Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Anelka's quenelle

i live in oxford and people like that are obviously going to come and speak at the oxford union but he better not turn up in high wycombe :mad:
 
cesare said:
Isn't the point that he's advertising for everything he's against?
Click to expand...

There were lots of powerful men who were powerful enough to realise THE TRUTH, like Henry Ford, Harold Truman (allegedly) and now Anelka.

Anelka would know all about who the richest people in the world really are, given he's one of them :D
 
littlebabyjesus said:
What a load of crap. Churchill was racist by today's standards. And the language he used betrays the sense of innate superiority of the empire-building British. He had prejudices that were sadly typical of his time and class. There's no need to shirk that, but also no need to attempt to make him out as equivalent to Hitler because of it.
Click to expand...

But then again, what about Martin Gilbert's convincing argument that he was the greatest gentile friend of the Jews in practice? No-one on this thread seems to be aware of his work:

http://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Jews-A-Lifelong-Friendship/dp/0805088644

Which to me seems far more important than his clubroom anti-semitic terminology.

Which isn't to deny that, by today's standards, he would be adjudged an anti-semite. But it is to call into question today's standards.
 
Last edited:
andysays said:
Well I'm certainly no fan of Churchill, but I'm not sure that this quote demonstrates his anti-semitism as clearly as you're suggesting. The world-wide conspiracy referred to is Bolshevism, not Judaism, and it's no surprise to most of us that Churchill was anti-Bolshevik.
Click to expand...

What is anti-semitic (by today's standards) in that article is Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism is a Jewish conspiracy.
 
frogwoman said:
im not sure what your point is here :confused: who's obsessing over how people use language?
Click to expand...

Those who would label Churchill an anti-semite on the grounds of his language, while ignoring his practical activities in favor of (what he perceived as) Jewish interests.

This discussion is really demonstrating the difficulties in calling a person "anti-semitic" as opposed to an opinion or set of opinions. The question of whether Churchill "was" an anti-semite is both unanswerable and irrelevant.
 
phildwyer said:
What is anti-semitic (by today's standards) in that article is Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism is a Jewish conspiracy.
Click to expand...

a view shared by the black hundreds and other groups and people of the time who one would be able to call far right and anti semetic surely?
 
phildwyer said:
What is anti-semitic (by today's standards) in that article is Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism is a Jewish conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Haven't you (unsuccessfully) argued this before? I'm getting a distinct feeling of deja vu.

Anyway, as far as I can see, the quote you've posted doesn't demonstrate Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism is/was a Jewish conspiracy.

In fact following your link I find the suggestion that within that article he

called on Jews to repudiate "the Bolshevik conspiracy" and make clear that "the Bolshevik movement is not a Jewish movement"
Click to expand...

Personally, I'm relatively "not bothered" as to whether Churchill was anti-semitic or not, but I am at least curious as to why you're spending so much of your valuable time arguing the point (when it seems to me to have very little relevance to this thread or any of our lives in the C21st), and not making a terribly good job of it...
 
yeah that is anti-semitic (if that's really what he thought), i'm not sure why you're going on about it though. im not a fan of churchill, he was a cunt. surely it's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone like churchill would have put his personal dislikes aside for the interests of the british state/the british ruling class though.
 
frogwoman said:
yeah that is anti-semitic (if that's really what he thought), i'm not sure why you're going on about it though. im not a fan of churchill, he was a cunt. surely it's not beyond the realms of possibility that someone like churchill would have put his personal dislikes aside for the interests of the british state/the british ruling class though.
Click to expand...


see 'good old joe' and (paraphrasing) 'i'd make a deal with the devil if it meant beating the nazis'
 
yeah to be honest i've no idea why we're discussing churchill and what this has got to do with dieudonne and anelka
 
phildwyer said:
Those who would label Churchill an anti-semite on the grounds of his language, while ignoring his practical activities in favor of (what he perceived as) Jewish interests.

This discussion is really demonstrating the difficulties in calling a person "anti-semitic" as opposed to an opinion or set of opinions. The question of whether Churchill "was" an anti-semite is both unanswerable and irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Once again, you're following your tedious tactic of distorting what people are actually saying, and then arguing against a parody of your own creation.

The question is whether this gesture is anti-semitic. Various people have cited various examples of actions and expressed opinions which demonstrate, to those of us capable of making judgement without distorting things to suit their own pet ideas and tropes, that it is.

The question of whether Anelka "is" an anti-semite is irrelevant here and it will be irrelevant when he comes up before the FA
 
Of course, Dieudonne is not really anti-Semitic, nor can I think why, in a protest where people openly chant 'Jew(s), France is not yours' would they start singing 'Shoahnanas' around the 0:55 second mark.

 
Theisticle said:
Of course, Dieudonne is not really anti-Semitic, nor can I think why, in a protest where people openly chant 'Jew(s), France is not yours' would they start singing 'Shoahnanas' around the 0:55 second mark.

Click to expand...


:eek: :( :( what was this "protest" supposedly about?
 
andysays said:
Anyway, as far as I can see, the quote you've posted doesn't demonstrate Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism is/was a Jewish conspiracy.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I saw no need to cite the passages that demonstrate Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism was a Jewish conspiracy because I assumed they were common knowledge. Perhaps I misread my audience. Here he goes again:

"There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders."

Just let me know if you need any more proof, there's plenty.
 
butchersapron said:
It was a right wing (anti-gay, trad catholics etc) anti-Hollande demo. Why these terms matter is quite clearly demonstrated here. Imagine if it was a a left-wing demo. Here we have an anti-capitalist demo with anti-semitic chants. It doesn't matter because it's anti-capialist.
Click to expand...

Ah OK. :)
 
phildwyer said:
To be honest, I saw no need to cite the passages that demonstrate Churchill's conviction that Bolshevism was a Jewish conspiracy because I assumed they were common knowledge. Perhaps I misread my audience. Here he goes again:

"There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders."

Just let me know if you need any more proof, there's plenty.
Click to expand...
You've taken the link to Irving's website out now - but that's where you harvested that quote.
 
butchersapron said:
It was a right wing (anti-gay, trad catholics etc) anti-Hollande demo. Why these terms matter is quite clearly demonstrated here. Imagine if it was a a left-wing demo. Here we have an anti-capitalist demo with anti-semitic chants. It doesn't matter because it's anti-capialist.
Click to expand...

It can't be anti-capitalist if it's anti-semitic.

Anti-semitism is the socialism of fools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom