W obronie Perry'ego ,...

[Gość: sp;lit]

Na pocieche lajna pokroju manny_ramirez jest coraz mniej a takich jak ty i
ten pan w artykule coraz wiecej ,... Zio-nazizm to przezytek . Zeby ci bylo
razniej po metamorfozie podrzucam : "Zionism Has Exhausted Itself" , wywiad
z Amos Elon - Warte przeczytania ,...

uklony

============================================================================
A Ty Twoje islamskie wypowiedzi trzymaj na islamskich forach a tu sam sie
zachowuj jak przyzwoity polskopiszcy czlowiek a nie jakis mulla ze islamobadu
============================================================================

https://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/72,2.html?f=50&w=18930556&wv.x=1&v=2&s=0

===========================================================================

Under the Tuscan sun
======================

By Ari Shavit

Last Update: 23/12/2004 21:00

Once he was Israel's preeminent journalist, the chief chronicler of the
Israeli story. Now he is known throughout the world but has become nearly
anonymous here. After seven decades, Amos Elon is packing up his Jerusalem
apartment for a permanent mov

The young people at the news desk weren't quite sure who he was. The name
sounded familiar but they weren't sure from where. A few had heard about one
of his books. A few had once used another book as a textbook. But many people
don't really know who Amos Elon is. The man who was once the preeminent
journalist in Israel has been totally erased from the memory. The man who was
the chief chronicler of the Israeli story has ceased to register in the
Israeli consciousness. He is much better known to readers of the New York
Review of Books than to readers of Haaretz.

He was born in 1925, in Vienna, and immigrated to Mandatory Palestine with
his family in 1933. In the 1940s, he was one of Tel Aviv's prominent young
intellectuals - and was close to Uri Avnery and influenced by him. He wrote a
patriotic book about the War of Independence which he'd rather forget.

In the early 1950s, Amos Elon quickly became a star. For Haaretz, he wrote
several outstanding series of articles on subjects such as the rift among the
kibbutzim, the life of immigrants and the "second Israel" (the
underprivileged sectors of Israeli society). Elon became the protege of
Haaretz publisher and editor-in-chief Gershom Schocken, was sent to Europe
and later spent six years as Haaretz's Washington correspondent. In 1970, he
published his book, "The Israelis," which was an immediate international
success (it was published in English in 1971 as "The Israelis: Founders and
Sons"), and subsequently left the paper. In 1978, in wake of the peace
process with Egypt, he returned to Haaretz and remained with the paper until
1986.

In the small Italian village where he lives, Elon wrote his books about
Herzl, the Rothschild family and the history of German Jewry. The current
publication of the Hebrew version of "The Pity of it All: A Portrait of the
German-Jewish Epoch, 1743-1933" (which was published in English in 2002) is
coinciding with a significant biographical moment: Last month, Elon packed up
the apartment that he still kept in Jerusalem. Our conversation took place
among the piles of objects slated to be given away and the piles of books due
to be sent home, to Tuscany.

He looks much younger than his 79 years. He once wrote that Israeli faces
tend to wrinkle as if from a lot of gazing straight at the sun. His face,
however, is almost smooth.

If Elon has feelings, he keeps them hidden deep inside. At least outwardly,
he is serious, German, stern. A devotee of human rights but not overflowing
with brotherly love. Seemingly devoid of warmth and empathy, he is a man of
high standards. A man of high-level journalism and high culture. His
erudition is enviable.

A few of Elon's friends say something about him that he himself isn't ready
to admit: His decision to leave Israel essentially derives from deep despair.
From a sense that Israel doesn't have a chance. But it's also the man's
personality structure that has made him not want to belong. Not to
participate. To be an observer from a distance.

Maybe the young people at the news desk are right: Amos Elon doesn't interest
anyone here anymore. He's no longer relevant. But maybe they're wrong. And
not only because Elon is a supremely gifted journalist. Not only because the
international intelligentsia still perceives him as a thoughtful Israeli
voice. And not only because he is an inseparable part of the history of this
newspaper. But because Amos Elon epitomized an attitude that characterizes a
large part of the Israeli elite. In his words and his life, Amos Elon
expresses the deep aversion to the new Israel. The nationalistic, religious,
un-European Israel. This is apparently the reason why Amos Elon is leaving
us. He is turning back the clock, going back to being a European Jew.

Amos Elon, looking over the list of books you've written in the past decades -
"The Israelis," "Herzl," "The Rothschilds," "The Pity of It All" on German-
Jewish history - it's like the Zionist movie is being rewound; the whole
trajectory is from Israel backward.

Elon: "From Israel outward. And the reason is very simple. It's also related
to my leaving Haaretz. Nothing has changed here in the last 40 years. The
problems are exactly the same as they always were. The solutions were already
known back then. But no one paid attention to them. And I found myself
repeating them. I found myself saying the same thing all the time. And I
started to bore myself. The dialogue wasn't fruitful. It was a useless
dialogue. I was a lone voice in the wilderness."

Did you leave Haaretz and move to Tuscany to write historical books because
you were opposed to the occupation or because the whole Israeli experience
became unbearable to you?

"This place continues to be interesting and fascinating. It's in my blood to
this day. I get up in the morning in my home in Tuscany and listen to Israel
Radio and then I read Haaretz. But my feeling was that I couldn't say
anything here. Everything had already been said. And there's no true
dialogue. There's no suitable political development. But of course it's true
that it's impossible to live here without feeling some unease. And this
unease grows the worse the situation gets. And it has truly been getting
worse all these years."

