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.

 djones520 wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I'm sorry what? I'm going to just say I keep up with all the news in my country and this is not a thing here.

Might want to try to keep up a bit more.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/10/nazi-chants-at-dutch-soccer-game-expose-an-ugly-blot-on-the-beautiful-game/

It was a beautiful day for soccer in the Dutch town of Utrecht. Spring sunshine filled the stadium as the local team, FC Utrecht, kicked off against perennial powerhouse Ajax Amsterdam.

As the beautiful game slowly played out on the field, however, things in the stands quickly got ugly.

“Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas,” sang a section of the home supporters towards the fans visiting from Amsterdam, a city historic in part for its Jewish community. “My father was in the commandos, my mother was in the SS, together they burned Jews, because Jews burn the best!”

The anti-Semitism was caught on video and quickly circulated among Dutch media. FC Utrecht issued an apology as Jewish organizations demanded action by soccer authorities.

This was not a spur of the moment action. To chant something so utterly hateful... that's something deep in the psyche.

Good job reading my posts, I already mentioned the soccer thing. And it's been covered by multiple people in this thread and a couple of articles as well as being something fueled by soccer Rivalry, not true anti-semitism. Nice try though.

 Soladrin wrote:

 Soteks Prophet wrote:
The question that needs to be asked is why, throughout all of human history, have the Jews been reviled?

What do they do, or evoke from their neighbours that makes them hated?

Having a bad name in other fairy tale books.

So speaks that hater.
The rational response that doesn't involve taking a swipe at religion.


Jews have a hand in most of the baking in central Europe prior to the Third Reich. There is an argument that the defeat of Germany in the First World War was due to spiraling extortion, Germany was doing materially well but fiscally collapsing, a bit like the markets in 2008.
Jews cant be entirely blamed for this, not that that would stop Hitler, but Jewish bankers were a sizable proportion and a very visible one. They were blamed by the German people as to why Germany collapsed at a time when it was winning on the western front and had already won on the east.

Pretty much every anti semitic movement has had a fiscal core, even in the days of medieval catholicism. Religion is used as an excuse, just as racial purity was, but it isn't the actual cause.
Jews networked across Europe, which gave them a crucial business advantage, not thier fault, its natural to network with your own kind. Other businesspeople got progressively more jealous, as Jews also have a stronghold with the banking trade, at a time when Christians were forbidden under church law from charging interest, Jews became the banker of medieval Europe. Medieval Europe was no better at balancing the books than mdern Europe is, the major difference was that if a medieval Duke or Prince wanted to wriggle out of debt, he could get medieval.
It is at that time that the 'murderers of Christ' comes into it.

As it so happens this is not always the case. The Norman Kingdom of Sicily managed to make a multi faith balanced nation state n which Jews were actively encourggedto run the economy, Moslems formed the intelligensia and Norman Christians did the fighting. It worked for two centuries until the Papacy decided to 'clean house' and that had far more to o with medieval Italian politics than anything actually resembling religion. Moorish communities and Jews in Sain were integrated until the latter stages of the Reconquista, and the change which defind as a religious movement was a political power struggle at heart as militant Catholic is warred against itself not because of any doctrine but because there were multiple popes fr political purposes.

 Soladrin wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I'm sorry what? I'm going to just say I keep up with all the news in my country and this is not a thing here.

Might want to try to keep up a bit more.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/10/nazi-chants-at-dutch-soccer-game-expose-an-ugly-blot-on-the-beautiful-game/

It was a beautiful day for soccer in the Dutch town of Utrecht. Spring sunshine filled the stadium as the local team, FC Utrecht, kicked off against perennial powerhouse Ajax Amsterdam.

As the beautiful game slowly played out on the field, however, things in the stands quickly got ugly.

“Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas,” sang a section of the home supporters towards the fans visiting from Amsterdam, a city historic in part for its Jewish community. “My father was in the commandos, my mother was in the SS, together they burned Jews, because Jews burn the best!”

The anti-Semitism was caught on video and quickly circulated among Dutch media. FC Utrecht issued an apology as Jewish organizations demanded action by soccer authorities.

This was not a spur of the moment action. To chant something so utterly hateful... that's something deep in the psyche.

Good job reading my posts, I already mentioned the soccer thing. And it's been covered by multiple people in this thread and a couple of articles as well as being something fueled by soccer Rivalry, not true anti-semitism. Nice try though.

