seebs

The problem is, you can't sum the amount of loans together and call it a "cost", because (in general) loans are repaid later, with interest which exceeds the cost to you of going without access to the money for that time.

I think any attempt to evaluate a statistic should start with careful attention to exactly what's being measured. Seems reasonable.

Epinoia

Personally, I agree with the Copenhagen school myself. But what about the idol-worship thing? Let's say one day you joined the Shrine of the Sacred Monkey and wore Monkey charms and exhorted fellow humans to make hajj or aliyah or pilgrimage to the shrine to get in good with Sacred Monkey and the Minions of the Universe. Oh, and that you had to have sex at the Monkey's feet and then have pork chops and milk for dinner. This of course is purely hypothetical, but would you guess that this would cause friction similar to the volcano blowup?

J-D

Epinoia said I found this too abbreviated to be sure what it meant. The people who objected to the former UN resolution equating Zionism with racism did not do so on the basis of a contrast between race and religion. They did so on the grounds that the accusation was false and defamatory.

Epinoia went on to say Purely as a matter of fact about exisitng usage, I don't observe the word 'Holocaust' being used that way. However, there is a good question here. Why is it that there is a special term used for the attempted extermination of the Jews by the Nazis, but no special word for the attempted extermination of the Roma (gypsies), or the Bibelforscher (Jehovah's Witnesses), or the Freemasons, or the Communists, or homosexuals, or people with disabilities? I don't know. But it's not because there's a conspiracy to suppress mention of those other attempted exterminations. Indeed, the extermination of the Jews is not only the most frequently mentioned of these but also the most frequently denied.

Anybody who wants to coin a new term for the attempted extermination of the Roma by the Nazis, for example, is free to do so, and if other people find it useful and adopt it, it will become accepted. Likewise, anybody who wants to promote an extended use of the term 'Holocaust' can do so, although my opinion is that (given what is, fairly or unfairly, the currently accepted use) such an attempt would create confusion and therefore provoke resistance.

Epinoia also said If that's what you think, wouldn't it be more constructive to promote greater public attention to the experience of the Roma, the Bibelforscher, and so on, instead of criticising public attention to the experience of the Jews? Spreading information is good, so argue for more, not less.

In another post, Epinoia said I'll be checking out Norm Finkelstein's book when the library copy becomes available. At the JDO.org archives I only found one instance of somebody losing his job, and that was an instance of somebody resigning from a politically sensitive job because of a potentially embarassing past political affiliation. It wasn't a general blacklist and it wasn't just for expressing an opinion.

Epinoia went on to say I was referring to the FAQ, at <http://www.infidels.org/infidels/faq.shtml#focus>, which explains that the website focuses on Christianity because of the greater amount of expertise available and because of the extent, influence, and apologetic activism of Christianity, going on to say that there is also substantial information relevant to non-Christian religions and to invite further submissions of the same.

Finally, Epinoia, you conclude by declining to explain how you have been intimidated in the past, but insisting that you are not afraid of anything any more. If you are not (or not any longer) afraid, why will you not describe how you were intimidated in the past?

Abbaddabba

Why does the site that the starter of this thread have no source of reference for their figures? It's at best unprofessional, almost certainly misleading and i'd be willing to wager flat out incorrect.

Though to be fair, there's a lot more substance to even imaginary statistics than the generic "revelation" that he seems to be gracing us with.

People do this. People think that. People believe this. Jews, in abstract unison, have tried to convince "us" that only jews died in the holocaust to get sympathy, which they knew would result in getting international funding in response to a territorial dispute, which is hurting america and hardworking, christian americans (who are discriminated against, mind you). A whole lot of statements with no real verifiable content.

Magdlyn

I am not familiar with the Copehnagen School.

Well, as to that. I would nover attempt to evangelize a Jew (unless I suddenly went insane). That would be rude.

If I wished to worship this or that, I imagine they would not care! They (and my sample is small and again, JME) do not give a crap what other people do. The "idol worhip" thing in Tanakh was fine for the Egyptians, for ex. It was just that YHWH didn't want the Jews to do it.

Supposedly.

One thing I find annoying iis when I point out the naive silliness of some of the more fanciful parts of the HB. Then they get all huffy and say, well you Xtians (not that I am one) do not know what is in oral Torah, which G-d gave Moshe at the same time as the written Torah and was passed down from then on and finally written down in the early centuries CE. I see this as apology for the need to write the re- interpretation of antiquated rules known as the Talmud. But the Orthodox I know do not see it this way. So we get a few fireworks in this regard.

For ex: the obvious lower class status of women in Tanakh, is reinterpreted as "Well, women are more holy than men. that is why they must be ritually unclean during and after menstruation, why a woman is unclean longer after giving birth to a girl than a boy," etc. "Back in the day, it was actually a good thing for a woman to be forced to marry her rapist because..." etc.

jbernier

Agreed. However, I do think that special care is in order when critiquing Judaism. That is to say, critiques of Judaism and Jews in general have contributed to mass genocide - we cannot ignore that history.

I know very little about Zundel. My understanding is that he got in trouble for hate speech. Canadian law recognizes that not all public speech is a public good. So does American law, btw - that is why there are laws vis-a-vis slander and libel, for instance. Free speech is never absolutely free, even in the most liberal of liberal democracies. I have no problem with limiting speech that incites persecution against particular groups of people in principle, and my understanding is that this is what Zundel got in hot water over (anyone who knows more about Zundel is free to correct me on this, though).