Have you developed a feeling of alienation toward Israel?

"Not alienation. Disappointment. I have no common language with the people
who are at the top in politics. I think they're wrong. Their style repulses
me. And maybe there is alienation because I don't know them anymore. I'm not
involved with them. I used to know everyone. I used to be intimately
acquainted with them. And today it's a group that I don't know. And maybe
there is alienation because of the sharp rightward shift in Israel. Toward
the right and toward religion."

Do you find Israel to be barbaric, unenlightened, nationalistic?

"In Israel there's the `Gush Dan' state and the political state. The `Gush
Dan' state is a state of live-and-let-live. Of tolerance. Of the desire for
peace and a good life. But the political state, well, you know what it looks
like."

What does it look like?

"It's partly quasi-fascist and partly religious with narrow horizons."

Quasi-fascist?

"Quasi-fascist in the sense that abstract principles of religion are
dictating our fate without any democratic process. There are religious people
here who believe they've put their finger on the very essence of being. They
know everything. They're in direct contact with God."

You have some profound anti- religious sentiment.

"I'm not being original when I say that religion that enters politics is
dangerous. Such religious people would be better off behind bars and not in
politics. Certainly

[Gość: sp;lit]

You have some profound anti- religious sentiment.

"I'm not being original when I say that religion that enters politics is
dangerous. Such religious people would be better off behind bars and not in
politics. Certainly."

The critical mistake of `67 opened the door to dark forces that overwhelmed the
Israel to which you belonged, to which you felt a genuine closeness?

"There were two sources of the perversion: the mixture of religion with
political policy and the secular right's military adventurism. Force. The
worship of force. By the way, it hasn't only come from the Likud. It also came
from Ahdut Ha'avoda (the United Workers Party, a precursor of the Labor Party),
from people like Allon and Galili. Ahdut Ha'avoda always seemed to me to be a
party of farmers fighting over each piece of land with pitchforks."

And the result is that this place has corrupted itself?

"The occupation certainly corrupted Israeli society. There is no dispute about
that."

Has Israel slid into a situation that places it in a category other than the
democratic Western nations?

"Without a doubt. And I'm still wracking my brain wondering what those people
were thinking after the Six-Day War. How did they think they could keep it?
What did Dayan think? Did he really think that if we just treat them nicely,
everything will be fine? What provinciality it was. What historic ignorance.
Had this ever happened anywhere else in the world? From this perspective, the
Israeli occupation is perhaps the least successful attempt at colonialism that
I can think of. This is the crappiest colonial regime that I can think of in
the modern age."

How is it worse than French or British colonialism?

"In the French and British colonies, there were mixed marriages. In India, for
instance. But especially with the French. They're freer than the British are in
bed, that's well-known. But both the French and the British tried to co-opt the
elites. As a rule, whenever a European nation took over territory in the Third
World, it tried to embrace the elite. Here there was no such attempt. There
were no mixed marriages, there was no significant commercial cooperation. The
only human partnership was in the lowest dimension of all: crime."

What you're really saying is that there was Israeli political primitiveness.
That we didn't even have a colonialist civilization worthy of the name.

"Correct. There was provinciality here. There was this upstart's arrogance. I'm
not surprised when you look at the population. We know where it comes from.
Either from the Arab countries or from Eastern Europe. But on the political
level, this arrogance was manifested in a total forsaking of an embracing of
the elites. They didn't know it was even possible.

"I'm not saying that everything would have been solved if they'd done this co-
opting and married Palestinians. The intifada would have broken out in any
case. But maybe, if Israel had behaved differently, the Palestinian war of
independence would have been less bloody. Maybe it wouldn't have generated this
horrific death cult."

Won't the disengagement solve this? Won't it remove the curse of the Six-Day
War from us?

"I think that Sharon and Peres are perhaps the last statesmen here, and they're
both Mapainiks [Mapai was another precursor to the Labor party]. Mapainiks are
practical people who recognize that politics is the art of the possible and
recognize the limits of force. I think that both of them, very belatedly, are
demonstrating a degree of statesmanship that they didn't have before. But
Israel is leaving the Gaza Strip now not because they recognize that it belongs
to someone else, but because the occupation has become too messy. Because it's
impossible to maintain this way. It's not worth it. It's a cost-benefit
calculation. And I'm horrified by the fact that there are now 1.3 million
hopeless refugees in Gaza. Which is a powder keg that will explode. And Israel
is basically trying to get out of there now because it doesn't want to be
responsible for this explosion. But it will be responsible anyway."

What you're saying is that it's an illusion to think that the disengagement
will solve the problem.

"Of course it's an illusion. Gaza will explode. I think there will be a
terrible explosion there. That's why I still say today that the victory in the
Six-Day War was worse than a defeat."

You were the preeminent Israeli journalist. Respected, admired, well-connected.
In 1986, you left it all behind. When you look back, do you feel any regret?
Does it pain you that young Israelis don't even know your name?

"I miss the contact. It was good to be in contact. But on the other hand, I
haven't made a bad career. I'm a research fellow in New York. I appear all over
the world. And I live most of the year in Italy in my wife's house, which is
paradise. So even if someone were to offer me the job of Haaretz editor now,
I'd turn it down. I also wouldn't come back here to write."

So Israel and journalism are both beneath you now?

