[itai195]

Originally posted by Oswald Defense Lawyer:
Yes, there is a problem if any group dominates an industry, especially ones so powerful as Hollywood and the media, as my Wahabbi Arab example shows. And your continuing refusal to address this is the reason I called you a coward.

If this thread was a Hollywood film, it's a shame Bert Lahr isn't alive to play you.

The reason your posts are so suspicios is because you seem to be motivated by nothing more than a desire to point out that Jews dominate Hollywood. You suggest no remedy, and you don't seem concerned at all with other powerful industries that are dominated by particular groups. You constantly make an effort to cast your opinion as somehow oppressed in what is, I can only guess, an attempt to gain sympathy for your point of view.

Or am I just wildly misinterpreting your posts somehow?

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by itai195:
This is interesting to me, because I don't ever recall Israel fighting a war specificially against the Palestinian people... Correct me if I'm wrong please. They HAVE fought a war against the PLO, which at the time was undeniably a terrorist organization.

This is like Bin Laden waging a war against Americans... Not the US government... Why are we in Afganistan then?

If someone bombed a catholic church in NJ... would that be an attack against the Vatican? The vatican would assume so since it was a catholic church, it was an attack against christianity. The US government would assume it was an attack against the republican party, or whatever party was in the white house at the time.

It's spin. Intentional or not, I don't know. It's just spinning.

I also find the use of the NPR example to prove a pro-Israel bias somewhat curious, considering that many find NPR to be rather anti-Israel in general. For example, they recently had a large special series about the middle east conflict in which they discussed Israel's occupation of Palestinian areas last April. They neglected to mention that the motivation for this action was the passover suicide bombing. An interesting twist to this issue is that you can say the opposite when talking about Europe. I've frequently heard that CNN Europe, for example, devotes a lot more coverage to Palestinian deaths than to Israeli deaths.

In general, NPR, as well of the rest of the media is largely pro-israel. This is a comparison of one broadcast, to the past 20 years. A good test is pick up a newspaper after a bombing. Find where it mentions an Israeli death. Then look for a Palestinian death. Israeli deaths will make front page. Palestinian deaths, if even using the word "death" or "kill" (most often refered to as "conflict in previous weeks") will be way back in the paper.

One other thing I'd like to throw out there is that, yes, the US gives plenty of money to Israel. The US also gives plenty of money to the Palestinians and to Egypt, as well as a handful of other Arab nations. As much as people on this forum would like to malign the US role in the crisis, the fact remains that the US is the only peace broker that both the Palestinians and Israelis accept.

We absolutely fund both sides. Which is why they keep going. If this hurt there walet, politicians there would think twice.

We would have been in Iraq already, if it were on someone elses resources. When it's our limited (yes the US like any country has a limit) resources, we pause, find the right conditions, and make it quick. We don't want a long war. They don't care. The people on the other hand suffer.

Notice how much peace brokering Bush has done. This is why I have repeatedly been blaming him for tensions that have built up... We are the only country they allow to broker. Even though Bush doesn't like Arafat, he should have made an effort to either get the palestinian people to choose someone else to get things moving, or deal with Arafat.... It has been months of kill for kill warfare... We still stand idle. Where in the rulebook does it say that the UN can't step in here and give a more unified push for both sides to sit down at Camp David?

It's also humorous to me that you think an embargo will end anything. There was an Arab-imposed trade embargo on Israel for years, and it crumbled in the early 90s.

Yea, real embargo. What does the Arab world have that they need? The US and other countries bought from the Arab world the whole time, and sold it right back to Israel... a hair more of a cost... Nothing more. That was more for the principle of "we won't be preasured into selling for jews, we didn't try to kill them western europe did" rather than "this conflict needs to end"... Face it, the Arab world has oil, nothing else. We need oil. Israel will buy it from us then. If they stop us, we invade. Embargo was useless. Nobody really felt an effect.

