being abused for it. Sure attack his ideas, but can we please get over this ridiculous name-calling.

On the subject of influence:

Bush addresses AIPAC.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20040518-1.html

Interesting first line.

Finally, AIPAC elected a President I can kiss

What could he possibly mean?

Cheney addresses AIPAC.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20060307-1.html

Condoleeza Rice addresses AIPAC.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/46625.htm

John Bolton addresses AIPAC.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=J...icle%2FShowFull

and US vetos of UN resolutions critical of Isreal:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html

No influence there then.

Current US foreign policy towards the middle east would appear to reflect that of Israel or is it the other way around?

But don't take my word for it.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/sto...,552607,00.html

The Israelis control the policy in the congress and the senate.

-- Senator Fullbright, Chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee: 10/07/1973 on CBS' "Face the Nation". .

I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews..... terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen .... I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don't approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country"

-----Sec. of State John Foster Dulles quoted on p.99 of Fallen Pillars by Donald Neff

"...don't worry about American pressure on Israel, we, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it - Ariel Sharon to Shimon Peres(Kol Yisrael Radio) 3 October, 2001

and it is not restricted to US politics.

Tony Blair appears a little 'under the influence' as well.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../worldviews.DTL

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...2/ixportal.html

Did anyone say Lord Levy? Only in hushed tones...

Tony shouldn't feel too hungover though - Thatcher indulged in a tipple too:

http://www.shinesforall.com/archives/2005/...her_the_je.html

The above report was at one point available in many mainstream publications, but it would appear the ink has now faded to such an extent it is no longer readable - even in the online publications. Ah technology, not quite what it's cracked up to be...

No such problems for Merkel though:

Chancellor Angela Merkel met with President Bush in January, and now she's coming back for a rather brief visit; she'll be speaking to the American Jewish Committee in Washington[CFR website]
Merkel's track record on Jewish issues is "excellent," said Michael Wolffsohn, a history professor at the University of the Bundeswehr in Munich.

"She has always been in touch with the Central Council and the Israeli Embassy," Wolffsohn said in an e-mail comment. "Jewish-Israeli matters are close to her heart," as they are for the leadership of her party in general.[Jewish News]

Well, it's nice to know such unrestricted access to our politicians can be gained without having to have any influence. I will see if any of the above are available to speak at next week's 'Charity Egg and Spoon race' in aid of Lebanese children requiring prosthetic limbs. Oh, sorry not supposed to mention that - it's bigotted and anti-semetic. Anyone else bored with this game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's nice to know such unrestricted access to our politicians can be gained without having to have any influence. I will see if any of the above are available to speak at next week's 'Charity Egg and Spoon race' in aid of Lebanese children requiring prosthetic limbs. Oh, sorry not supposed to mention that - it's bigotted and anti-semetic. Anyone else bored with this game?

What a puerile posting.

Sid Walker was forwarding the idea of an international jewish conspiracy which several members have suggested is an essentially anti semitic position. This is not name calling it is in essence accurate description.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve and Mark,

If Sid merely said what you guys are saying, we wouldn’t be here. I wouldn’t have started this thread and if had started a thread like this one in such a case I doubt Owen, Dan and Andy would have voiced agreement. The problem isn't the "I" word but rather the "J" word.

Being anti-Israel is of course not anti-Semitic, many Jews indeed are anti-Israel. To say that the issues have nothing to do with each other is an over simplification because the issues are linked, e.g. obviously (with the exception of some fundamentalist Christian groups) anti-Semites will be anti-Israel.

There are people on both sides who fudge the issue:

Many Jewish (and even some non-Jewish) pro-Israeli groups and individuals say that critics of Israel are anti-Semitic. I think in most cases this is what they believe though in some cases it could be a ploy.

The flipside to the above is that many anti-Semites try to cloak their prejudices railing about the “Zionists” when they really mean Jews and their attempts as in the case with Sid’s comments about Andy to label their critics as part of the Israel lobby.

I said both sides but there really are three (though this is still an over simplification)

1) People who support Israel

2) People who are anti-Israel, but aren’t anti-Jewish

3) People who are anti-Semitic

Many (most?) people don’t fit neatly into one group, there are many people for example who (like me) don’t think it’s fair to label Israel a “fascist-terrorist state” but are none the less critical of that country’s actions and there are various degrees of anti-Semitism (just like there are varying degrees of any prejudice).

Since being part of the third group is looked down upon many of those people pretend to be part of the second.

Although those accused (and in most cases guilty) of anti-Semitism often refer sarcastically to anti-Semitism as the “most dreaded of slurs” this is not always the case. To some degree anti-Semitism is more tolerated than other prejudices, 2 examples:

1) 1984 – While seeking the Democratic nomination Jesse Jackson complained about the “Hymies” in “Hymietown”, he later apologized. He went on to get a total of about 3.5 million votes (mostly from African Americans) in various primaries.

1988 – Jackson again seeks the Democratic nomination with considerably more success than before at one point he had more delegates than any other candidates. He got considerable support from white liberals including Jews; his campaign manager in Minnesota was Paul Wellstone.

1993 – 2001 – President Clinton invites Jackson to the White House on several occasions.

1997 –Clinton sends Jackson to Kenya as his “special representative”

2000 – Clinton Awards Jackson with the nation's highest civilian honor -- the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

2005 – President Bush invites Jackson to the Presidential Medal of Freedom ceremony.

OK now imagine that a presidential candidate complained about the “Niggers” and “Niggertown” or “Spics” and “Spictown”

2) Scholars for 9/11 Truth has two openly anti-Semitic Holocaust denying members Peter Meyer [ http://911review.com/denial/holocaust.html#serendipity ] and Eric Hufxxxx. Hufxxxx’s views haven’t prevented him from being a darling of the “truth” movement. There are plenty of white supremacists who believe 9/11 was “an inside job” but AFAIK none of them are members of S911T or are frequently quoted by other members of the movement. Openly white supremacists it seems are, and deservedly so, considered ‘persona non grata’ at most “truth” events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len,

I agree. But it is becoming almost impossible these days to talk about Israel without being labelled. This is being done deliberately to stifle debate, and more importantly, criticism of Israel.

I am a true believer in free speech. No subject is off limits. If Sid believes something he should be able to say so and suffer the slings and arrows of his detractors, but aimed at his ideas not at him.

That's called a debate. Not the pithy sniping which so many of these posts appear to be ending up as.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's nice to know such unrestricted access to our politicians can be gained without having to have any influence. I will see if any of the above are available to speak at next week's 'Charity Egg and Spoon race' in aid of Lebanese children requiring prosthetic limbs. Oh, sorry not supposed to mention that - it's bigotted and anti-semetic. Anyone else bored with this game?

What a puerile posting.

Sid Walker was forwarding the idea of an international jewish conspiracy which several members have suggested is an essentially anti semitic position. This is not name calling it is in essence accurate description.

Andy,

Len Colby started this thread by cherry picking a quote from a Sid Walker posting on another thread. It's an attempt to portray Sid as a fanatic and exclude him from the wider debate. This tactic was recently used to great effect to silence Michael Collins Piper. Len regularly appoints himself chief inquisitor, dissecting posts and demanding evidence in support of each claim made in the posting. Nothing wrong with that, except that Len often fails to back his own claims with reason, logic and evidence. Len can't seem to accept that this is an issue that should be debated. If it has no foundation then it will quickly fade into irrelevance.

Brandishing the anti-semite label, while ignoring the issues which underpin the debate only makes you seem like a modern day McCarthyist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...