I did a skim through, didn't see anything referring to this. And i'm going to call bs that it's a "soccer" thing. Doing so is just trying to sweep it under the rug. I understand that Europeans are slowed about soccer, but you don't get anything going like that even the most hardcore sports rivalries here in the US.

They were making a mockery of the systematic murder of 6 million people, and the enslavement of million more. If that is "just a soccer" thing, then you guys have zero fething stones to cast at us anymore.

 djones520 wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
I'm sorry what? I'm going to just say I keep up with all the news in my country and this is not a thing here.

Might want to try to keep up a bit more.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/04/10/nazi-chants-at-dutch-soccer-game-expose-an-ugly-blot-on-the-beautiful-game/

It was a beautiful day for soccer in the Dutch town of Utrecht. Spring sunshine filled the stadium as the local team, FC Utrecht, kicked off against perennial powerhouse Ajax Amsterdam.

As the beautiful game slowly played out on the field, however, things in the stands quickly got ugly.

“Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas,” sang a section of the home supporters towards the fans visiting from Amsterdam, a city historic in part for its Jewish community. “My father was in the commandos, my mother was in the SS, together they burned Jews, because Jews burn the best!”

The anti-Semitism was caught on video and quickly circulated among Dutch media. FC Utrecht issued an apology as Jewish organizations demanded action by soccer authorities.

This was not a spur of the moment action. To chant something so utterly hateful... that's something deep in the psyche.

Good job reading my posts, I already mentioned the soccer thing. And it's been covered by multiple people in this thread and a couple of articles as well as being something fueled by soccer Rivalry, not true anti-semitism. Nice try though.

I did a skim through, didn't see anything referring to this. And i'm going to call bs that it's a "soccer" thing. Doing so is just trying to sweep it under the rug. I understand that Europeans are slowed about soccer, but you don't get anything going like that even the most hardcore sports rivalries here in the US.

They were making a mockery of the systematic murder of 6 million people, and the enslavement of million more. If that is "just a soccer" thing, then you guys have zero fething stones to cast at us anymore.

Wait, mockery of the holocaust is new to you? Anyway, you can call bs all you like, that doesn't change it from being a soccer thing. Mind you, I don't agree with it either and I think sports fanatics should all feth off anyway.

 Orlanth wrote:
Jews have a hand in most of the baking in central Europe prior to the Third Reich. There is an argument that the defeat of Germany in the First World War was due to spiraling extortion, Germany was doing materially well but fiscally collapsing, a bit like the markets in 2008.
Jews cant be entirely blamed for this, not that that would stop Hitler, but Jewish bankers were a sizable proportion and a very visible one. They were blamed by the German people as to why Germany collapsed at a time when it was winning on the western front and had already won on the east.

Germany wasn't winning on the western front when it collapsed, it had been on the retreat for almost three months straight,

 Orlanth wrote:



Jews have a hand in most of the baking in central Europe prior to the Third Reich..

They certainly didn't loaf around you mean ?

 Manchu wrote:
"It is not 1933. But could it be 1929?"

This is a long, difficult, and provocative essay -- and as an American, I found it to be totally shocking. I grew up watching Schindler's List, reading Elie Wiesel, visiting Holocaust museums ... "NEVER AGAIN" was effectively just as important to my moral education in public school as well as in private life as the Bill of Rights. I am probably not the only American who sometimes naively assumes Europe is pretty much like the United States ... when in reality, European countries may have more in common in some ways with (just for example) Japan. What I mean is, despite the significant prejudices that characterize American society, we do have a way of absorbing immigrants that doesn't seem possible for European nations. As Mr. Goldberg, the author of the essay, says in the video: The concept of a Moroccan-American makes immediate sense. But what is a German Turk?

The revitalization of anti-Semitism in Europe and its relationship to Muslim communities also living in Europe is therefore ... well, shocking to be honest to me as an American who was brought up on the moral truth summed up in that phrase "NEVER AGAIN." I really have trouble grasping that the question of whether the Jews should leave Europe can be a serious topic of discussion in 2015.

The migration of people from various North African and the Middle East countries (aka 'Muslims') to Western Europe has been a complicated affair and differs from country to country but it's hard to say it is typical in the way Europe absorbs immigrants. Immigrants from former colonies have integrated far more successfully and the same currently happens with the influx of Eastern Europeans. The closest US equivalent would be Mexicans in the south and that has had it's own issues.

