Rue

I am sorry you have to libe to see a young Canadian trying to re-write what happened and suggest Zionists and Nazis collaborated in some elaborate conspiracy and Zionists worked to prevent Jews from escaping the holocaust to other countries if it wasn't Palestine. I tried by best to pre-empt the hatred I saw coming. The sad thing is other than JBG I doubt anyone cares.

I now must respond to Buffy and her quoting Ben Gurion out of context. Buffy you quote; “If I knew that it was possible to save all the children in Germany by transporting them to England, but only half of them by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second—because we face not only the reckoning of those children, but the historical reckoning of the Jewish people.” Why don't you tell people where you pulled this quote from and why it was being quoted and by who. Tell people where you lifted the quote from because correct me if I am wrong you took it off one of the many hate sites such as the ones I listed in my earlier response did you not? More to the point why don't you even read the above quote. It wasn't a literal statement. It was a metaphorical statement. Of course you would have known that had you bothered to actually read the speech it comes from instead of lifting it from a hate site. See that's what happens when you lift quotes out of context because you have no clue where they really come from and what Ben Gurion was actually alluding to. In fact Buffy had you bothered to find out what actually happened you would know the "Zionists" were part of a very active underground often aligned with the Serbs who smuggled as many Jews as they could to Israel. You would also know an arrangement was made to exchange British prisoners of war for 5000 Jewish children but the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem living in Berlin as Hitler's guest interceded and made sure those 5,000 Jewish children were exterminated because he feared they would end up in Israel. But things like historic detail do they even interest you Buffy when they don't fit your agenda? "Keep in mind that the World Zionist Organisation discouraged countries from accepting the Jews, since they wanted them to go to Israel (then of course British Mandate Palestine). " Again Buffy if you are going to quote the hate lines I listed and Mr. Brenner or others who have a blatant anti-Zionist, anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli agenda then at least try keep in mind what they state is not a reliable source and that is why you have no reference for it from a credible history text. Its a subjective opinion that comes from Mr. Brenner who got it from Stalin's boys. Go read. Go do what I do. Go into the library and do what I did and what JBG is asking of me. Go into the archives and read what Stalin's proganda unit wrote about Zionists during world war two as I did and then compare it as I did to what Mr. Brenner now writes before you quote him. Its not only fabricated its not even original. Here is the point Buffy, of course the Zionist organization wanted Jews going to Israel but are you suggesting they prevented Jews from going elsewhere knowing they would die? What kind of bullshit is that Buffy? Of course the Zionist underground smuggled Jews wherever they could. They smuggled them anywhere they could where there were no Nazis or Axis occuped or allied countries. For you to suggest they discouraged this is absolute and utter bullshit-it sugests Jews would kill fellow Jews if they could not get them to Israel. That is just not true, history has proven what the Zionist underground did. You can try deny it or twist it, but that won't change it Buffy. "The Zionists and the National Socialists were pretty much on the same page for a long time leading up to the onset of WW2 and even for a while during it." I specifically addressed this lie knowing you would pick up on Keng's nonsense and try defend it. "Don't kid yourselves. You like Keng know the real truth right? "Here is a review (I don't know who the reviewer is, I just grabbed this off google - as I was thinking of Brenners tireless work exposing the links between the Zionist elites and the Nazis)." Man oh man. Go on Buffy. Go back and read what I wrote before you just happened to find this web-site you got from the one I listed. Brenner is not an historian and his "tireless work", as you now romanticize it is based on his subjective opinions and having gone into Stalins archives and repeating what an East German propaganda officer in the Stasni was asked to fabricate for Stalin on this alleged Zionist connection. As usual Buffy the smoking gun you quote is fabricated drivel and you would have known that if instead of simply googling hate sites looking for anti-Zionist rhetoric you further investigated who Brenner is. One thing is for sure, you are predictable. " Brenner isn’t the first writer to address the mostly taboo subject of how the Zionist leadership cooperated with the Nazis. Rolf Hilberg’s seminal “The Destruction of European Jews”; Hannah Arendt’s “Eichmann in Jerusalem”; Ben Hecht’s “Perfidy”; Edwin Black’s “The Transfer Agreement”; Francis R. Nicosia’s “The Third Reich and the Palestine Question”; Rudolf Vrba and Alan Bestic’s “I Cannot Forgive”; and Rafael Medoff’s “The Deadening Silence: American Jews and the Holocaust,” also dared, with varying public success." Interesting how none of the above is an historian accepted in the historic community as having stated anything valid and all were completely dismissed as hate journalists with the exception of Hanah Arendt and had you bothered to read the book you now quote from Brenner's comments, you would know she never at any time suggested Zionists collaborated with Nazis. "After the Holocaust began in 1942, Eichmann dealt regularly with Dr. Rudolf Kastner, a Hungarian Jew, whom he considered a “fanatical Zionist.”" Again Buffy you quote from hate literature. The fact that Kastner tried to save Jews from their deaths does not mean he collabiorated with Eichman and you would know that if you did something other than make assumptions from paraphrasing hate sites. The fact that Jewish representatives had to talk to Nazis to try save Jews does not mean they collaborated with them as part of this elaborate Zionist plot. "Kastner was later assassinated in Israel as a Nazi collaborator." He was the subject of hatred because it was felt by some he did not save enough Jews, while other Jews felt he was a hero for saving the ones he managed. He was not assassinated as you neatly try to suggest simply because he collaborated with Nazis. He died because tragically he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't and some holocaust survivors such as the one who killed him felt he betrayed them. If he tried to negotiate to save Jews he was seen as a sell out assisting the Nazis kill Jews, but if he didn't didn't negotiate,Jews would have died as well. For you to try twist this as evidence of a Zionist plot is just plain nasty. Do me a favour Buffy, your lecturing on what happened in Hungary to Jews based on your sudden googled expertise is just absolutely wrong not just because its past the point of simplistic black and white contextualizing by people with a specific agenda but because it has nothing to do with what actually happened so stop. You have no right to lecture anyone on what happened to Hungarian Jews. Stop trying to act like you are the authority on something you have made no attempt to research. "Readers, too, will be surprised to learn, that after the Nuremberg Anti-Jewish Race Laws were enacted in Sept., 1935, that there were only two flags that were permitted to be displayed in all of Nazi Germany. One was Hitler’s favorite, the Swastika. The other was the blue and white banner of Zionism. The Zionists were also allowed to publish their own newspaper." Absolute and utter bullshit. Completely fabricated and it never happened Buffy but that is precisely what happens when you quote people quoting proganda officers whose mandate it is to create false stories. Stop and think Buffy. They were exterminating 6 million Jews while you claim this was happening. " The reasons for this Reich-sponsored favoritism was, according to the author: The Zionists and the Nazis had a common interest, making German Jews emigrate to Palestine." There we have it. Nazis were misunderstood. Never mind those gas chambers and elaborate railroad tracks. This is precisely what happens when people too young to understand what happened and make no effort to find out instead live their world through the inter-net's hate sites. "As early as June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation was sending a secret memorandum to the Nazis, which said, in part: “It is our opinion that an answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state [German Reich] can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims as a social, cultural and moral renewal of Jewry- -indeed, that such a national renewal must first create the decisive social and spiritual premises for all solutions...”" This is a classic example of how a document is removed from its actual context and given a new meaning by people like you to fit your agenda. First off, The memorandum was not secret it was public Buffy. You would know that had you bothered to read something other then the hate line you lifted it from. You would also know that this was an attempt to try convince the Nazis not to persecute Jews and there was nothing sinister about it and for you Buffy to suggest Zionists trying to convince Hitler not to persecute Jews is a sinister zionist plot with Nazis is hateful and motivated is it not by your agenda which needs to demonize Zionists? This is what it has come to right Buffy? You defending the Kengs of this planet and relying on googling hate sites to try suggest Nazis had an alliance with Zionists.

