Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I rather like the Iron Dome program though, it's an elegant solution to the whole rocked business. Shoot them down and you don't have to bomb civilians in Gaza to stop the rockets. It's a win-win solution.

That's a bit like saying as long as you've got a bulletproof vest, you don't need to try to get the shooting at you to stop.

 Seaward wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I rather like the Iron Dome program though, it's an elegant solution to the whole rocked business. Shoot them down and you don't have to bomb civilians in Gaza to stop the rockets. It's a win-win solution.

That's a bit like saying as long as you've got a bulletproof vest, you don't need to try to get the shooting at you to stop.

If the bullet proof vest had a 99% protection rate and covered your whole body you might not want to go after the guy with a gun with your GAU10 gatling cannon.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

The UK had an amicable solution to this centuries ago that still works. Let Jews have free reign over certain industries, notably the diamond trade, merchant and investment banking and allow them to build any kind of business in their own community, but to restrict them from domestic banking and insurance. This is why the UK has a large stable Jewish population, the problems that occurred in Germany in WW1 cant occur here and the return concessions are acceptable to the Jewish community.

Or, you know, you let Jewish people do the same things as everyone else?

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

1. People network with their own community and Jews have had a global community, even when there was no global community.
People stick with their own kind, its human nature, so Jews give the best deals to other Jews, just as the cliche of the 'Englishman abroad' who forms a club if he finds two other Englishmen. The concept behind this is based on logical observation, people network with their own. We all do it, but Jews have an advantage, being a race, a culture and a religion prascticing seperate living, the grouping is cohesive has a common ethos which is already business orientated though its spiritual teachings and common history and can network frankly far better than anyone else.
So Jews network more and tend to get rich quicker. This isn't a problem, though it can cause resentment of the left wing kind due to envy that of itself is not the fault of the Jews.

2. So where is the problem then?
Where the problems begin is when banking is involved. If the bankers are Jewish they give better deals and more lenient settlement terms to their own kind, which causers resentment and division. Furthermore if a company (likely a Gentile debtor) is foreclosed on the assets go to the creditors, and thus auctioned off to fellow Jews. Now the new management of the old company is Jewish and from then on being Jewish is largely necessary in order to be promoted, thus Jews take over the industry that was previously foreclosed on. This turns into a nasty vicious circle.
At this point claims of 'Jewish conspiracy' arise, and is the source of that theory, even though all we see is open business networking and the conspiracy angle is mostly myth. I say mostly because Jewish business is largely aware of what is going on, but networks as normal, because networking with our own kind is what humans do and Jews cannot be blamed for what is part of essential human nature.
England had this problem earlier than most of Europe as the towns were broadly more fair and there were fewer wars reaching the urban areas, also as an island it was easier to establish a cordon. Thus to combat this trend all Jews were expelled from England in the 13th century. Because we had our over-reaction over and done back in a time when harsh reaction to social conditions was morally acceptable we could also reflect and rebuild a relationship with the Jewish community early.
It was Cromwell who let the Jews return, but there were caveats that work from then to this day, so thwe working relationship with Jews is four centuries old and was built on a common understanding of economic and political realities that are still true today.

3. How does this work and why is it fair?
By limiting Jews from domestic banking the above problems which were major economic bugbears and the direct fuel for the rise of Nazism were curtailed. Its easy to write off Hitlers opinions as just the ravings of a sick feth, but they wouldn't have had any bite unless there was a veneer of truth to them. In the First World War the European economies were squeezed, however where there was partisan banking some people (Jews) would be given concessions, others would be foreclosed on (non Jews with assets sold to other Jews). While this is a gross oversimplification it occurred often enough to cause resentment and help pave the way for German defeat.

4. Ok, but even if that is so tthat deosnt make it right.
Up to a point, but the return concessions were and still are major. We live in a land of equal opportunities legislation, and companies can and are censured as racist if they fail to hire percentages of ethnic workers, or offer equal opportunities to promotion. However there are exceptions, Tescos and Sainsburys are amongst the largest employers in the UK but there is a clean demographic between store workers and head office workers. Jews enter at head office level while non Jews with some token exceptions have a glass ceiling at store manager level, and store managers don't get the same pay as managers with oversight over the quantity of staff you would find in other industries.
I remember a quote given to me from 1999, the height of New Labour and the politically correct move to ethnically equalise the workforce: 'shop level staff is not a profile job for Jews'. Not a profile job could be taken to mean gross discrimination is in place, but isn't, this Status Quo remains intact even when other companies were being censured for not having enough women or ethnics in management.