France and to a lesser extent the UK are exceptions as both countries had a long colonial history with African and the Middle East but in other European countries Muslims were originally temporary migrant workers, basically expats, who were expected to leave after a number of years. Due to various events this did not happen, but the duality of their status still affects their position in society today. Stronger ties with the countries of origin through satellite TV and internet since the nineties has had a negative effect on integration and language fluency.

The latter leads me to disagree with Goldberg that the current antisemitism hails from Europe's past. Imo it's a result from the stronger influence of Middle Eastern mass (and social) media in which Israel, and Jews, are portrayed very negatively.

Not saying that there is no anti-semitism practically everywhere in Europe but the French situation is a special one. French big town banlieus are full of young muslim, more specifically, with maghrebian (north african) background, who live in bad conditions, very often in 2nd to 4th generation, with little perspective of making a good living or getting integrated into French majority culture. A lot of these young men naturally were and are very susceptible to the wrong preachings and a "US vs. THEM" thinking. And while there might only be a minority that resorts to actual violence, the anti-semitic "turths" seep through to almost all maghrebians.
In big parts of French big towns, maghrebians make up for 50% of the population, so antisemitic expressions are more common that in German towns, for example.
There were some cases of real anti-semitic violence from muslim extremists. (Attack on a school, the shooting in the Brussels museum)

Add to that there is an old antisemtic strain in French-catholic majority thinking, and the rise of the Front National, who granddaddy JM LePen is an antisemite if there ever was one (even if his daughter hates him for regularly sabotaging her attempts to bring the FN into the middle of French society), and it becomes more understandable why French jews might feel uncomfortable.

Still, between a country where some young arabs and old white French guys will slur at you, and a country a) where you can get bombed to death and b) that regularly bombs others to death, steals their land, and keeps them effectively in a state of apartheid, I know where I would raise my kids...

In any case, it is a) a unique French situation, because of the relatively big number of maghrebians and their failure to integrate them /isolating them in ghettos for more than a generation and b) the author is a known Zionist and anti-muslim activist.

Most other European countries' right-wing, anti-immigrant movements are anti-muslim nowadays, and sometimes acitvely seek solidarity with and from the jewish communities.
Last time I read something about jews in Germany it was some Israelian guys creating an uproar in their homeland because they spread the message "Leave Israel, come to Germany" (becuase the cholocate pudding was so much cheaper... I think jews are doing fine in our country, if all they worry about is the price of kasher chocolate pudding...*)

*not saying that we do not have important issues with Neo-Nazis and right-wing movements but generally, it's a totally different situation that in France.

This is what happens when you encourage massive amounts of immigration.

At least the Jews can go to a homeland that will look after their interests, no so great for those stuck living here when they leave.

It is undeniable that there is has been an increase in anti-Semitism in Europe in the past 15 years.

There has also been an increase in anti-Islamism, anti-immigration generally (let's remind ourselves, though, that Jewish citizens are natives, not immigrants), and homophobia.

This is partly a resurgence of the kind of fascism that in the 20s and 30s was represented by Mussolini, Hitler and Sir Oswald Mosley, caused then and now by conditions of economic distress.

Whether Jews are in particular danger I don't know. The British experience is that anti-Semitic attacks have gone up from 931 to 1,168 but this needs to be set against a background level of 4 million violent crimes a year. Things seem to be worse in France.

However it obviously is a challenge to civilised society in all of Europe. The idea behind a modern liberal democracy with the rule of law and everything is to stop this kind of thing from happening.

Mosley's issue was with particular Communists who happened to be Jews.

That and he was against international finance.

He didn't want to fight the war because it would cost us everything and it did. Let's not buy into the revisionist idea that the war was fought to "save the Jews".

There is no resurgence of early 20th Century fascism. People don't even use the word "Fascist" in the correct sense. It's a catch all buzzword for "bad". It adds nothing of value to the conversation.

We have seen unprecedented levels of immigration brought on to effect political social/change and to compress working class wages. None of this was asked for by the British people. It's been tyrannously applied and has seen little benefit. It's perpetuated by globalists and those that value money above all. Champagne socialist and bourgeois bohemians.

 Orlanth wrote:
It is time for Jews to leave parts of Europe.

Sweden for one.

Why?