Israel today is a markedly different nation than it was in 1990, and if you want my honest opinion I think that bringing in Western trade has caused the liberal movement in Israel to grow by leaps and bounds. Of course, somehow the so obviously pro-Israel US media has somehow laregly failed to mention any of this. That people in the US have the impression that our aid to Israel has given them carte blanche to do whatever they want leads me only to conclude that there really isn't a pro-Israel media bias, at least not as much of one as some would claim.

I would agree that there is a change, and it is portrayed in the media.... But the change isn't where it needs to be. It's still old Sharon in power. It's not the young 20 something liberals who just want peace and a place to raise a family. It's these old dogs who will go to the end to cleanse the land.

When these kids get in power, peace may happen... If the region survives that long.

As I stated before, it seems to be a puppet government more than anything else. If this movement gets into power, things would change. This obviously doesn't happen.

What the people want doesn't matter (in this case or in any other). It's what the government wants. I would bet that the average Iraqui couldn't give a **** about the US. They would much rather have food, water, a job, and a place to live. It's when Sadam spins the media that they show agression towards us, on his behalf. And we do the same to them.

Just now, the 60's liberals are starting to make a difference here in the US if you think about it. Americans with disabilities act, to name just one of many new laws. Look when it was created. It's a baby! There are many laws that should have been in place for 100 years, but are brand new. They 60's movements are just now having an impact....

As far as hollywood being about profit, it's also about politics. It's not ironic that there are over 50 movies glorifying war in the works at this moment. It's not ironic that the US Army is also a consultant for them.

There are also several movies in the works where a normal person stops terrorists.... guess who requested a few of those?

P-O-L-I-T-I-C-S = The people are meaningless

[Monique]

I love ignorant people that get only their information through movies. Maybe some of you should read a book once in a while and you would find plenty of litterature on Gulags, 100 years war, the Crusades, the rise and fall of the Roman Empire; and Rwawanda.

By the way the Romanov and Lenin were not friends and you cannot put together the Romanov and Lenin rise to power. It is totally different just like night and day. And at that time they were both dicators who exploited the Russian people.

By the way there are also books on the cold war, the Vietnam war (and lots of them).

Again the reason why the concentration camps are mentioned in most movies about the second world war is because there were 17 millions people that were murdered there. 6 million Jews and 11 millions of Russians, Gypsies, Christians, etc.

And those numbers are very conservative.

To say that we should not talk about it because it offends the little minds of Holocaust denier, is ridiculous well do not watch it and you won't have to think too much.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Monique:
I love ignorant people that get only their information through movies. Maybe some of you should read a book once in a while and you would find plenty of litterature on Gulags, 100 years war, the Crusades, the rise and fall of the Roman Empire; and Rwawanda.

By the way the Romanov and Lenin were not friends and you cannot put together the Romanov and Lenin rise to power. It is totally different just like night and day. And at that time they were both dicators who exploited the Russian people.

By the way there are also books on the cold war, the Vietnam war (and lots of them).

Again the reason why the concentration camps are mentioned in most movies about the second world war is because there were 17 millions people that were murdered there. 6 million Jews and 11 millions of Russians, Gypsies, Christians, etc.

And those numbers are very conservative.

To say that we should not talk about it because it offends the little minds of Holocaust denier, is ridiculous well do not watch it and you won't have to think too much.

REMINDS ME:
What ticked me off a was some Jewish guy arguing in the airport a last week (me was on vacation) because he was reading some magazine which refered to the AIDS epidemic as an african holocaust (something comparing it to the holocaust, I'm driving this from the conversation I overheard)... "How you can compare the Holocaust to something so insignifigant. These anti-semite writers are the problem with the world these days... <goes on for several minutes>".... Think he set the Jewish people back about 100 years...



Me thinks it's best to simply put the facts out there.... You can't force someone to believe what they don't want to. There will always be people who think an event in history didn't happen, no matter what.

Then you have people, as my friend above who are convinced that nothing can beat a certain event, and everyone else is in a worldwide conspiracy to make AIDS outshine the holocaust..

Really felt enlightened to know that AIDS doesn't really exist... Did you know it was a fabricated by the NAZI's and the Arabs!



(wanted to start a thread on that little bit, but not worth it)

me thinks if someone wants to believe something enough, they will regardless. The fool above, as well as Sadam (who thinks he shall overcome the US )

[Atef's corpse]

AIDS is a condition caused by HIV. Although the angry Jew was out of line and overreacting, there is little comparison to be made between the destruction of AIDS and the Holocaust, or with the word holocaust. The Holocaust was something done by one nation to other people. AIDS is something people acquire largely through their own actions.

[macvillage.net]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...lestinians_216

If the court decided that a reservist doesn't have the right to reject a mission because it violates international law.... oh my, I'm crosseyed....




Violation of international law is enforcable by a government?

Just odd

[Atef's corpse]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...lestinians_216

If the court decided that a reservist doesn't have the right to reject a mission because it violates international law.... oh my, I'm crosseyed....




Violation of international law is enforcable by a government?

Just odd

No, it isn't confusing for someone with a mildly developed brain stem. The case was about reservists not wanting an assignment because they said the Israeli occupation of the West Bank violates international law. The military is not a democracy, and you do not get to pick and choose your assignments. If the higher-ups say go, you go there or go to jail.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Atef's corpse:
No, it isn't confusing for someone with a mildly developed brain stem. The case was about reservists not wanting an assignment because they said the Israeli occupation of the West Bank violates international law. The military is not a democracy, and you do not get to pick and choose your assignments. If the higher-ups say go, you go there or go to jail.

Good, you can read the words, not try understanding what they stand for....

Israel has now officially established in the court of law that it's military is required to break international law (doesn't that in itself violate internation law) and by saying that it's military is required to do so based on past and future cases, it also admits to breaking international law... something it has never done before.... and has denied and fighted against for years.

If you read the article rather than just post a random comment, perhaps your post would mean something.

[Oswald Defense Lawyer]

For a concrete example of the effects of Jewish dominance on the film industry, just compare two recent films:

1) 'Divine Intervention' - A modern comedy set in Palestine. Winner of the International Critics Prize at Cannes - kept out of the Oscars because the place where the director was from doesn't exist (!) (more )

2) 'The Pianist' - Yet Another Holocaust film, set about 60 years ago. Directed by child-rapist Roman Polanski. Eligible for Oscar nomination.


Clearly, for Hollywood, raping children is better being Palestinian. Especially if your film's about the Holocaust.

There's no business like Shoah Business.

[Atef's corpse]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Good, you can read the words, not try understanding what they stand for....

Israel has now officially established in the court of law that it's military is required to break international law (doesn't that in itself violate internation law) and by saying that it's military is required to do so based on past and future cases, it also admits to breaking international law... something it has never done before.... and has denied and fighted against for years.

If you read the article rather than just post a random comment, perhaps your post would mean something.

They're not breaking international law because the 'occupation' is not illegal. It was taken during wartime--land taken by the victorious nation against an aggressor. There's nothing illegal about it.

And the court, Robert, ruled on whether soldiers can reject/choose their assignments. The court ruled they cannot. The fact that it was based on a soldier's refusal to go into the West Bank is just a side note.

[Atef's corpse]

Originally posted by Oswald Defense Lawyer:
at Cannes

Cannes also gave Michael Moore's 'Columbine' movie a 13 minute standing ovation. His movie is short on facts and high on idiocy, yet Cannes thought it was great.

Cannes doesn't mean squat except to the rich, pretentious 'artsy' pricks of the world.

Most likely the movie sucked, or maybe Hollywood figured that no one would go to the movie--Americans don't care too much about people who strap bombs to themselves just to blow women and BABIES into bloody pieces.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Atef's corpse:
They're not breaking international law because the 'occupation' is not illegal. It was taken during wartime--land taken by the victorious nation against an aggressor. There's nothing illegal about it.

And the court, Robert, ruled on whether soldiers can reject/choose their assignments. The court ruled they cannot. The fact that it was based on a soldier's refusal to go into the West Bank is just a side note.

Actually, they are intentionally (now we can say that) refusing to withdraw dispite UN Resolutions... the fact that Iraq is violating a UN resolution is a cause for war next month.

This does make the "occupation illegal".

[Atef's corpse]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Actually, they are intentionally (now we can say that) refusing to withdraw dispite UN Resolutions... the fact that Iraq is violating a UN resolution is a cause for war next month.

This does make the "occupation illegal".

Robert, can you show me a Security Council resolution calling for Israel's withdrawal from the West Bank?

The UN General Assembly is unimportant. Their mindless dotterings do not make international law.

[derien]

Originally posted by Oswald Defense Lawyer:
Yes, there is a problem if any group dominates an industry, especially ones so powerful as Hollywood and the media, as my Wahabbi Arab example shows. And your continuing refusal to address this is the reason I called you a coward.

If this thread was a Hollywood film, it's a shame Bert Lahr isn't alive to play you.

Alas, if only I were brave...



...and you had a brain.

(I hope you find this at least somewhat humorous.)

I think I adequately addressed your example, although maybe it did not seem that way because I did not retype "Wahabbi" when I replied. Seems to me you don't want me to simply acknowledge the issue, you want me to agree with you. No matter how many times you call me cowardly (which doesn't really make sense), I probably won't come around to your view. I think what you really are trying to say is that I'm not being open-minded enough. Here I can only say that I have analyzed the situation to the best of my limited capacities and have ultimately found your assertions lacking. Some of the issues you raise might have merit, but I think you improperly identify the causes.

[derien]

Originally posted by vmarks:
This thread -was- about Jewish movies. It wasn't about a war in the middle east, it was about the way movies get made in California, a world away.

You are so right. Which is why I was reluctant to finally address that "other" issue in a later post. I think I would like to paraphrase and reiterate the central points of my intitial posts, for my own benefit at least, if for no one else's:

There is a literary quality inherent to the Holocaust that makes it easy and meaningful to reinterpret. It is frightening to us not so entirely because of the victims, but more so perhaps because of the perpetrators, to whom many in the audience find, with horror, they can relate. The objection seems to be that the Holocaust is retold at the expense of other worthy stories--those of Turkey, Russia, Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, etc. That may be a legitimate complaint, but what cannot be said is that the Holocaust is overtold. If there is more to say of it, more should be said.

...and please pardon me for the consecutive posts...

[SimeyTheLimey]

Vbb is acting up

[SimeyTheLimey]

Damn board ate my post twice.

I give up.

[Oswald Defense Lawyer]

I think I adequately addressed your example

No, you studiously side-stepped it. As you continue to do. As you will continue to do.

Seems to me you don't want me to simply acknowledge the issue, you want me to agree with you

I get a sense that you actually do agree with me. But for fear of losing face, or being misinterpreted as being anti-semitic, it's difficult for you to admit it.

No matter how many times you call me cowardly (which doesn't really make sense)

The cowardice continues. I give you a concrete example of how Jewish dominance effects the film industry. Unable to deal with it, you ignore it.
Perhaps you, like Hollywood, believe that raping children is morally better than being Palestinian. I find it hard to believe you really think like this. But if so, I would have to warn all parents to be wary of you - you should be easy to spot shuffling about in your Lion suit....

It is frightening to us not so entirely because of the victims, but more so perhaps because of the perpetrators, to whom many in the audience find, with horror, they can relate.

To say that it's has a greater literary quality because a 'cultured' people were the perpetrators is plainly ridiculous. The Belgians, a similarly 'cultured' people, murdered just as many Congolese as the Nazis murdered Jews, if not more. This chaotic history still contributes to the situation in Congo. And yet - can you recall one single movie about Congolese genocide, despite it having all the 'literary' credentials you claim?

but what cannot be said is that the Holocaust is overtold (sic)

This is precisely what can be said. Endless repetition of the subject is just trivializing it, rendering it meaningless. At least the younger generation are starting to get sick of people using the Holocaust for political and financial gain.