"I've gotten away from it. An American friend of mine says that journalism is
only for the young. My wife Beth, who didn't want me to leave Israel, said it's
true that journalism is for the young, but it also keeps you young. No, I
wouldn't go back to it now. I adore my rest, and the tranquility I live in now.
My nerves may be here, but I'm tired. And not so healthy. It's hard to believe,
but next year I'll be 80. I've had two heart surgeries and my memory isn't what
it used to be. Nor are my powers of concentration. So I prefer to be a
pensioner sitting on a mountain and gazing at the gorgeous view."

Basically, you've chosen to live in exile.

"To a certain extent, it's exile. For sure. I'm not Italian. Italian politics
doesn't interest me. I also miss my friends in Israel very much. I have some
very dear friends here. There, I don't have any friends like the ones I have
here. And I don't have an intensive intellectual contact there. But I'm an old
pensioner who's nearing 80. Now I want my peace and quiet."

Is Amos Elon a Zionist, a post-Zionist or an anti-Zionist?

"I definitely agree with the idea that there was a need to establish a state-of-
the-Jews in Israel for those Jews who want to live here. I also recognize the
right of Jews who don't want to live here not to do so. They're doing okay. And
in their daily life, they're refuting the Zionists' claim that they were doomed
to extinction.

"I think that Zionism has exhausted itself. Precisely because it accomplished
its aims. If the Zionism of today isn't a success story, it's the fault of the
Zionists. It's because of the religio-zation and Likudization of Zionism and
because what was supposed to be a state-of-the-Jews has become a Jewish state."

Or maybe you just can't identify with a state that isn't secular-European. I
want to remind you that in your classic book, "The Israelis," there are no
Sephardim or religious people or traditional people. The Israel you loved was
the secular-European Israel. Its others didn't really interest you.

"That argument is correct. But when I wrote `The Israelis,' it wasn't my
ambition to write a history of Israel. It wasn't my ambition to describe all of
Israeli society. I wrote about those that interested me."

That's exactly the point. The non-Europeans and non-secular don't interest you.
You wrote a book about the Israelis that excludes half the Israelis.

"You could make the same argument against the new book, `The Pity of It All.'
There are no poor Jews and hardly any religious Jews in it, either. The people
I write about are the secular, intelligent, successful, wealthy, brilliant
ones, the Nobel Prize winners. They're the ones who interest me. Other people
have written books about the rest."

Why don't you admit it:

[Gość: sp;lit]

Why don't you admit it: You're a European Jew who shows an interest only in
European Jews just like yourself. Your heart goes out solely to them.

"I don't have any self-consciousness as a European Jew. This description is
barely apt. I hardly think of myself as a Jew. As I see it, I'm an Israeli. An
Israeli of Jewish origin."

That's the definition? An Israeli of Jewish origin?

"I think so. But I have many other loyalties. I'm at home in American culture.
I write in Hebrew and English. I've also written a book in German. I have a
real kinship with German culture, absolutely."

Your book on German Jewry is written with caution and restraint and historical
matter-of-factness. But between the lines, you can sense a certain yearning.

"I like these people. I see myself as one of them. Therefore, I identify with
these people and with their struggle. I also identify with their terrible
tragedy, with the pain of how it all ended, how it ended in such a horrible
way."

But you insist that this end wasn't necessary. That, as you see it, the
Holocaust was not an inevitable event.

"I don't believe in deterministic processes. Aside from the Zionists, no one
believes in that anymore. Only the Zionists believe that the hatred of the
Jewish people throughout the ages will also continue in the future. But I'm
saying that it's not inevitable. That it could be different. There was nothing
fundamental in the relationship between German culture and German Jewry that
absolutely dictated this appalling end."

If that's so, then basically you believe that this thing could have continued
to survive. The option of the Jewish diaspora in Germany was the most promising
cultural option for Europe, in your opinion.

"Certainly. German Jewry was the secular elite of Europe. They were the essence
of modernism - leaders who made their livelihood from brainpower and not from
brawn, mediators and not workers of the land. Journalists, writers, scientists.
If it all hadn't ended so horribly, today we'd be singing the praises of Weimar
culture. We'd be comparing it to the Italian Renaissance. What happened there
in the fields of literature, psychology, painting and architecture didn't
happen anywhere else. There hadn't been anything like it since the Renaissance."

You refuse to see the fact that there was a basic failure in this enterprise of
secular European Jewry. You refuse to see that it couldn't last.

"I sincerely dispute that. I don't think there was something deep or
fundamental or unavoidable here. It was chance. If the First World War hadn't
destroyed Germany's liberal middle class, a very progressive nation would have
developed there. Even after the war, Hitler wasn't the only alternative."

You're really insistent on that. It's important to you to cling to the lost
option of the yekkes. The book you wrote is essentially a nostalgic ode to the
refined lost paradise of that Jewish Germany. In a certain sense, it is your
true homeland.

"No. I grew up here, not there. I grew up in Tel Aviv in a middle-class family
that lost its assets as a result of its emigration to Israel. My parents
arrived from Vienna in 1933. My father wanted to go to France but my mother
said it had to be Eretz Israel. And so we ended up in Eretz Israel. That's why
I am not an ideological Israeli. I did not grow up here out of choice. But I
did grow up here. Here is where I kissed a girl for the first time. And what is
a homeland if not the place where you kiss a girl for the first time?

"Yes, my parents' friends were all immigrants from Germany and Austria. The big
library at home was all German. And being a yekke [a Jew of German origin] was
difficult then. It was a derogatory word. So it was important to me to write
about the yekkes. Because in the past they didn't get such good press here. But
they were really the first free Jews. And the first Europeans. And they built a
civil society and believed obsessively in Bildung, which is self-improvement
through the fostering of social concerns. They were constantly working on self-
improvement. On self-refinement."

And on assimilation. Your book is a paean to the assimilationists.

"Yes, certainly."

Assimilation is a legitimate personal option. Perhaps it's even a fruitful one,
as your book describes, for a generation or two. But it's not a sustainable
option. In the third or fourth generation, the possibility of being an
assimilated Jew dissipates. The Jewish element of the identity disappears.

"So it dissipates. That doesn't concern me."

It doesn't concern you whether there will be some kind of future for the Jewish
people?

"The whole matter of Judaism as a nation is quite problematic. Apart from the
Zionists, no one argues that the Jews are a nation."

In your view, the Jews are not a nation?

"I don't think that they are one nation. I don't think so. It's a religion."

If so, then the problem is even worse. A Jew who isn't religious is basically
lacking an identity.

"Why must a person constantly define himself? Only doctrinaires demand that you
present your identity card all the time. I don't want Judaism to be a tattoo on
my forehead. And I can't say that I'm a Jew because I am a totally secular
person."

Let's leave the matter of identity aside. The possibility that in the future
there may not be a Jewish people or a Jewish civilization doesn't bother you?

"If people want to assimilate to the point that they disappear within the
general society without a trace - that's their right. I don't think it's a
tragedy. It's not the end of the world."

I want to go back to the journalist in you. Israel is a pretty major story. You
were the chief chronicler of this story. And now you've given it up.

"Yes, but I'm leaving behind an opus that's worth something. And I'm fortunate
enough to live in Tuscany on a hill that looks out on what may be the most
beautiful landscape in the world. Nothing has changed there in thousands of
years. And it's so beautiful that it melts your heart. So in the few years I
have left, I want to look at this view most of the days of the year. On other
days, I'll come to Israel and get mad."

You don't get mad in Italy?

"No. In Italy, I laugh."

You were a practitioner of serious, high-minded journalism. Do you think this
type of journalism is in danger of extinction today?

"Definitely. There's no doubt. What I did wasn't part of the entertainment
industry. Just the opposite. I spoiled people's moods. Nowadays, journalism all
over the world is becoming part of the entertainment industry. It's becoming a
circus. And in doing so it is forfeiting the constitutional role it had in a
free society. This role was to educate, not to entertain."

Does this process worry you?

"I lament it. Years ago, The Times of London was one of the most civilized
newspapers you could think of. You opened it in the morning and you felt like
some nice, intelligent uncle had sat down next to your bed to explain the world
to you. Today it's a tabloid. Sex, crime, gossip. And it's the same with The
Guardian and The Telegraph. Even The New York Times has become part of the
entertainment industry. Apart from the quality financial newspapers, the Neue
Zuercher Zeitung and the Frankfurter Allegemeine are practically the only
newspapers that haven't been overwhelmed by this process."

And in Israel?

"The evening papers are just headlines and pictures. They're tabloids. To me,
they're not newspapers. But Haaretz is a much better newspaper than it was in
my time. Much better. I think that Hanoch Marmari did wonders for the paper. He
managed to do at Haaretz exactly the opposite of what's happening at other
prestigious newspapers in the world. He made it bigger, more interesting,
cosmopolitan. Today it's one of the best papers in

[manny_ramirez]

A swoja droga podaj link bo chetnie poczytalbym to w oryginale

[Gość: sp;lit]

Today it's one of the best papers in the world, in my opinion. One of the few
good papers to have survived. But I'm afraid that this miracle won't last. If
they really get in trouble, they'll also be pushed toward entertainment. I'm
very worried about it. Very worried. Aren't you?"

[manny_ramirez]

You have some profound anti- religious sentiment.

"I'm not being original when I say that religion that enters politics is
dangerous. Such religious people would be better off behind bars and not in
politics. Certainly."

Wojujacy ateizm to taka sama religia jak kazda inna i na dodatek najbardziej ze
wszystkich nietolerancyjna

[manny_ramirez]

Split pozwol czytelnikom samym sobie decydowac kto jest lajnem a kto nie. A
rownajac zionizm z nazizmem to sam sobie wystawiasz najlepsza cenzurke

[manny_ramirez]

Quasi-fascist in the sense that abstract principles of religion are
dictating our fate without any democratic process.

A to zdanie wystawia najlepsze swiadectewo Twemu autorytetowi

Kzdy, w miare inteligentny czlowiek, wie z faszyzm i nazizm nie mialy
absolutnie nic wspolnego z jakokolwiek istniejaca religia

[Gość: sp;lit]

A twoj wpis swiadczy o twoim intelekcie , my friend ,... Facet twierdzi i ma
racje - Fundamentalizm religijny pozbawiony marginesu tolerancji jest samym w
sobie rodzajem Quasi-faszyzmu ,... Oczywiscie ty to widzisz tylko u Muslims :)

uklony

==============================================================================

Quasi-fascist in the sense that abstract principles of religion are
dictating our fate without any democratic process.

A to zdanie wystawia najlepsze swiadectewo Twemu autorytetowi

Kzdy, w miare inteligentny czlowiek, wie z faszyzm i nazizm nie mialy
absolutnie nic wspolnego z jakokolwiek istniejaca religia

[manny_ramirez]

Split moze mam duzo mniejsza inteligencje niz Ty ale nawet czlowiek z 200 IQ mi
nie udowodni ze faszyzm i nazizm mialy swe korzenie w jakiekolwiek religi. No
tak prawde ignorant jestem, bo prawda jednak ze bazowaly bo przeciez
oswieceniowy racjonalizm to tez przeciez nic innego tylko religia

dobrze by bylo zeby ludzie najpierw nauczyli sie czym faszyzm i nazizm naprawde
byly zanim zaczna przylepiac etykietki do ludzi. A chcialbym swoja droga abys
pokazal dzie ja rownalem islam z faszyzmem

aha a swoja droga to moglbys byc fair i dac tez te wpisy perrego gdzie
on "parchatych" wywalal z tego forum. zobaczyli by wtedy inni ze moje zdanie
ktore tak pieknie zacytowalas to tylko byla parafraza Perrego.

no i gdzie ten link do tego wywiadu?

kämpfe ich für das Werk des Herren

[Gość: Katarzyna]

Osobie, ktora do tej pory nie wie, ze narodowy-socjalizm mogl zaistniec tylko
dzieki religii, ktora z nigo zrobili nazisci nie pomoze nawet czlowiek z IQ
400.

Kazde powazniejsze zrodlo dotyczace narodowego socjalizmu opisuje religijny
aspekt tego ruchu i tylko ty niczego nie wiesz. Szkoda.

Nie trzeba przy tym wcale zbyt gleboko zaglebiac sie w materie. Wystarczy
tylko przypomniec sobie obrazy pochodow nazistow z pochodniami, wykwity kultu
osoby Hitlera, obrzadki i zakonny charakter "mnichow" SS, bezgraniczne i slepe
oddanie "wyznawcow", "msze" noymberskie itd. itd.

Narodowy socjalizm BYL sam w sobie religia zbudowanej po czesci na
chrzescijanstwie (nienawisc do Zydow) i w znacznie wiekszej mierze na zlepku
wierzen germanskich pogan.


„So glaube ich heute im Sinne des allmächtigen Schöpfers zu handeln: indem ich
mich des Juden erwehre, kämpfe ich für das Werk des Herren.“. Zitat A. Hitlers

"Wierze, ze postepuje dzis zgodnie z wola wszechmocnego stworzyciela:
broniac sie przed Zydem walcze w imieniu dziela bozego" Cytat Adolfa Hitlera


www.inidia.de/nationalsozialismus_und_religion.htm
www.uni-marburg.de/fb03/neu/vorles/ws03_04/suche/fuk/fukkaisw4_1.html
217.175.235.200/basisreligion/nationalsoz.htm
www.wissen24.de/vorschau/16521.html

[manny_ramirez]

jakbys przeczytala moje posty dokladnie to bys zobaczyla ze pisze prawie to
samo. pisalem wyraznie ze nazizm nie mial korzeni w zadne zorganizowanej
religii. wrecz przeciez wszystkie zwalczal.

upatrywac korzenie anty-semityzmu w chrzescijanstwie to takie uplycenie
historii Rezszy ze w ogole zal tracic czas na jakakolwiek dyskusje w tej sprawie

a ze nazizm byl religia to jest oczywiste--tylko ze wlasnie to miala byc
religia oparta na kompletnie innych fundamentach niz te istniejace. przywodcy
rzeszy to byli nie tylko anty-semici ale takze jednoczesnie i anty-
chrzescijanie, te istanijace religie chcieli zastapic swoja nowa oparta na
watkach poganskich i usprawdliwiona racjonalizmem

czemu sie przeciwstawiam to jakieklowiek probie szukania zrodel nazizmu w
chrzescijanstwie, takich nie bylo


a przytykanie etykietki faszysta do ludzi autentycznie reigijnych--mam na mysli
chrzescijan, to oznaka calkowitej ignorancji

[Gość: Katarzyna]

Nie uwazasz, ze to absurd pisac, ze narodowy socjalizm "nie mial korzeni w
zadnej religii" i rownoczesnie przyznawac, ze sam byl "religia"?

Narodowy socjalizm przejal i odgrzal na nowo caly swiat germansko-celtyckich
wierzen wzbogacajac go o elementy kultu przejete ze starozytnego Rzymu i
chrzescijanstwa. Jakze w takim wypadku mozna pisac, ze "nie mial korzeni w
zadnej religii"?

Dopatrywanie sie zwiazku miedzy chrzescijanstwem i antysemityzmem nie jest
uplycaniem niczego, tylko najoczywistszym faktem. Pogromy Zydow to (niestety)
tylko jedno z wielu przewinien chrzescijanstwa na przestrzeni wiekow.
Chrzescijanizm i jego wypaczenia nieodlacznie zwiazane byly z antysemityzmem.

To, ze Hitler chcial zwalczac inne religie rowniez niczego nie dowodzi. Czyz
zwalczanie innych religii w imie wlasnej to cos nowego?