Keng why don't you respond directly to what I say and what you said? What kind of person avoids responding to what he's said and tries to keep avoiding what he's said and try pretend he's said something else? You ever going to respond to me directly or is that all you can do Keng spew hatred then try deny what you said? In regards to your latest comments; "I'm not sure where you get "turned away far more" from. Did Canada actually turn away many boat-loads full of Jews yet at the same time let known Jews arrive in smaller groups among other eastern European immigrants? " Some of us Keng read. We bother to read and learn about the history of their country. Until you do you wil make such comments such as "I'm not sure where you get..." perhaps Keng if you did something other then read neo-nazi and christian hate inter-net sites you might find there is a world other then the selective one you live in. "Such utter nonsense. " Precisely. You demonstrate time and time again your comments are based on you making things up as you go along. "Excluding non-believers is not "discriminatory" from Christian communities; non-believers will only try to undermine and corrupt Christianity, and that's exactly what has been happening for some time now. " Everytime you open your mouth and utter your judgement of who and who is not Christian you discriminate. "That's exactly what you're doing. And of course when someone subjects your faith to the same rigorous criticism, what is your response? Antisemitism." Rigourous criticism? You have not once on any post provided a reference or source for anything you have said. You don't even have the integrity to say what denomination you claim to be a member of! Now you pose as some who has delivered rigious criticism? "Well, you can call it whatever you want, but the NT makes it clear who's really right and who's really wrong." There we have it. Keng has got it all figured out. There are "right" people and "wrong" people and how does he know this, cause Jesus tells him so. But hey don't worry Keng doesn't think he's disciminating when he says this. "So you can make up whatever arguments you want and call people all the names you can think of, it really makes no difference in the end for you." Interesting this coming from a man who claims only to hate the sin not the sinner but has no problem threatening people with damnation. "To suggest, though, that the government of Canada was solely governed by Christian values is pretty ignorant." The depth of you ignorance just flows. Keng pick up a history book and find out how this country was created and what role Christianity played in the governments of the day. "Immigration policy was largely dictated by secualr economic and racial principles." Again you spew out a subjective opinion which is not based on anything other then what you fabricated. In fact immigration policy was for many years dictated on the principle that if someone was not Christian they could not come to the country. It was never just based on economics or race and if you bothered to read about the history of Canada's immigration policy you would know that. "Nowhere did I "suggest" that the Nazis "did not exterminate Jews". You specifically did. You made a comment that Jews collaborated with the Gestapo and then ooenly asked if the Gestapo was helping Jews, why would it be suggested they were exterminating them. You stated it Keng and I have quoted your statement back to you and you know what you stated and why you asked the question you did. This game of trying to deny what you stated and acting innocent has worn thin. Interesting for someone who never suggested the Gestapo was benevolvent to Jews and was not trying to exterminate them yo; now state; "I'm saying that initially there was actually an attempt to remove Jews from Germany--that means that Jews who were still alive were sent to other parts of the world, and seeing that there were only a few hundred thousand within Germany itself, this could have been accomplished." Again Keng you spew. The above is historically absolutely incorrect. Jews were not sent to other parts of the world. What happened is they fled often without passports and with everything stolen from them. They had to flee illegally or after paying huge brives. They were not "sent" like it was some peaceful bye bye. Why were they event "sent" Keng? Can you ven attempt to try address that question? "..when Britain and France declared war on the Nazis after they invaded Poland to win back land that was, it could be argued, rightfully Germany's in the first place." Again I can only summize you get the little knowledge you think you are sharing from neo-Nazi hate lines. "The declaration of war meant that attempts to remove Jews from Germany were much more difficult to undertake;" It actually became easier because now the Nazis could build elaborate rail road systems in many nations nations including Germany to remove Jews. " With the invasion of Russia, this is situation was further exaserbated, which is why in 1942 it was decided to "eliminate" the Jews. " The word is exasperated and Hitler did not decide to eliminate Jews because he invaded countries and went -ooh look guys there are lots of Jews let's kill them. "I'm NOT saying that I agree with this; I'm just relating how the situation evolved from the Nazi perspective. " Again Keng if you were speaking from the Nazi perspective you would in fact be quoting Mein Kempf or the thousands of other documents calling on the extermination of all Jews as a final solution not because Germany did not know what to do with them, but because Nazi Germany felt they knew exactly how they should deal with them and planned it with great care and deliberation to assure maximum death efficiency. "I've never, ever denied that a mass killing of Jews and other "undesireables" happened; just like I don't deny that other mass killings have occured, ie. in the Soviet Union, the Japanese in China, etc." No you just state Jews are undesireables as you did above. You just can't stop it from spewing can you Keng. Oh it was an accident referring to Jews as undesireables right Keng? "Well, apparently that's what happened; and if that's what happened, then apparently it's the "kind of mind" that is concerned with the truth. Again, I haven't denied or "dismiss[ed]" the mass killing of Jews and other "undesireables"." No you but you manage to twice now refer to Jews as undesireables not to mention prove to everyone that you simply fabricate history to suit what ever agenda it is you think you are now pursuing. "Again, I haven't denied or "dismiss[ed]" the mass killing of Jews and other "undesireables"." Say now, is it just me or is this your third denial and reference to Jewsl as undesireables... "Incidently, many Christians were killed by the Nazis, and along with other non-Jewish victims of the Nazi regime, probably numbered in the millions." Interesting for someone who infers he is a Jehova's Witness or 7th Day Adventist with his lecturing how he is a member of a denomination that distances itself from the state and most Christian mainstream churches, but has no clue the numbers of wither group that died in the holocaust and bluffs his way along with "probably numbered" because again you simply make up as you go along. The only reason you state what you do above is to trivialize the meaning of the holocaust to Jews. Its transparent, its pathetic, and its hateful. "Sad to say that I have often heard Jews only refer to only the Jewish victims of Nazism." I doubt you have ever had a conversation with Jews about the holocaust or anything else. In fact I doubt you have ever met a Jew. I also think you invented the above incident to try justify your hatred of Jews, no more no less. Anyone who has ever spoken to Jewish holocaust suirvivors or Jews when they educate about the hiolocaust or has been with Jews commemorating the holocaust or knows anything about the holocaust education programs created by Jews would know when Jews refer to the holocaust, i.e., in any ceremony particularly during the rememberance service held once a year-we specifically mention the non Jews who died in the holocaust and remember them as well. Yad Vashem, the holocaust memorial in Jerusalem, and the Holocaust Memorial in Washington, D.C.., and the holocaust studies programs at all universitspecifically mention and discuss the killings of others such as the Romanoes ,7th day Adventists. gays, the disabled, communists, etc. Our prayers commemorate these dead and do not distinguish them from Jews. "I suppose that could be construed as an "insult" in a way, don't you think?" Now Keng suggests Jews insult Christians when they discuss the holocaust. Of course he means "true Christians". There is no limit to the Jew baiting Keng will lower himself to.

Generalizing as to all pacificists is dumb as their motives may not be the same. Some pacifists are probably moral and realistic others hypocritical and self-serving. It all depends on the situation they are reacting or not reacting to. Which brings us to the next question-unless you know what the scenario is, how do you go about constructing your moral judgement on the person(s) you feel is being passive to it?

