I am one busy girl looking up all the sites and books Shamgar has posted. I can't pass up investigating all of it. Much, much too interesting to ignore. I love reading what Intellectuals are saying about our situation.

__________________
Hi, I like communications. I like intelligent and amusing people. We might disagree, but that's okay. Just don't be boring.

Then why are you wasting your time reading Shamgar's crap?

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

Your response "presumes" you are the "intelligent" one . . . . hahahahaaaaaa. . . . here is my "light" reading that I have been working on . . .

Total Propaganda PR (Lea's Communication)
ISBN: 0805808922 by Edelstein, Alex S

Propaganda Techniques ISBN: 1410704963
by Conserva, Henry T.

Age of Propaganda : the Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion (Rev 00 Edition) ISBN: 0805074031 by Pratkanis, Anthony / Aronson, Elliot

Propaganda : the Formation of Men's Attitudes (73 Edition)
ISBN: 0394718747 by Ellul, Jacques

Parting the Curtain : Propaganda, Culture, and the Cold War, 1945-1961 (97 Edition) ISBN: 0312176805 by Hixson, Walter L.

Propaganda (04 Edition) ISBN: 0970312598 by Bernays, Edward

Toxic Sludge Is Good for You! : Lies, (*)(*)(*)(*) Lies and the Public Relations Industry (95 Edition) ISBN: 1567510604 by Stauber, John / Rampton, Sheldon

Trust Us We're Experts! : How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles With Your Future (01 Edition) ISBN: 1585421391 by Rampton, Sheldon / Stauber, John

Image : Guide To Pseudo-events in America (61 Edition)
ISBN: 0689702809 by Boorstin, Daniel J.

How Brands Become Icons : Principles of Cultural Branding (04 Edition)
ISBN: 1578517745 by Holt, Douglas B.

Well the kings of propaganda. .the jews. . .always blame the goy of commiting the crime they commit. . . .

Propaganda by its very nature is an enterprise for perverting the significance of events and of insinuating false intentions. There are two salient aspects of this fact. First of all, the propagandist must insist on the purity of his own intentions and, at the same time, hurl accusations at his enemy. But the accusation is never made haphazardly or groundlessly (9). The propagandist will not accuse the enemy of just an misdeed; he will accuse him of the very intention that he himself has and of trying to commit the very crime that he himself is about to commit. He who wants to provoke war not only proclaims his own peaceful intentions but also accuses the other party of provocation. He who uses concentration camps accuses his neighbor of doing so. He who intends to establish a dictatorship always insists that his adversaries are bent on dictatorship. The accusation aimed at the other's intentions clearly reveals the intentions of the accuser. But the public cannot see this because the revelation is interwoven with facts. The mechanism used here is to slip from the facts, which wold demand factual judgment, to moral terrain and to ethical judgment.

(9)Because political problems are difficult and often confusing, and their significance and their import not obvious, the propagandist can easily present them in moral language – and here we leave the realm of fact, to enter into that of passion. Facts, then, come to be discussed in the language of indignation, a tone which is almost always the mark of propaganda.

Jaques Ellul, “Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes” (New York: 1973) Page 58.

The fact that I consider almost every word you come out with, certainly most of the copy/paste stuff, to be utter crap, in no way 'presumes' that I have a higher intelligence.

BTW, what is your IQ? Purley out of interrest of course, I wouldn't mock you relentlessly because of it it...

And you told me that, why?

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

Let's see. . . . your "comic book material" responses. . . . . my "big boy" reading material responses . . yeah. . you are the "intelligent one". . . hahahahahaaaaaaaaa

...you are obviously the smarter one. After all, you read big boy books...

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

Thanks for the confession. . . here is some more "big boy" reading material which will be way over your little head. . . this of course is the outline of the jew propaganda spewed to include criticism of Israel as "antisemitism". . .which of course is debunked in the article. . .

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040202/klug
review | posted January 15, 2004 (February 2, 2004 issue)
The Myth of the New Anti-Semitism
Brian Klug

In 1879 the German journalist Wilhelm Marr, a former socialist and anarchist, founded an organization that was novel in two ways. It was the first political party based on a platform of hostility to Jews. And it introduced the world to a new word: "anti-Semite."