[manny_ramirez]

nie, nie uwazam tego za absurd bo pisalem wyraznie ze nie mial korzeni w zadnej
zorganizowanej religii--chyba ze kulty poganskie uwazasz za
zinstytucjonalizowana religie==

"Narodowy socjalizm przejal i odgrzal na nowo caly swiat germansko-celtyckich
> wierzen wzbogacajac go o elementy kultu przejete ze starozytnego Rzymu i
> chrzescijanstwa."==calkowicie sie zgadzam, zobacz wyzej

oczywiscie ze "Dopatrywanie sie zwiazku miedzy chrzescijanstwem i
antysemityzmem nie jest
> uplycaniem niczego, tylko najoczywistszym faktem. " tylko uplycaniem jest
stwierdzenie ze nazisci odwolywali sie do chrzescijanstwa w swoim anty-
semityzmie, sprawa wielce watpliwa
ich anty-semityzm swe zrodla bardziej w darwinizmie niz jakiekolwiek religii

a Twe ostatnie zdanie absolutnie prawdziwe tylko nie ma nic do rzeczy. Ja nie
pisalem ze nazizm nie byl religia, wierze wrecz religijnie sam ze byl, tylko ze
nie mial zadnych korzeni w, ani nie odwlywal sie w ogole do, chrzescijanstwa.
wrecz je zwalczal

Mysle wrecz ze nasze poglady sa bardzo podobne w tej sprawie

[Gość: Katarzyna]

a co to za roznica, czy religia jest "zinstytucjonalizowana" czy nie? Czy
chrzescijanstwo w pierwszych stuleciach swego istnienia bylo
"zinstytucjonalizowane"? Czy brak "zinstytucjonalizowania" umniejsza w czyms
wartosc jakiejs religii?

A rozne formy kultow poganskich w roznych formach przetrwaly do dzis i maja sie
nie najgorzej. Nawet chrzescijanstwo nie bylo w stanie calkowicie uwolnic sie
od licznych jego form.

Hitler stworzyl swoja wlasna, nowa "religie" czerpiac z innych religii mniej
lub bardziej swiadomie wzorce. Rowniez glebolo zakorzeniony w chrzescijanstwie
(niestety) antysemityzm byl mu jak najbardziej na reke.

Przeczytaj jeszcze raz uwaznie cytat Hitlera, w ktorym swoja krucjate
przeciw "zlu" za jakie nie tylko on uwazal wowczys Zydow
dedykowal "wszechmocnemu" kimkolwiek by on tez byl....

Moje ostatnie zdanie - jak sam piszesz "prawdziwe" - ma owszem wiele do rzeczy.
To przeciez ty uzasadniales rzekomy brak "korzeni" narodowego socjalizmu w
innych religiach tym, ze zwalczal inne religie. Wedlug mnie to zaden argument.
Przedstawiciele niemal wszystkich religii majacych lub nie majacych "korzenie"
w innych religiach zwalczali kiedys inne religie.
Tak wiec fakt zwalczania innych religii nie dowodzi ani tego, ze cos jest lub
nie jest religia lub ma takie czy inne korzenie.

[Gość: sp;lit]

Pogromy Zydow , czyzby ? Rowniez , czarownic , innowiercow , wolno-myslicieli ,
reformatorow , jezuitow , astronomow , nauczycieli , and on , and on , and on .

Jak widzisz Zydzi nie maja monopolu na przesladowania zwiazane z dominujaca
religia w tamtych czasach i tu musze poprzec manny_ramirez , upraszczasz i
naginasz historie dla wlasnych potrzeb . Krotko mowiac , nie tylko splycasz
temat , ale robisz to z agenda ,... Dokopac kosciolowi !!!

uklony

==============================================================================

Dopatrywanie sie zwiazku miedzy chrzescijanstwem i antysemityzmem nie jest
uplycaniem niczego, tylko najoczywistszym faktem. Pogromy Zydow to (niestety)
tylko jedno z wielu przewinien chrzescijanstwa na przestrzeni wiekow.
Chrzescijanizm i jego wypaczenia nieodlacznie zwiazane byly z antysemityzmem.

[Gość: Katarzyna]

Gość portalu: sp;lit napisał(a):

> Pogromy Zydow , czyzby ? Rowniez , czarownic , innowiercow , wolno-
> myslicieli ,reformatorow , jezuitow ,

Czyzbys chcial zaprzyczyc zwiazku kosciola w tym wszystkim? Czyzbys nalezal do
tych, ktorzy twierdza, ze kosciol w Europie nie ma sobie nic do zarzucenia?

[Gość: sp;lit]

Napisalem wyraznie : W tamtych czasach i nie imputuj ze tylko Zydzi cierpieli .

uklony

=============================================================================

w tamtych czasach

[Gość: Katarzyna]

W ktorym miejscu i w jaki sposob "imputuje" ze tylko Zydzi cierpieli?

Czy podobnie jak Rachelka widzisz rzeczy, ktorych nie ma?

[Gość: sp;lit]

Wymienilas jeszcze kogos ?

uklony

[Gość: Katarzyna]

a dlaczego mialabym? Nienawisc do Zydow byla centralnym aspektem "religii"
Hitlera i o tym tutaj dyskutujemy!

Czy jesli bedziemy dyskutowac o grzybach i napisze , ze "grzyby zbierano w
Europie juz od najwczesniejszych czasow" to "zasugeruje" tym, ze nie zbierano
niczego innego?

[Gość: rachelka]

Nie "tym nas karmi EU", tylko takie sa fakty. Zydow palono i mordowano w
Europie od najwczesniejszych czasow.
Czy chcesz moze powiedziec, ze kosciol chrzescijanski nie mial w Europie nic
wspolnego z nienawiscia do Zydow i ich pogromami?

no nie ma to jak twoje obiektywne widzenie swiata. pomimo pogromow kosciola
zydzi mogli egzystowac w europie i polsce dosyc dlugo, gorzej chyba z ta
egzystencja innych nacji w obrebie wspolczesnego panstwie izrael. i o to mi
chodzi. nie jestescie bez winy,wiec nie rob z tego narodu jedynych cierpietnikow
ludzkosci.