In response to Leafless: "Latimer DOES NOT OWN HIS DAUGHTER." That is precisely why he set her free. "If he could not handle her situation, allow someonelse to do it. " He could handle her situation, it was the medical and now legal communities that can't The medical community told him, time and time again they could not treat his daughter and they had NO facilities or treatments for her. " Latimer is not God." He never claimed to be how about you with your sanctimonious pronoucements? "Latimer plain and simple murdered his daughter." With your cognitive processes I would imagine many things seem simple. One day you will be sitting and dying and faced with pain that won't end-pray you are not dependent on someone who has your views and values. "those quickest to pronounce others as weak are the first to demand the strength of others to sustain them" Lato Tzu "yah yah I'm going to hell, but I can guarantee you I'm the first face he will see when he dies not Jesus" Jackie Mason

I wish to address specifically an anti-semitic myth keng posted on this forum when he suggested the Gestapo (Nazis)collaborated with Zionists. He stated and I quote; " The Nazis really convinced many people that they simply didn't want Jews in the country anymore; even the Gestapo cooperated with Zionists in getting Jews to Palestine. If they wanted to exterminate Jews, why do that? " The desire of Jews wanting to return to their homeland existed long before the Nazis and the holocaust. The Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Mandate to establish a Jewish national home in Palestine were issued decades before the Holocaust. The actual myth Keng tries to promulgate as to a Zionist-German connection was reconstituted and recirculated by a Marxist, Lenni Brenner. Kind of ironic a true Christian like Keng is now quoting communists, the same people he claims persecute his religion. Lennie Brenner' works are actually regurgitated copies of original docrtine origination from Stalin's propganada ministry. Brenner wrote a book, "Zionism in the Age of the Dictators" and he at points simply repeats verbatum what the Stalin propaganda Ministry created including passages from East German propagandist Klaus Polkehn. Its not even hidden. But this is what makes anti-semitic myths interesting. They get picked up on a wide and diverse set of groups who all have on thing in common-a need to deny the holocaust and promulgate hate about Jews. For example take a look at this list of hate web sites to see how each will take Brenner's work, and run with it, but all have their own political agendas; http://www.scripturesforamerica.org/html2/jm0100a.htm http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres6/BAZO.pdf http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/ch12.htm http://globalfire.tv/nj/03en/jews/zionazis.htm http://www.rense.com/general43/hist.htm http://www.harunyahya.com/books/social/hol...violence_01.php http://www.savethemales.ca/001764.html http://www.lastsuperpower.net/docs/nzc10zi...mingermany/view http://www.rense.com/general40/zionn.htm This myth actually comes out of the holocaust inversion technique created by the Nazis in Syria post world war Two in which they portray Israelis and Jews as Nazis. It was provided to the Mufti of Jerusalem who then trained Yasir Arafat on how to use it and it is widely dissemenitated on Middle East t.v. networks in Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iran to name but a few media outlets. In its current versions the premises for Nazi-Zionist collaboration is created by taking alleged quotes from various "Zionist" representatives. Any negotiation or attempt by Jewish leaders to ecure the safety and passage of Jews is then defined as proof of “collaboration.” A classic example is by taking a letter of the Zionist Association for Germany (ZVfG) written in June 1933 and then suggesting its proof Zionists supported Nazi seizure of power in Germany and it was published in an article in al-Musawwar, on 16 January 1998 . Muslim "scholars Anan Bardji and Fathi Amar, presented a paper quoting Alfred Rosenberg’s piece, "The Track of the Jews in Changing Times (1919)" as evidence that the enforced emigration of German Jews to Palestine was a central aim of the Nazi movement and this was published in al-Mauqif, vol. 127 [1998] and al-’Arabi 19 January 1998. Rosenberg a famous anti-semitic Nazi was also at one point part of a myth spread that he was Jewish also a complete fabrication. What is absolutely absurd about this piece is that if you read Rosenberg’s writings they in fact manifest violent hatred towards Jews( völkische Bewegung) and yet this is argued as proof of a basis for Nazi-Zionist cooperation! Another deliberate lie and myth used to propagate the Nazi-Zionist connection is by making reference to the “Haavara” agreement of August 1933. That agreement allowed a number of German Jews to emigrate to Palestine. So it then inspired Zahr ad-Din Background on p.107 not to mention Stalin propagandists and neo-Nazis to all use this agreement to argue the German Ministry of Economic Affairs which organized the necessary financial transfers was involved in an elaborate Zionism conspiracy. Sharif ash-Shubashi and Ahmad ‘Abd al-Ma’ata Hidjazi, two more Muslim"scholars" claimed Zionists collaborated with Nazis in regards to Jewish emigration in al-Ahram, in a May 9, 1996 article and again on October 16, 1996. In this myth which portrays Jews as collaborating with Nazis in a Zionist conspiracy, Jews are depicted as being the actual persecutors and deportors of Jews. For example,Hungarian Zionist leader, Rudolph Kasztner, who tried to get Jews released from concentration camps, is depicted as being responsible for deporting Jews to the gas chambers of Auschwitz as published in Zahr ad-Din, Background, and in further articles in al-Wafd, 22 January 1998, ash-Shahid, vol. 151, 1998. Another Muslim scholar, Abd as-Subur Marzuq claimed that Zionist leaders played an important role in supporting the Nazi security service in al-Liwa’ al-Islami, 13 October 1996. What makes this myth Keng repeats so vile is it suggests if a Jew tried to negotiate with the Nazis to save other Jews that makes them Nazi collaborators. Interestingly the smeer is used against all Zionists, Jews and Israelis today as a vital component in denying the holocaust and trying to portray Jews as liars, and not victims of the holocaust but victimizers of themselves in the holocaust! It gets so absurd that even a well known anti-Zionist, Rabbi Weissmandel is depicted as a Zionist (simply because he is a Jew) and then as a Nazi collaborator because he tried to save Jews. To suggest Zionists collaborated with Nazis is the ultimate in hatred and ignorance and its a classic example of how alleged criticism of Israel becomes a smeer against all Jews and a denial of the holocaust and a porrayal of Jews as victimizers of themselves. Now I repeat again Keng cite your sources and what your religious denomination is.

For the record because I feel it important to address anything Keng says about Jews; Jews first came to Canada in the 1750's but they had to hide their identity as non Jews were not allowed in at that time. Between 1850 and 1900, 15,000 Jews came to Canada. Another 120,000 came between 1990 and 1920 and ten another 60,000 between 1920 and 1940. From 1940 to the end of the War no Jews were allowed in Canada and McKenzie King openly referred to Jews trying to escape Germany and the holocaust across Europe and come to Canada as vermin that must be prevented from infiltrating Christian society and contaminating Canada. Post world War Two to date another 135,000 Jews have come to Canada. What Keng conveniently skips over is that during world War Two the Prime Minister who was openly anti-semitic and openly made hate statements against Jews on a regular basis often invoking the Christian religion to justify it, sent Jews to their death by sending them back to Nazi Germany. Jews like all the other immigrants, Siekhs, Chinese, Irish,Dukabhors, Ukrainians, had similair experiences. If you were not part of the mainstream dominant culture you were forced to live in ghettoes and limited as to what jobs you could do. There was a lot of ignroance displayed not just to irish, Jews, Chinese and Siekhs but all visible minorities and people not considered mainstream like the Dukhabors and Ukrainians, and other East Europeans, and other Asians and Africans and South Americans and West Indians, etc. for pretty much the same ignorant reasons you see in Keng posts when he defines people based on his "Christian" values.