Marr was an atheist, and the Antisemiten-Liga (League of Anti-Semites) was hostile to Jews on the secular grounds that they are an alien "race." However, his account of "Semitism" was not essentially different from the demonic conception of the Jew that had existed in Christian Europe for centuries. It boiled down to this: Jews are a people apart from the rest of humanity. They are the enemy. Wherever they go, they form a state within a state. Conspiring in secret, they work together to promote their own collective advantage at the expense of the nations or societies in whose midst they dwell and on whom they prey. Cunning and manipulative, they possess uncanny powers that enable them, despite their small numbers, to achieve their ends. The term "antiSemitism" has come to refer to this discourse, or variations on the themes it contains, because the same rhetoric persists whether Jewish identity is seen as religious, racial, national or ethnic. Sometimes this discourse is explicit; at other times it is the subtext of attacks on Jews. Anti-Semitism, thus defined, is not new.

But a spate of recent articles and books assert the rise of a "new anti-Semitism." This is the thrust of "Graffiti on History's Walls" by Mortimer Zuckerman, the cover story of the November 3, 2003, issue of U.S. News & World Report. In December New York magazine ran a similarly sensationalist cover story, titled "The Return of Anti-Semitism," which spoke of "a groundswell of hate" against Jews and suggested that Jew-hatred was now "politically correct" in Europe. At least three books recently published in English make the same claim: Never Again? by Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League; The New Anti-Semitism by feminist Phyllis Chesler; and The Case for Israel by Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. Most of the contributors to A New Antisemitism?, edited by Paul Iganski and Barry Kosmin, take a similar view, with varying degrees of emphasis.

As the words "threat" and "crisis" in the subtitles of the books by Foxman and Chesler indicate, the "new anti-Semitism" is generally seen, by those who proclaim its existence, as
a clear and present danger. Foxman believes that a "frightening coalition of anti-Jewish
sentiment is forming on a global scale." Chesler goes even further: "Let me be clear: the war against the Jews is being waged on many fronts--militarily, politically, economically, and through propaganda--and on all continents." She even perceives a wider threat to Western civilization itself: "Who or what can loosen the madness that has gripped the world and that threatens to annihilate the Jews and the West?"

There is certainly reason to be concerned about a climate of hostility to Jews, including vicious physical attacks. On one Saturday this past November, for example, two synagogues in Istanbul were truck-bombed during Sabbath services, while an Orthodox Jewish school in a Paris suburb was largely destroyed by arson. Some researchers report a 60 percent worldwide increase in the number of assaults on Jews (or persons perceived to be Jewish) in 2002, compared with the previous year. At the same time, something is rotten in the state of public discourse. Anti-Jewish slogans and graphics have appeared on marches opposing the invasion of Iraq. Jewish conspiracy theories have been revived, such as the widely circulated "urban legend" that Jews were warned in advance to stay away from the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001. And recently, certain public figures on both the right and the left have made negative generalizations about Jews and "Jewish influence."

The authors under review tend to lump all these facts together, along with a wealth of evidence for what they see as an explosion of bias against Israel: in the media, in the United Nations, on college campuses and elsewhere. They conclude that there is a single unified phenomenon, a "new antiSemitism." However, while the facts give cause for serious concern, the idea that they add up to a new kind of anti-Semitism is confused. Moreover, this confusion, combined with a McCarthyite tendency to see anti-Semites under every bed, arguably contributes to the climate of hostility toward Jews. The result is to make matters worse for the very people these authors mean to defend.

The claim that I am criticizing is not that there is a new outbreak of "old" antiSemitism but that there is an outbreak of anti-Semitism of a new kind. Thus the case in support of this claim is not merely cumulative: It does not consist simply in piling up one example after another. There is an organizing principle, a central idea that holds the case together. It is only in terms of this idea that many of the examples cited in the literature count as evidence of antiSemitism. Without this central idea, the case that is made with their help falls apart. So the question is this: What puts the "new" into "new anti-Semitism"?