 Manchu wrote:
Are you advocating ... like Jewish kids should go out in the streets and fight? Or what?

No, I'm saying that European Jews should hire (or find volunteers from the community to serve as) armed security guards for synagogues and other social gatherings. Were they in America, I'd recommend that everyone over there who felt the need obtain a carry permit, carry a handgun, and learn how to use it. In Europe that might be a tall order.

 George Spiggott wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Jews have a hand in most of the baking in central Europe prior to the Third Reich. There is an argument that the defeat of Germany in the First World War was due to spiraling extortion, Germany was doing materially well but fiscally collapsing, a bit like the markets in 2008.
Jews cant be entirely blamed for this, not that that would stop Hitler, but Jewish bankers were a sizable proportion and a very visible one. They were blamed by the German people as to why Germany collapsed at a time when it was winning on the western front and had already won on the east.

Germany wasn't winning on the western front when it collapsed, it had been on the retreat for almost three months straight,

I think he was referring to WW1, where I do recall that the Germans were enjoying a slight advantage in the trench warfare.

Now Fanta is put on stage in this conversation:

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/03/04/coca-cola-pulls-fanta-ad-over-nazi-controversy/

 Grey Templar wrote:

 George Spiggott wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
Jews have a hand in most of the baking in central Europe prior to the Third Reich. There is an argument that the defeat of Germany in the First World War was due to spiraling extortion, Germany was doing materially well but fiscally collapsing, a bit like the markets in 2008.
Jews cant be entirely blamed for this, not that that would stop Hitler, but Jewish bankers were a sizable proportion and a very visible one. They were blamed by the German people as to why Germany collapsed at a time when it was winning on the western front and had already won on the east.

Germany wasn't winning on the western front when it collapsed, it had been on the retreat for almost three months straight,

I think he was referring to WW1, where I do recall that the Germans were enjoying a slight advantage in the trench warfare.

Not in the last three months, It was all down hill from mid July and got worse from the 8th of August (Lutendorff's Black day of the German army).

 Medium of Death wrote:
Mosley's issue was with particular Communists who happened to be Jews.

That and he was against international finance.

He didn't want to fight the war because it would cost us everything and it did. Let's not buy into the revisionist idea that the war was fought to "save the Jews".

There is no resurgence of early 20th Century fascism. People don't even use the word "Fascist" in the correct sense. It's a catch all buzzword for "bad". It adds nothing of value to the conversation.

We have seen unprecedented levels of immigration brought on to effect political social/change and to compress working class wages. None of this was asked for by the British people. It's been tyrannously applied and has seen little benefit. It's perpetuated by globalists and those that value money above all. Champagne socialist and bourgeois bohemians.

For someone who complains about people derailing discussions with wishy-washy terminology you are using a lot of it yourself...

 treslibras wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
Mosley's issue was with particular Communists who happened to be Jews.

That and he was against international finance.

He didn't want to fight the war because it would cost us everything and it did. Let's not buy into the revisionist idea that the war was fought to "save the Jews".

There is no resurgence of early 20th Century fascism. People don't even use the word "Fascist" in the correct sense. It's a catch all buzzword for "bad". It adds nothing of value to the conversation.

We have seen unprecedented levels of immigration brought on to effect political social/change and to compress working class wages. None of this was asked for by the British people. It's been tyrannously applied and has seen little benefit. It's perpetuated by globalists and those that value money above all. Champagne socialist and bourgeois bohemians.

For someone who complains about people derailing discussions with wishy-washy terminology you are using a lot of it yourself...

Two phrases? Two phrases that have definitions as opposed to "fascist" which is rather nebulous these days. Fantastic observation.

 djones520 wrote:
.......

I did a skim through, didn't see anything referring to this. And i'm going to call bs that it's a "soccer" thing. Doing so is just trying to sweep it under the rug. I understand that Europeans are slowed about soccer, but you don't get anything going like that even the most hardcore sports rivalries here in the US......

Unfortunately, in the past the hatred and rivalry between Football clubs in the UK was, and still is in some areas very real and vitriolic indeed. They wouldn't give a monkey's if the supporters were Yids, or any other ethnic group, it's almost irrelevant and only a convenient handle for their real hatred, that of the opposing team.
The passion, and fervent support is real, and God help you if you end up wearing the wrong colours in the wrong place at the wrong time. Lads have been stabbed to death and thrown from bridges for less. Their ethnicity doesn't even come into it.
However, it's not like the US doesn't suffer from Sports related violence, and racism, so I wouldn't get on your high horse.