Keng again states subjective opinions with no basis, i.e. "Actually, Canada was letting Jews in at this time, so if Canada didn't want them then why did they let them in in the first place? " Canada always had an extremely restrictive policy when it came to admitting non Christians or visible minorities. It turned away far more Jews then it took in. But then for Keng to make an effort to find out what the history of treatmnent of minorities were coming to this country would require he actually read a history book. Like that will happen. "Well, I don't think that any country is obliged to accept large groups of refugees; and at that time there was a perception that Jews were linked with Communism and everybody frightened--rightfully so--about the spread of Communism and its subversion of stable Christian societies. " Where there is Keng there is a justification for doing anything discriminatory as long as you make sure to say you do it on behalf of Jesus. "even the Gestapo cooperated with Zionists in getting Jews to Palestine. If they wanted to exterminate Jews, why do that?" The above is a vicious anti-semtiic lie. It suggests something that is completely false and then suggests Germany did not exterminate Jews. How much more of this tripe needs to flow on this forum for someone to ask Keng to either quote his sources or refrain from such deliberately hateful comments? what kind of mind suggests the Gestapo cooperated with Jews? what kind of mind tries to dismiss the holocaust and what Nazis did and suggest they were involved in a Zionist alliance? Of course Keng will not provide the course for this outrageous statement because like all the others he makes, he fabricates them. I again say to Keng directly who refuses to tell us all what denomination he is a member of where he got the above information from-otherwise Keng I am calling you out on the last statement and say you are nothing but a holocaust denier and fabricator of deliberately inflammatory comments designed to insult all Jews and victims of the holocaust.

Excellent point you made. I defer to it. I should not generalize. Just the generalization made it defective but I appreciate you know I was opining an ideal not a fact. Your response is of course dead on. A government with the moral responsibility of assuring its people remain safe must not assume anything. They don't have that luxury. However I would hope the people and their elected politicians would make efforts to try influence peaceful overtures.

To clarify, the PM has no ability to pardon this man. He can't circumvent the parole process. People are mixing up the legal powers of our Prime Minister with a United States governor. Once someone is convicted of a crime, the Prime Minister can not interfere. In fact once any legal process commences or a politice investigation commences, no politician in Canada has the right to interfere. That would actually be a criminal offense not to mention grounds to impeach them from office.

In Canada "pardoning" someone really only means removing their name from the criminal record so when they go apply for a job or a passport or a driver's license or a job its not there. In this case, the Parole Board had many options and using the remorse test didn't even have to be used. The major test of such a person is to ask, will they or are they likely to cause harm if released back into society and how much rehabilitation would they need if they were to re-enter society. That was never asked because the Parole Board deliberately precluded such questions by saying since he shows no remorse, we don't have to ask anything else. The Parole Board engaged in pure and utter politics. Someone directed them to use the remorse test deliberately knowing in this case this man would not lie. Its nasty politics at its worst by some religious fundamentalists who firmly believe in what they are doing and that only God can end life. They were present through-out the trial and I suspect have strong clout in the province where Mr. Latimer was unfortunate enough to live. I can assure you had this been Quebec, Ontario or British Columbia he would have been placed on probation if it ever went to trial. Ineresting how blow hards like Clayton Ruby and Eddie Greenspan have no time of day for this man. Mr. Ruby was of course concerned about discrimination against pit bulls but this man-bah.

Very little. In fact the only people who would have influence are the Law Societies and Medical Ethics Professors and prominent lawyers, religious figures and health care professionals who should be outraged and volunteering to testify for him at such hearings. For the Parole Board to rely on the remorse test is pure political grand-standing. Its outrageous but what is more outrageous is the silence from the legal bars across Canada and the idiot politicians in his own province.

Well American this is an outrageous case and I will tell you why. His daughter was a classic case of someone who medicine could not help. Her continued life necessarily meant she would be condemned to excruciating and overwhelming pain that could not be controlled by medication. This was never an issue to her father/mother of her being disabled and them not wanting to look after her. That is what it was turned into by disability groups who projected their own fears into the equation and saw themselves in this girl. The disabled groups felt this girl symbolized them and how easy it could be to dispose of them and they took over and intervened in the case and turned it into a political platform for another issue-the issue as to how to accommodate the disabled. That is NOT what this case was. when Mr. Latimer put his daughter to death he did not in my opinion have the mens reas required of a criminal intending to kill. This was not a murder. This was not somebody saying I will kill as Capricorn defined it. There has to be a clear distinction between criminal intent, i.e., a deliberate intent to kill and someone who genuinely was placed in a situation where as a parent his moral duty to assure his daughter would not suffer was paramount. Every doctor Mr. Latimer went to said there was nothing they could do to prevent her pain. The medical system could not help her and for people to think it is acceptable to leave people condemned to excruciating pain particularly someone who would not understand what was happening is inexcusable. Its a classic case of many in our society fearing death and in so doing compromising the quality of life. Because so many of us fear death we are willing to prolong the agony of this poor innocent child. What I said to disabled groups in heated debates was they were projecting their own fears and anxieties into a situation that was beteen this poor girl, her parents and the treating physicians. This case should have never gone to trial. If the disability groups were genuinely interested in promoting a system that promotes humanity and caring they would have said, fine convict him but don't put him in jail. This man did not belong in jail and never has. By imprisoning him they punished his wife as well. He was no danger to society. Now let us deal with this bull shit Parole Board. They have options. Testing him for remorse is NOT the only option and in fact in the majority of these hearings, remorse is not even a factor. In criminal courts, remorse as a mitigating factor is considered a suspect and often idiotic way to determine guilt as its so easy to manipulate by sociopaths, psychopaths and those who have done wrong. In fact the first thing a dishonest person does is show remorse. Now think how absurd it was in this case. How can you ask the father of a girl who has been told his daughter must live the rest of her life screaming out in pain-whether he regrets what he did? What kind of idiot asks such a question? What kind of idiot society asks a man if he regrets allowing his daughter to find peace and comfort instead of a life of hell and pain? So what-the man now stays in jail but Karla Hamolka she's out reproducing. Makes sense to me. Better still just how many murderers and rapists get off with far less time then he's served because what-they showed remorse? what sanctimonious bullshit. Here are the cold hard facts. Advances in medicine keep people alive but many will be placed in a state of excrutiating pain or compromised life. Yes I am the first to appreciate the vulerabiluty of the disabled and how they feel if you allow euthenasia it will make it easier to kill them, but that was NOT and should not be the issue. Holland has shown you can build in safeguards to assure no disabled person can be done away with because someone finds it inconvenient. That has to be distinguished and not linked as disabled groups are doing and which I think is dead wrong, with the issue of a dying patient or chronically ill patient racked in pain who can not be helped. I had a friend die of a very fast spreading cancer. The system worked for him. They allowed him to die at home with a morphine drip he controlled at all times. He died peacefully in his sleep thanks to his being able to have control of the morphine drip. In his remaining days he at least had a way to control the pain and find some dignity and comfort. What about this poor girl? How dare anyone question her father and demand his remorse. Remorse for what, for not watching her scream out in a tormented state as her bones fused together? I am disgusted with the lack of compassion in our criminal system and in its absoltuely f..cked up priorities in how it values life. The whole point of Dr. Kavorkian's deliberate provocation of the legal system was to get people to wake up and deal with this issue. As we all age, many of us will be faced with terminal illness. Do you really think you need someone lecturing you that you must stay alive when you are in pain? In this case the people who judge Latimer do not know the facts. They do not know he was told there was no hope for his daughter and he tried and tried for years. To Judge this man and demand he apologize is bullshit. He has been made a scapegoat for our society's inability to express compassion and deal with its fear of death and the shortcomings of our medical health systems. I would have done the exact same thing if it was my daughter. This man has been tortured enough. Does any rational person believe he should be punished for what e did? Do people not realize he has to live the rest of his life realizing what he did? The same people saying Latimer should stay in jail, willl soon enough find themselves in hospitals riddled in pain and demanding mercy. What goes around will come around and they better hope the same justice applied to Latimer doesn't trap them in a hell of their own painful making.

Lol. I wanted to wait a bit to see if Buffy had any more insider knowledge of Israel before I responded with my Zionist-Mossad response to her speculations. For some of us, the mysterious release of this intelligence report was quite deliberate not an accident and of course has political motives behind it. So we do not just assume what is now told to us is accurate or inaccurate, just what it is-an information release-and let’s remind Ms. Buffy one more time-just because a man tells you something, doesn’t make it true Buffy. We tend to exaggerate and lie. Yes I know that may be hard to believe but trust me, when it comes to talking about the size and velocity of our weapons we do tend to mislead. That said, when the Israeli Foreign Minister makes comments as to Iran simply biding time until it builds up its nuclear arsenal, those comments, may not even be intended for Iran or Buffy but for China and Russia and North Vietnam or Syria. Its pure showmanship deliberately designed to send a message to certain people to butt out. It is no different then when China sulks over Taiwan and refuses to allow US Navy ships to come in out of a storm and dock in Hong Kong or the way in whines when Western politicians meet with the Dalai Lama. What is interesting is when someone asks an Israeli politician would Israel attack Iran if it had nuclear weapons and then the Israeli says we leave open our options, these same idiots who ask such idiot questions then report-imminent war is just around the corner. Its blither and blather and rhetoric and stupid questions which invite deliberately evasive answers which give these idiots something to write. Nothing more. If someone asked Buffy this question-would you slap a man across his face for spitting in yours-does the question not invite deliberately violent response speculation? But does anyone perceive Buffy as being evil and hostile or simply an innocent victim? In Israel's case we know they are preconceived as evil and beligerent and not as potential victims of a radiation blast. Congress recently stated it was selling Israel 5,000 precision-guided "smart bombs," including 500 satellite-guided, one-ton JDAM "bunker busters" tested in Baghdad and capable of penetrating six feet of concrete. This happened right before the mysterious leak. Walk with me Buffy. Do you think these penetrating six feet concrete bombs are really needed or is that for show? Could this all be a collosal marketing and sales publicity hook with the bait and real in exercise? I can hear it-hurry now-its NOT TOO LATE TO BUY THESE BOMBS DID WE SAY ITS TOO LATE OH HAHAHAHAHAH ITS NOT TOO LATE AT ALL REMEMBER THOSE N-BOMBS, NO THEY HAVE NOT BEEN BUILT YET SO YOU STILL HAVE TIME HURRY ON DOWN TODAY AND WE WILL SELL YOU TO BUNKER BUSTERS FOR THE PRICE OF ONE. Now mind you the above my penis is bigger then your penis message was also in response to previous Iranian messages as to their penis size claim , or to be more specific, the fact its Shahab-3 ballistic missiles of which there are estimated from 25 to 100 are now operational. Those missiles or what Freudians like myself insist are references to penis size can oopsy "penetrate" Israel and go kablam only the orgasm might be a painful one. After all we know how small Israel is. Is their precedent for Israel engaging in pre-emptive strikes? Some allege one recently happened in Syria while others think that was a deliberately leaked false story. What we do know is back in 1981, Israeli jets did manage to engage in allegedly below the radar cover story since we all know Saudi Arabia had AWACS) 700-mile, daytime air mission that took them across Saudi Arabian and Jordanian air space (with full consent of both nations) into Iraq where it is documented that it took the jets about 90 seconds to obliterate the French(vive le France) Osiraq nuclear reactor which was at that time the centerpiece of Iraq's burgeoning nuclear-weapons program. So sure such a thing could happen again but only with tacit support of Egypt, Jordan, Russia, Turkey and the U.S. for starters. What Ms. Buffy does not appreciate is that China depends heavily on Iran for natural gas and would have to be assured any such strike has full support of the Arab world’s major energy suppliers and would nto disrupt Chinese energy flow. That is how it works in the real world, particularly one where China says out loud it hates Israel and then in private engages in all kinds of military deals with them while at the same time sucking the natural gas out of Iran for cheap. Some of us believe Iran is looking for away out of its contracts with China even as we speak and its heavy military reliance on Russia now is also sucking its finances. Interestingly China does not engage in major military supplies to Iran. Gee could there be something to that? Could that be Buffy because that is how they keep Israel calm and indirectly tell them to stand down as long as they are there? Any Israeli attack on Iran has what is called back-draft. Of course it would create an ant-Jewish frenzy endangering the Jews of Iran and threatening instability in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, all enemies of Iran but who would find themselves reluctant to endorse an open attack on Iran which could turn their citizens against them accusing them of being Zionist lackies. So no, someone assure Buffy her simplistic Israel bad and wants to attack Iran speculation may not be as sure fire as she thinks it is not to mention if Israel really thought Iran could nuke it, it already has tacit approval from China, Russia, the US and Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt to take it out with as little damage as possible. So kaboom to everyone.

I would restate it less beligerently. There is absolutely no doubt the Western style of society as seen in Israel (other than with its ultra-orthodox Jews) is vastly different than the traditional oriental life style in most parts of the Muslim world (although many Islamic countries have energing middle classes very much influenced by Western values) which can cause conflict. Just the way women and gays for example express their rights in Israel could lead to someone's death in Islamic countries. So yes that adds to the complexion of the conflict. But I do not think referring to the entire Middle East as mid-evil freaks is constructive. It simply fuels a negative stereotype of the Islamic world and ignores modern progressive Muslims let alobe the things all people have in common, i.e., the desire for peace, a job, etc.