If supermarkets were unequal employers they have nothing on the diamond trade. You cant even get a job at all unless you are Jewish, and more restrictive than that you need a recommendation. This is discrimination in spades, but is allowed to continue, is even in fact encouraged because the diamond industry deals with small transportable, non detectable high value goods. For a Jew to steal from his employer would be to fly in the face of his own culture and community and thus Jews make more stable and trustworthy employees for the diamond trade.
This might sound like a wise general principle, but be assured it is an exception. There was an expose on BBC Radio of all places about how Chinese agents infiltrated companies and stole their data purely because it was not permissible not to employee them due to underrepresentation of Chinese ethnicity in the workplace, and sensitivity of information was not considered an excuse. The Equal Opportunities dogmas are exceptionally prevalent, but have been continually bypassed by the Jewish community even though evidence 'discrimination' is more clearly prevalent than in other industries to to its extremity or the size of the organisation involved.

5. The end result.
All this doesn't concern me in the least because its part of a wider deal which in the long term is best for everyone in the UK economy, Jewish and non Jewish. Jews get to run thing their way in niche industries but cannot dictate her destiny of the economy at large. They are happy, we are happy and anti-Semitism is a problem only amongst the Islamic community. For this centuries old agreement to have survived the cultural fethstorm that was New Labour is saying something, a lot of what was done in the UK was built on time tested common sense principles, and all too many of those principles were removed due to doctrinal expediency over the last decade and a half..

That post certainly is different.

If you cannot post without insulting other forum members, then it's best you don't post.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I rather like the Iron Dome program though, it's an elegant solution to the whole rocked business. Shoot them down and you don't have to bomb civilians in Gaza to stop the rockets. It's a win-win solution.

That's a bit like saying as long as you've got a bulletproof vest, you don't need to try to get the shooting at you to stop.

If the bullet proof vest had a 99% protection rate and covered your whole body you might not want to go after the guy with a gun with your GAU10 gatling cannon.

As someone intimately familiar with the use of the M61 on guys with guns, I beg to differ. That sounds like the exact right response.

I'd proffer if I'm wearing a bullet proof vest and someone is shooting at me, my first thought would be "HOLY CRAP SOMEONE IS SHOOTING AT ME!"

 Seaward wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
I rather like the Iron Dome program though, it's an elegant solution to the whole rocked business. Shoot them down and you don't have to bomb civilians in Gaza to stop the rockets. It's a win-win solution.

That's a bit like saying as long as you've got a bulletproof vest, you don't need to try to get the shooting at you to stop.

If the bullet proof vest had a 99% protection rate and covered your whole body you might not want to go after the guy with a gun with your GAU10 gatling cannon.

As someone intimately familiar with the use of the M61 on guys with guns, I beg to differ. That sounds like the exact right response.

Fine, let me rephrase:

If you've got body armour that protects your entire body with 99% efficiency and someone starts shooting at you in a crowded street, the best response might not be to open fire with a GAU10 in his general direction.

That depends. Can you call in a napalm strike? Is yes, then you're right that is not the best option. If no then its GAU10 time. FREEEEEEEEEEEEEMMMMMMMMMMM!

Clearly any criticism of Israel is merely far right propaganda perpetrated by exiled Nazi's who hate Jews. Israel is the bestest ever country in the world. We should all submit to their only ever good and never bad rule and become provinces of Israel.

 purplefood wrote:
Clearly any criticism of Texas is merely far leftt propaganda perpetrated by California girly boys and other cat lovers who hate all that is good and just. Texas is the bestest ever country in the world. We should all submit to their only ever good and never bad rule and become provinces of Tejas!

Corrected your typo.

 Frazzled wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
Clearly any CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT of CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT is merely CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT propaganda perpetrated by CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT who aren't CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT and CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT people. CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT is the craziest ever CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT in the world. We should all just CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT

CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT your CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT.

I CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT'ed your correction

 Orlanth wrote:

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

...

What the feth was that? I have no words. Yeah, criticism of Israel is not automatically anti-semitism, the sort of drivel you wrote is.

---

As for the actual situation of Israel and Palestine, while I don't condone terrorism, Palestinians are really oppressed and they've no way out from the situation, it is no wonder some of them snap and take extreme measures. Israel is in position to end this gak, they should let Palestinians to have their own state (and yes, there would still be some crazy islamists that would still want to destroy Israel, but they'd lose wide public support and legitimacy.)

Seriously though, why don't they* get on a ship and just move to Brownsville? Its as hot but the TexMex is so much more awesome. Texas will be bring peace to the ME. Just come here. As long as you're down with Second Amendment of course, else California awaits!

*They being both Israelis and Palestinians

 Frazzled wrote:
Seriously though, why don't they* get on a ship and just move to Brownsville? Its as hot but the TexMex is so much more awesome. Texas will be bring peace to the ME. Just come here. As long as you're down with Second Amendment of course, else California awaits!