My department is very unique. Until very recently we had a Jewish Professor of New Testament (she recently left to take up a top administrative position at another school); we have Christian students doing Early Jewish Studies (such as myself, who minors in this field); Jewish students doing Early Christian Studies; etc. It allows for a fantastic learning environment.

I would agree with your critique of Crossan and Armstrong. I really do not like their scholarship, particularly Crossan's. I just do not think he is a very good historian. Fortunately, his work is an area of study very different than mine so I do not have to engage with his work very often (he does historical Jesus studies whereas I am much more interested in early Christian thought about the human condition).

There is definitely something to this critique. Truth be told I think that historians are often too guided by contemporary political concerns. That is not to say that such concerns are unimportant; they certainly are. I look at studies in the Gospel of John (the text on which my research currently focuses) over the last few years and there is a real attempt to show that John was not anti-Jewish. Now, admittedly, referring to him as 'anti-semitic' is problematic simply because that term is somewhat anachronistic. However, one cannot get past the fact that he has some nasty things to say about hoi ioudaioi, usually translated as 'the Jews' (although I think that 'the Judeans' is a much better translation). This is something which one cannot get around but a lot of people have spilled a lot of ink trying to do precisely that.

Cynthia of Syracuse

Just to note that there already is a term for the slaughter of the Roma - O Porrajmos - The Devouring.

More information here.

Toto

Zundel was convicted under Canadian law for denying the Holocaust (Section 177 of the Criminal Code of Canada prohibits "knowingly publishing false news" - something that is not a violation of the law in the US, and which on appeal was struck down by the Canadian Supreme Court.) Details of the convoluted legal procedings are here. Zundel was denied Canadian citizenship and moved to the US, but apparently is now in INS custody. He is a major distributor of neo-Nazi propaganda and could have been prosecuted for stirring up hate, but for some reason was not. If he were deported to Germany, he would be subject to prosecution.

J-D

Thanks!

Epinoia

Look, the fact still remains that Israel gets more aid per capita than any other country. Sheesh. Even usisrael.org isn't contesting that.

A separate discussion on the specifics would to me be interesting. Let's start another thread if you've changed your mind about discussing this. It would be premature for me to even guess whether you have, Seebs. And as I wish not to derail the thread, I'm moving on to the statement that the study I provided was "anti-JEWISH" propaganda. I believe the study's focus was on ISRAEL. Funny how the "but not ALL Jews feel the SAME about Israel" line gets thrown around, yet criticize Israel, and you're criticizing Jews. As far as Jews and/or Judaism and/or Israel go, the platitude that "they are not the same thing," remains true, but increasingly they might as well be. Especially on supporting Israel.

Consider any contest or debate. If both sides shift definitions to their liking, hide behind any number of platitudes, and engage in laughable fallicies, ad hominems and finally thug tactics to get their way, this isn't a debate; it's two brats having an uninteresting food fight. When those tactics are against the rules but one side gets preference in flouting them, it may seem more sportsmanly of the other side simply to bow out. Let the brat have the prize since he'll scream otherwise and get his Mummy all angry at you. Well, no one died and made either more special than anyone else, and both he and his mummy need to be called on this: A winner who won't grow up, who relies more on loser-like tactics each time is far, far lower than an honest loser and should get kicked out of the contest--not given massive props and rewards and held up as any kind of paragon of good conduct, arbiter of what's fair and unfair (or what is and isn't "hate"), or role-model democracy.

It must be nice to go somewhere you feel "at home" than at home. I'm sure it's relieving to know you can make aliyah if the shit hits the fan everywhere else. But understand that most American's "homelands" don't automatically take them back for the asking and would take even less in times of war, I'm sure. Americans do not begrudge Jews for either privilege they largely don't have. They might even be OK with spending money on it. But now we're billions or even trillions of dollars later. Now Mossad info at least partially contributed to starting a war that Israel badly wanted but won't be fighting in, assuming Sharon got his latest $4 bil from America to actually stay out. Nearly 40 years later, 1 in 5 people in the land it controls have no vote and no voice. Pal homes and villages are always shabbier than Jews, that is unless and until they're bulldozed to make room for more Jews, which always happens despite the varied excuse. They were hunting terrorists (and you happen to fit the profile) or making sure that "terrorists" have no place to come home to, and never mind the 80-year-old grandpa and his 3-year-old granddaughter who lived there too. Israel's not helping them as it's busy putting anyone who would on a "terrorist watch list" that protects it and the U.S. from major foreign threats like the author of "Peace Train" and "Moon Shadow." Public schools, too, are either Arab or Jew, separate and unequal. The Arab ones are falling apart while Jew schools get the goodies. Perhaps during parsha the old question comes up, "Why do they hate us so?"

Anyone with a brain could figure this out, so logically that would include a fair number of Jews. But then again, why answer that question when just asking it gets another handout in return?

That's good for Israel but not necessarily so much the U.S. Israel obviously looks after its own interest first and the U.S. should do the same. As as Israel gets the most aid per capita, my interest is proportionately large in ensuring that the U.S. gets its money's worth. As much as Jews would like, what is in their interest isn't necessarily equal to everyone elses, and there's a lot more everyone elses here. Now, if Jews want to open up the aliyah/bomb shelter rights to all Americans equally, that might even things out a bit. But I'm not holding my breath.