Let us refresh some righteous gentiles memories who seem to want to turn this into a racial incident. There was a time not too long ago if you were a Jew, you had to start your own hospital otherwise you would not get admitted. Likewise for those of you who are not Sikh or Chinese or visible minority there was a time if you were anything but a Wasp or Catholic you were lucky to get any treatment in any hopsital. But oh pish posh how some of us just assume Canada has always been this first world nation of perfect morality which can sneer its nose at Sikhs or whoever. Here is the point. Under the Public Health Act of Ontario any racist inference that Sikhs are acting like third world savages looking for preferential treatment is bullshit. The Public Health Act imposes strict guidelines on who is to be treated and no hospital can discriminate based on race, creed, religion, etc. But here is the point. For those few caucasians with their nose out of joint making smeers about the motives of Sikhs- they have done what every other ethnic community has done for their community, contribute funding to hospitals and their contributions will help not just Sikhs but everyone. To suggest they did so because they are third world manipulators trying to bribe there way to the front of line is racist. Its a classic smeer of a group by assigning them negative motives and qualities based on subjective perception but NOT FACT. Their motives are the same as any other group trying to assure their community has a hospital. How is that sinister? How is that seeking advantage? Here is how the real world works. Corporations make major donations to hospitals. Do you think they can get preferential treatment for their employees? What nonsense to suggest they can. That is precisely why they buy sheeshy private insurance plans and send their execs to private clinics. You want two tier health, its based on money not race. What we do know is someone who is a politician or someone with clout, may be able to push in line for certain things however to smeer all Sikhs because they donate to a community hospital and want it sensitive to their special religious needs is bull. Any hospital has a board of directors and yes when a doctor finds out a director is in the hoospital or a nurse or doctor's child is in the hospital or some other employee in the hospital this may get them some preference but nothing that will comromise the safety of anyone else. Tell me where do you think hospitals used to get their funding from exclusively and now continue to depend heavily on? Of couse its communities and their various groups. What next? Oh right, do tell me I get preferential treatment if I tell people my last name at Mt. Sinai. Yah they all just snap to attention. Right and when gay people used to go to Wllesley Hospital, everyone just stopped what they were doing and said-look he's gay push him in front of that straight guy. For that matter even in Catholic Hospitals such as Saint Joe's do you not think they showed some prefential treatment to priests or big shots in the Church? So why is it when a Sikh does it, suddenly its sinister. There was a time in this country when Sikhs were treated like expendable dirt and trying to get treated in a hospital was problematic simply because of their appearance and they are supposed to apologize for wanting to assure this never happens to them again? Some people are hell bent on taking anything a minority group does and degrading it and assigning sinister motive to it. There was and is none in Brampton. The Sikh people now upset are upset for no different then anyone else would be in any community. They are not upset because they can't get preferential treatment. That is someone's perception based on their bias against Sikhs. All Sikhs are upset about is what everyone of us gets upset about-lack of hospital beds, incomplete services, poor internal communications. This is a new hospital and a very large one at that. It of course in its start up phase struggles to iron out the kinks. It could take years. In the meantime people in the community will complain and do what communities do with all hospitals. As for the death, each time there is a death or an adverse reaction in a hospital setting, the public does get frightened. New hospital laws have been implemented to assure a protocol is followed to disclose to the patient's family and to the public what happened to assure if it was preventable steps can be taken to assure it does not happen again. However the facts are not in and the death may have been unavoidable, i.e., as a result of the nature of the illness, not anything flowing from a breakdown in health care. Running hospitals is done through a myriad of committees and a new organization called the LHIN which has been delegated authority from the provincial Ministry of Health to work with various agencies and of course all the health provider colleges to assure optimal health care. Part of this process requries being accounable and interactive with the community and the community is allowed and expected to express their opinions-trying to suggest they are third world for doing this is bull.

Michael, I genuinely was taught to challenge hatred in any form with open honest debate. On the other hand I appreciate what you say. Fire can not burn if there is no air. I actually foudn Drea's response very positive and the point you and Cap made was not lost either. I believe Jefferiah demonstrated the perfect solution for me to learn from. He mad an effort to respond and challenge the hatred but then also exercised restraint after it became apparent to him further responses would not help. I will try learn from that simple act of moderation he demonstrated.

I apologize to all posters if I contributed to this in any way.

Buffy hold that thought. I hope you understand the fact that I argue as strongly as I do with some should not be labelled in the same manner i.e., I hope you can see that applies not just to the Aras' of the world but people like myself who many call Zionist and assume because we are Jewish we are hypersensitive about anything to do with Israel. Your criticizing Israeli policy is not and will never be the issue with me. If I think it blurs the line between Jews and Israelis and adds to negative generalizations I will challenge it but for the same reason you did above. If you think I am accusatory with you I apologize. I am just debating you. If you genuinely believe I have become an Aras then blast away.

So Aras you never responded to me. Amazing how when you try suggest others ignore you and that means something also applies to you. Imagine that. Then again since you have come on this board you have made repeated hateful comments at all Jews as with the above comments to show just a few examples abd yet you have lectured others for being racist against Muslims. According to your reasoning, you can be anti-semtic, but no one should be anti-Muslim. Think its consistent? You think you have any credibility coming on this board to allegedly criticize Israeli policy but engage in name calling and baiting of all Jews and then lecture others about being intolerant? There is a reason you did not respond to me so before you point the finger at Jefferiah point it at yourself. He did not respond further because you did not understand his initial point. Now then Aras are you telling us all insulting Jews and denying the holocaust happened is a way to get oeople to respect Muslims and for that matter what you are saying? You think that is rational? Do you think being angry and insulting people and challenging them and threatening them will make them sympathetic to anything you have to say? All that happens Aras when you call names, is you attract other people who may want to engage in the same name calling either back on you or against Jews. Either way it simply adds to the negative hatred you are advocating. Enough. There is one poster I give a hard time to on this forum precisely because I do not want her turning into you. I don't want her to become so blinded by her message she forgets what she knows inside-that all people suffer equally and for the same reasons. Are you capable of acknowledging that or are you so angry you can't?

Buffy; "You know Rue, I'd be far more inclined to discuss things with you if you 1. used a less accusatory tone and 2. Didn't write a frikkin' novel." At least you responded. That I appreciate. Novels yes. "Do Jews spit on Christians in Israel? Uh yeah they do. Has this been a problem for a while - yes it has. Is it rather disgusting? Yes it is. Pretty simple - you shouldn't spit on folks." SOME Jews spit on Christians. Yes it is disgusting. "Now, did I say anywhere that ALL Israelis are running about spitting on Christians - it is also quite clear in the article that these perps are mostly Yeshiva students" With due respect no it was not clear and the way you presented it I am suggesting of course would set off people like keng attracted to it like flies to sugar. " - which of course makes them fundies to begin with. All religions have em - I wish they would keep em too (perhaps in a dark cellar somewhere and not let them out). " Absolutely agree with you. "Is it not possible for you, Rue, to at the very least admit that sometimes, yes sometimes Rue, Jews can do nasty things too??" I do it in virtually every response to you-concede Jews are not perfect. What I constantly though end up having to do is present the full story because you don't and I know you could if you wanted to. All I ask is you present it in a balanced way then as you say I will not write these bloody novels. "After all, they are all just human like the rest of us aren't they? " This is the point I am trying to establish with you. Interesting you and I now say the exact same thing so why do you think when I say it, its any different then when you say it? Its not. "- but hey - according to Rue - they deserve a pass simply because they are Jewish? Gimme a break... ugh." Buffy where have I said the Yeshiva students deserve a break? Where have I said anywhere that spitting is acceptable? Point it out. See I am still engaged in the same debate with you, challenging you to present the exact same information but in a balanced way that does not present it as black and white. Can you do that so I don't have to then read the Kengs of the world jumping on the bandwagon and taking this as a cue to promote their agendas? Its all I ask. I ask you because you know better and the Kengs of the world do not. You know what I would really wish would happen. You took your annoyance with me just once and look why it comes out. You see it as overreacting right? You probably don't even want to acknowledge the Kengs of the world right? Why not? When I see you criticize the Kengs of the world as consistently as you do such situations, I will take you more seriously. Tell me Buffy what could you not resist-the idea that fundamentalist Jews in Israel act like jack-asses or that it might fit into your concept that Israel has people living their who claim to be Jewish who are nasty? Do you think you raised it because you felt it proves your point Israel is infallible and should be criticized? If that was your agenda instead of relying on such obvious examples of fundamentalist intolerance which are not specific to any one religion, why not debate the policies you think are questionable and avoid these crude bursts of idiocy all humans engage in? They don't help establish your case. Do I sound accusatory, no just annoyed because I always hope when someone starts a thread and they see it inciting others to be hateful they at least address the hateful person and say, sorry that was not my intention please do not change the subject. It would coming from you have sounded more credible since you started the thread. Are you responsible for others, no but I would hope if you claim to be advocating on behalf of those you think are being hated, you do that consistently and not pick and choose who you think the victims are but challenge hatred wherever you see it. Being selective takes its toll on credibility.