*They being both Israelis and Palestinians

With all the shootin' going on over there, I'd say Second Ammendment detractors would be the least of problems!

 Crimson wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

...

What the feth was that? I have no words. Yeah, criticism of Israel is not automatically anti-semitism, the sort of drivel you wrote is.

How would an mutually beneficial agreement with the Jews be anti-Semitic.
There wasn't any anti-Semitism in the post, and the had to be explained comprehensively to show there was not.
There is a lot of realpolitik based on an understanding of human social psychology which I put pains to point out applies to everyone and doesn't single out culpability on Jews.

Logic will be wasted on some here though. Besides what would you want done about it, force the diamond industry to open up? Even if it would work would the Jews you are trying to 'help' appreciate your assistance?

 Orlanth wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

...

What the feth was that? I have no words. Yeah, criticism of Israel is not automatically anti-semitism, the sort of drivel you wrote is.

How would an mutually beneficial agreement with the Jews be anti-Semitic.
There wasn't any anti-Semitism in the post, and the had to be explained comprehensively to show there was not.
There is a lot of realpolitik based on an understanding of human social psychology which I put pains to point out applies to everyone and doesn't single out culpability on Jews.

Logic will be wasted on some here though. Besides what would you want done about it, force the diamond industry to open up? Even if it would work would the Jews you are trying to 'help' appreciate your assistance?

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

Relapse wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

...

What the feth was that? I have no words. Yeah, criticism of Israel is not automatically anti-semitism, the sort of drivel you wrote is.

How would an mutually beneficial agreement with the Jews be anti-Semitic.
There wasn't any anti-Semitism in the post, and the had to be explained comprehensively to show there was not.
There is a lot of realpolitik based on an understanding of human social psychology which I put pains to point out applies to everyone and doesn't single out culpability on Jews.

Logic will be wasted on some here though. Besides what would you want done about it, force the diamond industry to open up? Even if it would work would the Jews you are trying to 'help' appreciate your assistance?

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

Not to the best of my knowledge...

Relapse wrote:

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

I'm certain this has not been the case for ages. However he seems to be defending such discriminatory practices and fails to see why that would be a problem.

Relapse wrote:

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

You understood half correctly, the other half is that in other business areas restrictions that commonly apply are overlooked exclusively for Jews..
It's an agreed to and mutually acceptable trade off.

 Squigsquasher wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

That sounds right thinking, but actually doesn't work so well, as the Germans found out.
Bear with me while I explain why.

...

What the feth was that? I have no words. Yeah, criticism of Israel is not automatically anti-semitism, the sort of drivel you wrote is.

How would an mutually beneficial agreement with the Jews be anti-Semitic.
There wasn't any anti-Semitism in the post, and the had to be explained comprehensively to show there was not.
There is a lot of realpolitik based on an understanding of human social psychology which I put pains to point out applies to everyone and doesn't single out culpability on Jews.

Logic will be wasted on some here though. Besides what would you want done about it, force the diamond industry to open up? Even if it would work would the Jews you are trying to 'help' appreciate your assistance?

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

Not to the best of my knowledge...

Ok. The post seemed to imply there were restrictions and the bit about the Germanswas a tad troubling. Orlanth, is a poster I often view as fairly grounded even when I disagree with him, so I just need some clarification on his points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

You understood half correctly, the other half is that in other business areas restrictions that commonly apply are overlooked exclusively for Jews..
It's an agreed to and mutually acceptable trade off.

So what you are saying is that there are restrictions specifically on Jews in banking, but in the area of diamonds, etc. Jews are given free reign?

 Crimson wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

I'm certain this has not been the case for ages. However he seems to be defending such discriminatory practices and fails to see why that would be a problem.

 Crimson wrote:

I'm certain this has not been the case for ages.

Still the case today, most certainly true from my sources, Jewish and otherwise, though it might be becoming more one sided. Sainsburys has started in domestic banking, but I am not sure they can offer all normal banking services.

 Crimson wrote:

However he seems to be defending such discriminatory practices .

And no one is complaining. Jews are happy and run their own communities their way, non-Jews are happy, society is stable.
It even survived a two terms of a dogmatic government that got rid of most of the old wisdom.

 Crimson wrote:
and fails to see why that would be a problem.

I see the problem, perhaps you dont. Ask yourself why the US government cannot go against Israel.

We don't have anything like the level of lobbying in the UK because we have the long established mutual agreements that steered Jewish sector of the economy harmlessly into making monies for themselves and not controlling anyone else.
Jews make up a tiny percentage of the US population, but even you must appreciate that their influence on US policy is wholely disproportionate to their numbers. Continental Europe doesn't have many Jews due to Nazisim, but there is still a large established and stable community in the UK, a larger percentage than in the US but while there are many influential Jews they don't have influence over UK government like they do in the US, and we dont have problems with anti-Semitism either.