[Gość: sp;lit]

Tym was teraz EU karmi ? Trudno sie dziwic , ostatecznie Chrzescijanstwo , a w
szczegolnosci Katolicyzm "polozyl" komune ,... Swiadomi tego , ze moze polozyc
nastepna dyktature (w bialych rekawiczach) probuja zapobiec temu zawczasu .

Zapominasz ze dzieki gleboko wierzacej chrzescijanskiej Ameryce , Europa nie
musiala sie "uczyc" niemieckiego czy rosyjskiego , bo tylko takie alternatywy
zostaly ,... Hitler , albo Stalin ,... Jeden warty drugiego .

uklony

==============================================================================

Narodowy socjalizm BYL sam w sobie religia zbudowanej po czesci na
chrzescijanstwie (nienawisc do Zydow) i w znacznie wiekszej mierze na zlepku
wierzen germanskich pogan.

[Gość: Katarzyna]

Nie "tym nas karmi EU", tylko takie sa fakty. Zydow palono i mordowano w
Europie od najwczesniejszych czasow.
Czy chcesz moze powiedziec, ze kosciol chrzescijanski nie mial w Europie nic
wspolnego z nienawiscia do Zydow i ich pogromami?

[Gość: rachelka]

Gość portalu: Katarzyna napisał(a):

> Nie "tym nas karmi EU", tylko takie sa fakty. Zydow palono i mordowano w
> Europie od najwczesniejszych czasow.
> Czy chcesz moze powiedziec, ze kosciol chrzescijanski nie mial w Europie nic
> wspolnego z nienawiscia do Zydow i ich pogromami?

o ile wiem,nie tylko zydow palono w dawnych czasach,a w czasie II wojny palono
wszystkich. Papierz o ile mi wiadomo przyjechal do Izraela po to aby sie
pojednac,i to byl wielki gest. Pamietam dobrze,jak wiele rabinow plulo na Niego
mimo faktu wyciagniecia reki,ale wielu mowilo,ze czas sie pojednac i myslec o
przyszlosci. I ty to zrob,gdyz ciagle zycie przeszloscia i obrzucanie sie blotem
niczemu nie sluzy. Swiat wspolczesny widzi rowniez,co sie na Bliskim Wschodzie
dzieje,kto kogo okupuje i w jaki sposob, a wiec nikt nie jest bez winy.

[Gość: Katarzyna]

Gość portalu: rachelka napisał(a):

> o ile wiem,nie tylko zydow palono w dawnych czasach

A czy napisalam gdzies cos, co by temu zaprzeczalo? Gdzie?
Czytaj uwazniej.

[Gość: rachelka]

Nie "tym nas karmi EU", tylko takie sa fakty. Zydow palono i mordowano w
Europie od najwczesniejszych czasow.

zamiast sie ciskac na mnie sprawdz co piszesz sama. nie ma tu wzmianki,ze nie
tylko zydow palono, a sugerujesz przez swoje slowa,ze oni byli jedynymi
ofiarami,stad moj komentarz. jak juz pisalam nie warto jezdzic na tym wysokim
koniu,bo nikt nie ma czystego sumienia, a wyciaganie brudow jednej stronie w
czasach,gdy tyle rzeczy sie dzieje w Izraelu jest conajmniej jednostronne, i
bede tu poprawnie grzeczna.

[Gość: Katarzyna]

Gość portalu: rachelka napisał(a):

> nie ma tu wzmianki,ze nie tylko zydow palono, a sugerujesz przez swoje
> slowa,ze oni byli jedynymi ofiarami,

To kompletny absurd!
Co w mojej wypowiedzi "sugeruje", ze Zydzi byli "jedynymi ofiarami"?
"Zydow palono i mordowano w Europie od najwczesniejszych czasow"

Czy jesli napisze, ze "w Europie zbierano grzyby od najwczesniejszych czasow"
to "sugeruje" tym, ze nigdy nie zbierano niczego innego?


Jestes przewrazliwiona i widzisz rzeczy, ktorych po prostu nie ma.

[Gość: sp;lit]

Facet nigdzie nie twierdzi ze faszyzm i religia maja wspolne korzenie ,
porownuje je do siebie z racji podobienstwa ,... Braku tolerancji , to wszystko

Podalem co mi sie podoba , w jednym zdaniu popelniasz dwie gafy ,... Odnosisz
sie bez respektu do innego niz twoje wyznanie i wtykasz komus sympatyzowanie z
kims do kogo sie nie przyznaje , tylko dlatego , ze nie mysli po twojej linii .

Przeprosisz jego , a ja odszczekam to "lajno" ,... Deal ?

uklony

==============================================================================
A Ty Twoje islamskie wypowiedzi trzymaj na islamskich forach a tu sam sie
zachowuj jak przyzwoity polskopiszcy czlowiek a nie jakis mulla ze islamobadu
==============================================================================

Split moze mam duzo mniejsza inteligencje niz Ty ale nawet czlowiek z 200 IQ mi
nie udowodni ze faszyzm i nazizm mialy swe korzenie w jakiekolwiek religi. No
tak prawde ignorant jestem, bo prawda jednak ze bazowaly bo przeciez
oswieceniowy racjonalizm to tez przeciez nic innego tylko religia

dobrze by bylo zeby ludzie najpierw nauczyli sie czym faszyzm i nazizm naprawde
byly zanim zaczna przylepiac etykietki do ludzi. A chcialbym swoja droga abys
pokazal dzie ja rownalem islam z faszyzmem

aha a swoja droga to moglbys byc fair i dac tez te wpisy perrego gdzie
on "parchatych" wywalal z tego forum. zobaczyli by wtedy inni ze moje zdanie
ktore tak pieknie zacytowalas to tylko byla parafraza Perrego.

no i gdzie ten link do tego wywiadu?

www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/518402.html

[manny_ramirez]

nie mam zamiaru za nic przepraszac

zadnej gafy nie popelnilem, a ty popelniasz teraz czysta nieuczciwosc bo dobrze
wiesz ze moje zdanie to byla tylko i wylacznie parafraza perrego,


wiec jak przekonasz perrego zeby przeprosil zydow za parchatych to wtedy
bedziemy mogli dalej dyskutowac a teraz pa

wiesz, ze na nie jestem zlosliwy...