I finallly wish to conclude by using the exact same device Keng does in reverse. Instead of suggesting I am a true Christian being persecuted by Jews and illegitimate Christians, how about I refer to myself as a Jew, and state that Christians have always been hostile to Jews and then simply dump this list of events on you; 70 A.D. Destruction of Jerusalem 1,100,000 Jews were killed and 97,000 taken into slavery and captivity. 115 Rebellion of the Jews in Mesopotania, Egypt, Cyrene and Cyprus. Jews and Romans inflicted many barbaric atrocities on each other, causing the death of several hundreds of thousands of Romans and Jews. 132-35 The Bar Kochba rebellion (Bar Kochba was a false Messiah). Caused the death of 500,000 Jews; thousands were sold into slavery or taken into captivity. 135 Roman Emperor Hadrian commenced his persecution of the Jews. Jerusalem established as a pagan city. Erection of a Jupiter temple on the temple mountain (Moriah) and a temple to Venus on Golgotha. Jews were forbidden to practice circumcision, the reading of the Law, eating of unleavened bread at Passover or any Jewish festival. Infringement of this edict brought the death penalty. 315 Constantine the Great established "Christianity" as the State religion throughout the Roman Empire; issued many anti-Jewish laws. 379-95 Theodosius the Great expelled Jews from any official gate position or place of honor. Permitted the destruction of their synagogues if by so doing, it served a religious purpose. 613 Persecution of the Jews in Spain. All Jews who refused to be baptized had to leave the country. A few years later the remaining Jews were dispossessed, declared as slaves and given to pious "Christians" of position. All children 7 years or over were taken from their parents and given to receive a "Christian" education. 1096 Bloody persecutions of the Jews at the beginning of the First Crusade, in Germany. Along the cities on the Rhine River alone, 12,000 Jews were killed. The Jews were branded second only to the Moslems as the enemies of Christendom. 1121 Jews driven out of Flanders (now part of Belgium). They were not to return nor to be tolerated until they repented of the guilt of killing Jesus Christ. 1130 The Jews of London had to pay compensation of 1 million marks for allegedly killing a sick man. 1146-47 Renewed persecution of the Jews in Germany at the beginning of the Second Crusade. The French Monk, Rudolf, called for the destruction of the Jews as an introduction to the Second Crusade. It was only because of the intervention of Emperor Conrad who declared Nuerenberg and a small fortress as places of refuge for the Jews, and that of Abbot Bernard of Clairvaux, that the result was not quite as devastating as at the time of the First Crusade. 1181 French King Philip banished the Jews from his domain. They were permitted to sell all movable possessions, but the immovable such as land and houses reverted to the king. Seven years later he called the Jews back. 1189 At the coronation of Richard the Lionhearted, unexpected persecution of the Jews broke out in England. Most Jewish houses in London were burned, and many Jews killed. All possessions of the Jews were claimed by the Crown. Richard's successor alone, relieved the Jews of more than 8 million marks. 1215 At the IV Lateran Church Council, restrictions against the Jews by the church of Rome were issued. 1290 Edward I banished the Jews from England. 16,000 Jews left the country. 1298 Persecution of the Jews in Franconia, Bavaria and Austria. The Nobleman Kalbfleish alleged that he had received a divine order to destroy all the Jews. 140 Jewish communities were destroyed, and more than 100,000 Jews were mercilessly killed. 1306 King Philip the Fair banished the Jews from France. 100,000 Jews left the country. 1320 In France, 40,000 shepherds dedicated themselves for the Shepherd Crusade to free Palestine from the Moslems. Under the influence of criminals and land speculators, they destroyed 120 Jewish communities. 1321 Jews were accused of having incited outlaws to poison wells and fountains in the district of Guienne, France. 5,000 Jews were burned at the stake. 1348 Jews were blamed for the plague throughout Europe, especially in Germany. In Strausberg 2,000 Jews were burned. In Maintz 6,000 were killed in most gruesome fashion, and in Erfut 3,000; and in Worms 400 Jews burned themselves in their homes. 1370 Jews were blamed for having defiled the "Host" (wafer used in the Mass) in Brabant. The accused were burned alive. Again, all Jews were banned from Flanders and until the year 1820, every 15 years a feast was kept to celebrate the event. 1391 Persecutions in Spain. In Seville and 70 other Jewish communities, the Jews were cruelly massacred and their bodies dismembered. 1394 Second banishment of Jews from France. 1453 The Franciscan monk, Capistrano, persuaded the King of Poland to withdraw all citizens' rights of the Jewish people. 1478 The Spanish inquisition directed against the Jews. 1492 The banishment of Jews from Spain. 300,000 Jews who refused to be "baptized" into the Church of Rome left Spain penniless. Many migrated to the Muslim country, Turkey, where they found tolerance and a welcome. 1497 Banishment of the Jews from Portugal. King Manuel, generally friendly to the Jews, under pressure from Spain instigated forced baptism to keep the Jews. 20,000 Jews desired to leave the country. Many were ultimately declared slaves. 1516 First Ghetto established in Venice. 1540 Banishment of Jews from Naples and 10 years later, from Genoa and Venice. 1794 Restriction of Jews in Russia, Jewish men were forced to serve 25 years in the Russian military. Many hundreds of thousands of Jews left Russia. 1846-78 All former restriction, against the Jews in the Vatican State were re-inforced by Pope Pius IX. 1903 Renewed restrictions of Jews in Russia. Frequent pogroms (massacres); general impoverishment of Russian Jewry. 1933 Commencement of persecution of Jews in Hitler Germany. Inception of the systematic destruction of 6,000,000 Jews throughout Nazi-occupied Europe. Should I do what Keng does and make blanket accusations against all Christians? Of course it would be wrong. To try use the stupidity of any human in the past, present or future to justify stereotyping people negatively to defend hating them or considering them "sinners" etc., is what I challenge as being wrong. Yah I can't wait for Keng to respond or for Scott to respond with another " you are an hysterical woman" comment. Hysterical no. Persistent to the point of being a nightmare, yes.