There isn't a problem, we have a four century old solution and it works.

 Orlanth wrote:

Relapse wrote:

Are you saying that in the UK, Jews are restricted from certain businesses? I read the rather lengthy post that seems to defend that, but I just want to be sure I understood correctly.

You understood half correctly, the other half is that in other business areas restrictions that commonly apply are overlooked exclusively for Jews..
It's an agreed to and mutually acceptable trade off.

The Poles had a good word for that.

Ghetto.

Orlanth, no such legislation exists. You're detached from reality. Also, if you don't see why restricting what sort of business you can do based on your ethnicity/religion is wrong, I don't know what to tell you.

 Frazzled wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
Clearly any criticism of Texas is merely far leftt propaganda perpetrated by California girly boys and other cat lovers who hate all that is good and just. Texas is the bestest ever country in the world. We should all submit to their only ever good and never bad rule and become provinces of Tejas!

Corrected your typo.

Yes all hail the mighty Tejas

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Fine, let me rephrase:

If you've got body armour that protects your entire body with 99% efficiency and someone starts shooting at you in a crowded street, the best response might not be to open fire with a GAU10 in his general direction.

Now we're getting into, "That depends," territory.

Is this gunman shooting at me from within a crowd that actively supports him shooting me?

I think we've discussed all that can be discussed.

Lock maybe?

 Seaward wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Fine, let me rephrase:

If you've got body armour that protects your entire body with 99% efficiency and someone starts shooting at you in a crowded street, the best response might not be to open fire with a GAU10 in his general direction.

Now we're getting into, "That depends," territory.

Is this gunman shooting at me from within a crowd that actively supports him shooting me?

The question then would be, "why do they want him to shoot me". And, for that matter, how do you know they support him in the first place?

Relapse wrote:


Ok. The post seemed to imply there were restrictions and the bit about the Germanswas a tad troubling. Orlanth, is a poster I often view as fairly grounded even when I disagree with him, so I just need some clarification on his points.

Ahnd you are right to ask for clarification. Which is why the initial post was long.
Bottom line:

There is a mutual agreement between the British government and the UK's Jews going back four centuries for the mutual advancement of the UK's Jewish community and the British people.

It cant be any less sinister than that. However like a lot of things that are based on a deeper wisdom it can appear different at face value. I remember I young Jewish friend in his twenties who wanted to set up in the commercial insurance industry and was puzzled as to why the central synagogue was saying he shouldn't do so. Later it became more understandable why.

As fro the Germans, the idea of 'Jewish usuary' is a bugbear going back centuries and it fueled pogroms starting in IIRC 12th century Cologne that spread across Europe. One catalyst for that was money lending practices, though it would be unfair to limit it to one source. It is not relevant how much truth or lack of truth there is to the claims, all that is relevant is an understanding of how such hatred begin and fester I explained how the concept of 'Jewish conspiracy' comes about, magnified by a present number of genuine cases, most likely incidental that back up the myth that such a conspiracy exists.
When Hitler invaded Poland many Poles pointed out the Jews for persecution, they did not defend them as fellow Poles.

Ask yourself why people go so far and hate so much, the argument that they are just mad on anti-Semitism is an unsatisfactory answer.

Jews themselves know there is a problem and have had cause to fear persecution. However there has been no persecution of Jews in the UK for eight hundred years, nor any large scale resentment. We get 'standard' racist commentaries because people can be dicks to individuals of a different culture, exactly the same as calling people 'p*ki' or 'n*gger'. However with those individual retards excepted, and the Islamic minority we have let fester, we have never seen any large scale anti-Jewish sentiment in the UK in all this time. With known exception of a single backlash violence in 1947, which the police quickly put down and prevented from continuing, which was started after news broke that a British soldier serving in Palestine Mandate Territories was kidnapped and tortured to death by the Irgun and his body was strung up and booby trapped.


Think what might have happened if such an arrangement existed in 19th century conteinental Europe and there was no excuse for an anti-Semitic movement there?

I honestly think its working.

Relapse wrote:

So what you are saying is that there are restrictions specifically on Jews in banking, but in the area of diamonds, etc. Jews are given free reign?

Especially the diamond industry.
Jews can also perform any service, including banking for their own community.
There are Jewish domestic financiers in the UK, but they only lend money to the Jewish community, or are foreign investment/merchant bankers ( including very big ones like Rothschildes). You might ask why would they turn down domestic custom?

I find the idea of there being "the Jewish community" and "The British community" ridiculous. If you live in the UK, you're part of the British community, regardless of whether you're a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Atheist or (as in my case) a Slaanesh worshipper.

Judaism isn't even a race, it's a religion.

If Mr Abraham Bagel and his family want to go into banking then let them.