The answer, in a word, is anti-Zionism. The "vilification of Israel," Iganski and Kosmin argue, is "the core characteristic" of Judeophobia (their term for "new anti-Semitism"). In his contribution to their book, Jonathan Sacks, Chief Rabbi of Britain and the Commonwealth, explains: "What we are witnessing today is the second great mutation of antisemitism in modern times, from racial antisemitism to religious anti-Zionism (with the added premise that all Jews are Zionists)." Sometimes the point is made by equating the State of Israel in the "new" anti-Semitism with the individual Jew in the "old" variety. Rabbi Sacks himself draws this parallel in an article in the Guardian: "At times [anti-Semitism] has been directed against Jews as individuals. Today it is directed against Jews as a sovereign people." In the same vein, Dershowitz argues that Israel has become "the Jew among Nations."
[snip]

...that was waaaayyyyy over my little head. How am I supposed to understand English? Could you translate it into Shamgarish for me?


Did you even bother to read the dam thing? The author concluded that there is no 'New Anti-Semitism', rather, anti-Semitism has become anti-Zionism.

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison

See you needed an adult to read the article to you . . . .the second snip is the actaul conclusion from the article. . .in which the author concluded he was an "antisemite". . . . get someone to read for you are home. . .you will make less embarrasing statements that way. . . hopefully. . .

[snip]
Not that this justifies, not for one moment, a single incident where Jews are attacked for being Jewish; such attacks are repugnant. But it does provide a context within which to make sense of them without seeing a global "war against the Jews." There is no such war. It is, in fact, as much a figment of the imagination as its mirror image: a Jewish conspiracy against the world. Jews have good reason to be concerned about growing hostility toward them. But while this includes the revival of hard-core antiSemitism, it is closer to the truth to say that anti-Zionism today takes the form of anti-Semitism rather than the other way round. As Akiva Eldar observed recently in Ha'aretz, "It is much easier to claim the entire world is against us than to admit that the State of Israel, which rose as a refuge and a source of pride for Jews...has become a genuine source of danger and a source of shameful embarrassment to Jews who choose to live outside its borders."
[snip]

[snip]
In defense of her assertion that there is a global "war against the Jews," Chesler wields the ultimate weapon. "In my opinion," she says, "anyone who denies that this is so or who blames the Jews for provoking the attacks is an anti-Semite." Since I deny that there is such a war, this makes me an anti-Semite. But since her argument empties the word of all meaning, I do not feel maligned. In his contribution to A New Antisemitism?, historian Peter Pulzer, faulting the way "the liberal press" sometimes reports the activities of the Israel Defense Forces in the occupied territories, makes a telling point about the misuse of words. He says: "When every civilian death is a war crime, that concept loses its significance. When every expulsion from a village is genocide, we no longer know how to recognize genocide. When Auschwitz is everywhere, it is nowhere." Point taken. But equally, when anti-Semitism is everywhere, it is nowhere. And when every anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite, we no longer know how to recognize the real thing--the concept of anti-Semitism loses its significance.
[snip]

















. . . An immigrant-absorbing state [Israel] which constitutes a national and spiritual center for all Jews of the world and is a source of attraction for thousands of immigrants each year. Aliyah is the central goal of the State of Israel. This is the country we wish to shape. This is the country where our children will want to live. [What kind of immigrants are they willing to absord. . .jews - aliyah n. pl. a·li·yahs, also a·li·yot (äl-t) The immigration of Jews into Israel.]
Prime Minister Sharon's Speech at the Herzliya Conference
December 18, 2003

You didn't include the end of the article in your other post, so how the hell was I supposed to know what the 'actaul' conclusion was? Regardless, the articles actual conclusion (assuming you haven't got more to copy/paste) is what I said it was i.e, that 'the new Anti-Semitism' is actually anti-Zionism.

Do you ever bother to read the crap you post?

__________________
It's the difference between suicide and slow capitulation... - Jim Morrison