I didn't read the essay. Don't need to. They need to leave. This is not going to end well there.

Start a new life in the US. Find the ideal combination of TexMex and matsa balls!




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:



Jews have a hand in most of the baking in central Europe prior to the Third Reich..

They certainly didn't loaf around you mean ?

Indeed. Texans learned our cornbread secrets from them, and went on to beat the Kaiser. We all remember Pershing's conrbread powered blimp bombers that successfully air dropped Wild Bill Hikock into Berlin and defeated the Nazis in 1918.

I never did understand the whole "The Jews killed Jesus!" thing.
First, it was the Romans who did the actual killing. They just paid for the name. 40 silver pieces no less. Any good jew would sell out his own grandmother for 40 silver pieces, let alone someone claiming to be a prophet.

On a more serious note though. Has anyone noticed the similarities between what Jesus did/say and Deuteronomy 13?

The beginning of the chapter

1. \If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the Lord your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

So this man Jesus shows up, performs miracles, and basically says worship me (note I am paraphrasing heavily). Per the Old Testament, the Jews were obligated to kill Jesus.

That said, while I am Jewish, and do believe that a man named Jesus existed and was all about being excellent to one another, there are religious issues with him being the son of god and a direct father to son descendent of David (which is required for the Messiah).

I now return you to your original discussion.

It especially doesn't make sense because according to Christianity Jesus dying was the plan from the beginning. God sent his son to die for our sins and allow us to get the salvation we don't deserve, so if Jesus isn't killed then the whole plan falls apart. So, if anything, Christians should be thankful to everyone who was involved in killing Jesus. But I guess it's an easy way to give the angry mob something to be outraged about, as long as you make sure that nobody ever thinks too carefully about their religion.

Might have to break down and read Bill O'Reilly book "Killing of Jesus"

"The Jews killed Jesus!" thing.

People can believe any number of sillinesses if its suits them.

Specifically, the NT portrays a series of events in which, while the Romans were the executioners, the Jewish people and religious elite were the ones actually trying to kill Jesus. They're the ones who told 'lies' about Jesus to Roman authorities. The Gospels portray Pontius Pilate, as thinking Jesus was innocent of any crime, but sentencing him to death anyway because the Jews (specifically the Pharisees) wanted it. They chose to free Barabas (a notorious criminal and murderer) rather than Jesus when Pilate attempted to force them to free Jesus.

 Happyjew wrote:


So this man Jesus shows up, performs miracles, and basically says worship me (note I am paraphrasing heavily). Per the Old Testament, the Jews were obligated to kill Jesus.

This would make sense if Jesus ever actually told anyone to Worship him. In fact he never gave any such command or teaching (rather if anything, what is written about him discourages worshiping him specifically rather than God imo).

That said, there is a long running theory in regard to the NT. Namely that what we currently know about the Pharisees and their beliefs, wanting to kill Jesus doesn't make very much sense. In fact, the discussion between them and Jesus as described in the Gospels seems to run counter to what the Pharisees actually believed at that time period. First, their depiction in the Gospels shows them as being bizarrely uneducated about the Torah for men who largely dedicated their lives to the interpretation of 'the Law' and it's relevance in Hellenistic Judea. Really, baring the 'I was sent by God' bit, which never really made anyone popular with established religious authority, a lot of Jesus' teachings are much in line with what we know about Pharisee beliefs. There's very little reason to think they'd single him out like they did. Messianic holy men were commonplace in the Ancient world and Judea was not an exception. In his own life, Jesus would have been a dime a dozen. There's no reason to think the Pharisees would give a damn what some small time Rabbi was saying or that they'd be able to sway Roman authorities like they did.

Other evidence is that the tradition of releasing a prisoner during Passover, appears only in the NT. No other source ever mentions it (and given how much time Josephus devotes to the relationship between Jewish religion and Roman political authority in his works, not mentioning it at all is more curious). In fact, Pilates entire character in the NT seems to be the opposite of his historical person. Josephus and Philo describe a ponderous and rash man with no cultural sensitivity or patience whatsoever. He lost his job because he saw a bunch of pilgrims, thought they were rebels, and ordered in the damn cavalry to slaughter them.