ScottUSA’s decision to try justify Keng’s comments by deflecting the subject raised and introducing the aguement that Jews persecuted Christians, again I would argue was selective and by being selective takes historic events out of context in a manner that necessarily suggests if Jews persecuted Christians, then Christians have a right to feel negative towards Jews and make the kind of sweeping generalizations Keng does about Jews always having been hostile to Christians and would be hostile against them if they were in the majority because as Keng says, at the pith and substance of the dispute between jews and Christians is the refusal of Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah. Those are Keng’s and Scott’s words not mine. For those of us who do not use history as an exercise to take only certain episodes, remove them from the continum and context from which they flowed, to then support a concept that suggests one side hated the other. Historic events of course happen based on a continuings series of developments that are all related by cause and effect. By looking at them as isolated snap shots their meaning is necessarily distorted or misunderstood. To understand an historic event one can not merely look at the actual event, they must also take the time to understand the events and conditions leading up to and culminating in that event, something ScottUSA did not do and of course to date keng has not done as he has demonstrated his claims of fact have no source other than his subjective feelings. Christianity has references to Jews persecuting Christians starting with the alleged blood libel and Pontius Pilate being ordered by Jewish Priests to kill Jesus and then references to the persecution of Peter, John, stephen and then Paul before he converted. The problem with trying to simplify these incidents as Jew v.s. Christian is that as is the case with any conflict, it is never black and white and the sources being relied on by ScottUSA and Keng which they assume are absolutely accurate are not if for no other reason the evidence they rely on is not first hand and in fact evidence that was written long after the fact, then edited and re-written. To start with Pontus Pilate contrary to the story in Luek 23:13-24 and 33 and Mathew 27 is not first hand. Its fiction. A human wrote this after the fact, then it was re-written numerous times. What is interesting is that when one looks at historic documents and references to Pilate outside the New Testament what emerges is a picture of a governor who could have cared less about public opinoon, ordered the crucifixion of hundreds if not thousands of Jews and used his military to engage in mass slaughters, raping and pillaging of Jewish villages to keep them under control. Yet the New Testament version has this man being compliant to Jewish Priests something that contradicts his actions up to that point and in fact suddenly turn him from a Stalinesque dictator to a democratic and sensitive guy who wanted to appease people he otherwise thought were vermin. Its why many historians, Christian and otherwise have argued the New Testament re-wrote what happened to appease the Romans by shifting the blame on Jews. The point is for those who simply reply as Keng does verbatum on the Bible for the “truth” what they do is accept re-edited second hand fiction of what happened. Even todfay’s mainstream Christian historians concede the New Testament is not first-hand and may have been edited for political reasons. The concept of Jews persecuting Christians as ScottUSA has presented also is not as simplistic as he makes it sound. After Christ’s death there was intense missionary activity on the part of Christians iand it took place at synagogues. These missionaries would tell their Jewish audiences that Jesus would return leading an army from Heaven to establish a kingdom. What ScottUSA conveniently skips over is that this would of course caused a hostile reaction but not as he and Keng suggests in an effort to suggest Jews hate Christians but because of practical political reasons. The Jews became hostile because they felt such Preaching would expose them all to group punishment (imprisonment, torture, slaughter) by the Romans since it suggested the Roman empire would be overthrown by Jesus. If Jewish leaders at that time did not suppress any references to this Christian insurrection, their follwers most certainly would have been exposed to Roman backlash. So its far more complex then this simplistic Jews have always been hostile to Christians remark first advanced by Keng and then compounded by ScottUSa. In pre-Islamic Yemen it is true a Jewish King called Dhu Nuwas persecuted Christians in his kingdom and there was a massacre of Christians in Najran in 524 but this was not based on religion. This was a tribal war and it did not just happen for no reason. Again one must look at the entire cause and effect and events leading up to it. The point is, it was a response to an earlier massacre by Byzantine Christians against Jews. This is precisely why I criticize people like ScottUSA because they select out of history only part of the event, the part that suits their political agenda. I instead look at the full picture and when I analyze it would say both massacres by both sides were equally as unfortunate. I don’t choose just one and most importantly I don’t use such tribal battles as a pretext to suggest Jews hate Christians. Another major source of claim about Jewish persecution of Christians comes from the monk Antiochus Strategos. Many Christian historians openly question the accuracy of his claims. Did Jews and Christians continually engage in battles. Of course they did. The Bible and human history is a continuous episode of such battles. It also appears that In 115, Emperor Trajan battled the Parthians and overran Mesopotamia. Jews in Mesopotamia at that time preferred Parthian rule to Roman rule. The Parthians taking advantage of this preference dispatched Jews from Mesopotamia to Rome to encourage revolts by Jews within the Roman Empire. In this context both In Cyprus and Cyrene, Jews massacred gentiles in great numbers. They did not just kill Christians. They killed anyone including Jews favourable to the Roman Empire. Wnen Trajan won his war against Parthia the Jews of Cyprus and Cyrene were all wiped out. So any attempt to take this incident or others like it and try suggest its caused by Jewish hatred to Christians is nonsense. Its part of a greater political battle going on of many minority groups trying to survive in hostile societies.

Scott why don't you debate what I have said? You claimed I challenged Keng and assumed by just certain words he said that I came to the conclusion because he feels he is a victim and persecuted he is hateful. You now try avoid your selectivity as to what I said with what? A patronizing comment? Again Scott your patronizing me is par for the course. Its your style with anyone you disagree with. Your style is to engage in references to females and gays using words such as hysterical and fag as you have done in the past when you don't want to debate the issues at hand. I have made it a point to carefully address each and every word I find questionable coming out of Keng's posts. He in turn has chosen to ignore not just me but anyone when they ask him to show how what he claims is a fact, is based on something. That makes him lack credibility. How about you? What is your agenda? You tried to suggest what Keng said was misunderstood by me. You also raised ancient historic episodes to suggest Jews persecute people which was not the issue being challenged. Why? Did you hear me at any time deny that? Did you even bother to read what I was challenging? Are you capable of reading something you disagree with and at least trying to make an effort to find out what it is you think you are disagreeing with? Scott if at this point you are at the point of embracing the Kengs on this forum and defending what they say, I think that speaks for itself and your attempts to portray yourself as a level headed credible person who is beyond simpistic hateful remarks is wearing thin. There is only so far you can go with that mantle. Me? I admit I have belaboured this point but I do so because I see no one else challenges Keng, particularly those posters who claim to be Christian or open minded or who resent being stereotyepd as leftists or those who claim its not right to be selective but show in their silence how selective they are and how they will only speak out if its against just one group they wish to criticize to the exclusion of all others. Say what you want Scott and continue with the patronization but unlike you I am not selective and pick and choose only those topics that suit my personal political agenda.

Yes. Precisely for saying these things. Its called stereotyping people because you think you know how they all think. Its called being hateful because you think it gives you the right to suggest they are false and you are true. Its hateful because you make assumptions about how an entire group thinks and feels. You did not just state you felt you were being persecuted. You made a point of stating several times Jews have always been hostile to Christians and if a majority would be hostile to them. You made a point of stating anyone that does not follow your concept of what Christianity is, is not a true Christian. That Sir makes you a hateful, spiteful, close minded person who states what you do deliberately to be devisive and paint people as for or against you. Its precisely what generates your mind to suggest Aras is in fact myself or someone else who challenges your discriminatory comments. Its what compels you to call gays pedophiles. Playing the innocent persecuted victim Keng is not going to work. Your attempt to emotionally manipulate and turn your abusive comments into the innocent remarks of a victim just don't cut it. Until you come on this forum and admit your comments are not facts but your subjective opinions and are necessarily insulting to others you have zero credibility. Making a sweeping negative generalization that All Jews are hostile to Christians and then stating this is a fact doesn't make it a fact Keng-what it does do is demonstrate you feel you can come on this forum and utter subjective hateful remarks based on your subjective negative generalizations of an entire people to demonize them, and have the audacity to tell people its a fact. I say it again Keng, the fact that you do not have the ability to address each and every response I directed at you speaks for itself. What is your denomination Keng. Why don't you state what it is if you are so proud of it and it teaches you these things? Tell us all Keng. if you are as you say a true Christian, tell the false ones which denomination you belong to and save them...isn't that what you are suggesting...until they see Jesus as you do they go to hell? Isn't that what you have stated? As for your deliberately racist statement to me about Jews not being descended from Adam and Eve, trying to justify it after the fact doesnt' work Keng. See that is the problem with hatred. When it spews and oozes just like pus from a wound its hard to deny once its out in the open. It smells and its obvious in its fluid nature and where it drips. Pretending its not there once it drips out is too late Keng. The fact you made this comment and so many others, shows you do not practice the "true Christianity" you demand others follow. You are a man whose words are intended to divide and pit people against one another and all it does is attract those kinds of people who wish to do the same. I just find it sad no person who claims to believe in Christianity on this forum has not seen fit to challenge your expropriation of Christianity. As long as I do it you can hide behind the fact I am a Jew to play this game that when I criticize you its because I am anti-Christian. I say it again, since you came on this forum with your original agenda to disparage gays and portray them as pedophiles you have continued to share your subjective opinions which I challenge because I find them negative generalizations of people and groups designed to incite intolerance and divisiveness towards these people and promulgate a myth that there is a right and wrong, and if its not Keng's view of right, its wrong.