[Gość: J.K.]

wspierasz sie haaretz-em...
to bezproduktywne....
w Izraelu jest w koncu demokracja.

komentuj decyzje rzadu izraelskiego - to bedzie mialo jakis sens.

jezeli bedziesz komentowal opinie, opozycyjnej gazety,
bedziesz krecil sie w kolko.

to tak po starej sympatii..

[Gość: sp;lit]

You got to be kidding ,... Right ???

uklony

=============================================================================

w Izraelu jest w koncu demokracja.

[Gość: sp;lit]

He , he - Jedyna w swoim rodzaju , quasi :))) Nie chcialbys zyc w tej calej ,
(jak ty ten twor nazywasz) demokracji , bedac jednym z przedstawicieli
mniejszosci narodowych , nie mowiac , Palestynczykiem . Opozycji rezimu tez
skutecznie zatykaja mordy ,...

A wiesz chociaz jak dziala mechanizm demokracji ?

to tak po starej sympatii.. :)


uklony

==============================================================================
wspierasz sie haaretz-em...to bezproduktywne.... w Izraelu jest w koncu
demokracja.
==============================================================================

Last Update: 30/12/2004 18:31

Ramat Gan forbids posters denouncing deputy chief of staff

By Lily Galili, Haaretz Correspondent

Large posters calling for the dismissal of Israel Defense Forces Deputy Chief
of Staff Major General Dan Halutz were displayed in Jerusalem on Thursday in
the kick-off to a campaign headed by the Yesh Gvul organization and the Public
Committee Against Torture in Israel.

The posters bore a picture of Halutz, former commander of the Israel Air Force,
and text reading: "Fly Halutz home - restore the IDF's combat ethics." Ramat
Gan refused to allow the posters to be displayed on municipally-owned
billboards.

The groups plan to hang 1,300 posters around the country.

The two organizations, together with a number of public figures, are waging
their campaign based on Halutz's part in the Israel Air Force operation to
assassinate Hamas leader Salah Shehadeh, in which a one-ton bomb was dropped in
a residential neighborhood of Gaza City, and killed 14 people, many of them
children.

The petitioners argue that Halutz, who was at the time the commander of the
IAF, should be barred from holding a senior position in the IDF.

The activists plan to display the posters in other cities around the country
next week. Ramat Gan, however, refused to allow their display.

Haifa, Ramat Hasharon and Rehovot agreed to allow the posters to be displayed
on municipal billboards. Tel Aviv has postponed making a decision on whether or
not to allow display of the posters.

Jerusalem allow the posters' display only after Yesh Gvul's lawyer, Yossi
Arnon, sent the city a letter indicating the municipality had no legal right to
forbid their posting.

Yesh Gvul announced that it would take legal action against cities that refuse
to allow display of the posters. An organization spokesman said the campaign is
not focusing specifically on Halutz but rather on the "automatic immunity
granted to senior IDF officers who direct actions that are liable to be
described as war crimes."

Ten of the people who signed the "pilots letter," in which they refused to
carry out assignments in the territories, petitioned the High Court of Justice
on Sunday morning - along with members of Yesh Gvul and leading academic and
literary figures - to demand the court block Halutz's appointment as the IDF's
deputy chief of staff.

The petition supplements a High Court request filed six months ago by Yesh Gvul
and five literary figures asking that the Court order the IDF Advocate General
and the Government Attorney General to launch a criminal investigation into the
killing of the children in the assassination of Shehadeh. This earlier request
has yet to be reviewed by the Court.

The petitioners include former minister Shulamit Aloni, former Attorney General
Michael Ben-Yair, and Hebrew University of Jerusalem professors Ze'ev Sternhell
and Yaron Ezrahi.

The petitioners write that "Halutz is responsible for one of the most grave
acts in the IDF's history." Appointing him deputy chief of staff before a
criminal investigation of the Gaza bombing is carried out would be illegal,
they claim.

www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/521352.html

[rattler]

A tutaj wypowiedz madrego czlowieka na temat tej calej izraelskiej demokracji ,
nic dodac nic ujac - Right to the point .

narazie

---------------------------------------

How can an ethno-religious supremacy that is also a colonial power ever qualify
as a democracy? Israel may be a democracy for its Jewish citizens, but it is an
apartheid for its Palestinian citizens, as argued earlier. New York University
professor Tony Judt, for instance, calls Israel a "dysfunctional anachronism,"
categorizing it among the "belligerently intolerant, faith-driven ethno states."

-----------------------------------------

w Izraelu jest w koncu demokracja.

[rattler]

Facet bebeszy fundamenty zio-nazizmu - Punkt po punkcie obnaza syf jaki drazy
ten sztuczny organizm - Dobry artykul !!!

narazie