This has lead some theologians to question the nature of how the Bible describes the lead up to Jesus' death. Specifically the theory posits that the Romans were the only ones who really wanted Jesus dead (exactly why varies a lot). Later Christians, the ones who wrote the Gospels, due to political realities that the first Christians faced in Judea, instead shifted blame onto the Jewish religious powers. One, to avoid their fledgling religion sparking the ire of Roman authorities who saw the 'Nazarenes' as too similar to the Maccabees, and two, because the relationship between the Jewish religious elites and the Nazzarenes had quickly become hostile in the second half of the 1st Century (which is confirmed in the writings of Josephus). It thus suited these early Christians to tell a version of the story where Jewish religious authority took the blame for killing Jesus rather than Romans cracking down on anyone with 'revolutionary' sounding religious rhetoric.

 LordofHats wrote:

"The Jews killed Jesus!" thing.

People can believe any number of sillinesses if its suits them.

Specifically, the NT portrays a series of events in which, while the Romans were the executioners, the Jewish people and religious elite were the ones actually trying to kill Jesus. They're the ones who told 'lies' about Jesus to Roman authorities. The Gospels portray Pontius Pilate, as thinking Jesus was innocent of any crime, but sentencing him to death anyway because the Jews (specifically the Pharisees) wanted it. They chose to free Barabas (a notorious criminal and murderer) rather than Jesus when Pilate attempted to force them to free Jesus.

Yeah, the Jews were responsible for his crucifixion. The Romans were only the instrument, and really as far as they were concerned they were just doing it to prevent a riot.

 Happyjew wrote:


So this man Jesus shows up, performs miracles, and basically says worship me (note I am paraphrasing heavily). Per the Old Testament, the Jews were obligated to kill Jesus.

This would make sense if Jesus ever actually told anyone to Worship him. In fact he never gave any such command or teaching (rather if anything, what is written about him discourages worshiping him specifically rather than God imo).

Not in the exact words, but he did repeatedly claim to be God. Of course God doesn't command worship, its not worship if its forced, he simply deserves it. But on multiple occasions Jesus was worshipped. Its actually how you can tell the difference between God and Angels in the scriptures. Before the siege of Jericho, Joshua was visited by a Messenger from God. By the fact that the messenger didn't refuse Joshua's worship, and the fact he used the title "commander of the armies of the Lord", we know that was Jesus. In contrast, whenever its an Angel the worship is always refused.

So, discussion closed, or what?

Because if american boy scouts start discussing their (americanized bible study version of) christian lecture, I think the topic "Should Jews leave Europe" is basically dead. Is it not?

 Frazzled wrote:
I didn't read the essay. Don't need to. They need to leave. This is not going to end well there.

Start a new life in the US. Find the ideal combination of TexMex and matsa balls!

Not sure they are safer in the U.S., with all your gun violence and bad eating habits and rabid wiener dogs!

 Happyjew wrote:
Any good jew would sell out his own grandmother for 40 silver pieces, let alone someone claiming to be a prophet.

Uh?

There are a few points worth raising with this article.

First off, Europe us not homogenous at all. Antisemetism might be on the rise in France but that is hardly Europe-wide.
Second, the antisemetism (which is present and admittedly rising) is mostly coming from a sizeable, loud and unpopular muslim community. The comparison to 1928 is invalid because even in France (the country with the most noticeable problem) antisemetic statements have been met with prosecution rather than approval from the state. It is hyperbole to suggest that the mood is the same.
Lastly, your comparison to Japan is not very good either. Education about the holocaust is extensive and detailed, and at least in my school the kids are beaten over the head with it. The majority of Germans I speak to are extremely knowledgeable and I have never heard an antisemetic utterance in my time here. Islamaphobic, yes, never antisemetic.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Any good jew would sell out his own grandmother for 40 silver pieces, let alone someone claiming to be a prophet.

Uh?

Judging by the fact that Happy points out that he/she him/herself is Jewish, I'd assume that's a cheeky joke on his/her own expense.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Any good jew would sell out his own grandmother for 40 silver pieces, let alone someone claiming to be a prophet.

Uh?

Judging by the fact that Happy points out that he/she him/herself is Jewish, I'd assume that's a cheeky joke on his/her own expense.

How much should I pay her/him to pretend she/he was dead serious and is completely antisemitic ?