Lionel, you would be paranoiaic if you would suggest that the Free
constructionworkers were the only factor. This is not how I understand you. And
there are other causes of cours.
It's not only in creating the state of Israel, but also in supporting it in all
activities of religious terrorism that western countries have contributed to the
present situation. And that cannot only be blamed on the Free Masons. I think
the orthodox Protestant movements are much stronger and all consider the Jews as
the choosen people. In the U.S. many hospitals have taken over the practice of
circumsizing babies, just because it's a jewish custom (any neutral medical
expert will tell you that there's no medical or hygienic reason to do such a
thing, in fact it's as intelligent as trying to keep your feet clean by throwing
all you're shoes and socks away).
Here in Holland I've met quite some people who will not hear any critic on the
Israeli politics, because they've spent a year in a kibbuts or because they
still feel guilty about the shoah and see the Jews as the innocent prosecuted
underdog. And there's no room for nuance. Anyone who says that orthodox Jews are
arrogant bastards, is supposed to be a friend of Hitler's.
erik
Lionel Boxer wrote:
> I don't think my comments are paranoiaic at all. They do not worry me if
> that is what you are referring to ... rather they explain why the English
> created the State of Isreal. They saw it as their duty to make it happen.
>
> In an article about Gadamer, Outwaite (in Skinner (1985, p. 24)) explains:
> 'This notion of projection tends to be misunderstood in the Anglo-Saxon
> world as a mysterious kind of empathy, but what Dilthey (1958) and others
> really had in mind was a much more cerebral process based on a common sphere
> of experience.
>
> This Masonry was indeed a common sphere of experience and the English did
> not (and perhaps still do not) 'know what they do does', to quote another
> idea of Foucault. If a whole nation attend monthyly meetings that reinforce
> the notion that Jews are meant to be in Isreal then they will gain
> satisfaction in seeing that take place.
>
> Just an idea. Not paranoiaic.
>
> After reading a bit of Foucualt, I get the feeling that the English race
> does not understand alegory to the same degree that the French and Russians
> do.
>
> ---------------
> guillame debord <guydeborder@xxxxxxxx>
> Some of those things that you are saying are quite
> parnoiaic. Very good and nice, I like that mad
> critical nuts which reads things into those weird
> movements de la passe!!
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
constructionworkers were the only factor. This is not how I understand you. And
there are other causes of cours.
It's not only in creating the state of Israel, but also in supporting it in all
activities of religious terrorism that western countries have contributed to the
present situation. And that cannot only be blamed on the Free Masons. I think
the orthodox Protestant movements are much stronger and all consider the Jews as
the choosen people. In the U.S. many hospitals have taken over the practice of
circumsizing babies, just because it's a jewish custom (any neutral medical
expert will tell you that there's no medical or hygienic reason to do such a
thing, in fact it's as intelligent as trying to keep your feet clean by throwing
all you're shoes and socks away).
Here in Holland I've met quite some people who will not hear any critic on the
Israeli politics, because they've spent a year in a kibbuts or because they
still feel guilty about the shoah and see the Jews as the innocent prosecuted
underdog. And there's no room for nuance. Anyone who says that orthodox Jews are
arrogant bastards, is supposed to be a friend of Hitler's.
erik
Lionel Boxer wrote:
> I don't think my comments are paranoiaic at all. They do not worry me if
> that is what you are referring to ... rather they explain why the English
> created the State of Isreal. They saw it as their duty to make it happen.
>
> In an article about Gadamer, Outwaite (in Skinner (1985, p. 24)) explains:
> 'This notion of projection tends to be misunderstood in the Anglo-Saxon
> world as a mysterious kind of empathy, but what Dilthey (1958) and others
> really had in mind was a much more cerebral process based on a common sphere
> of experience.
>
> This Masonry was indeed a common sphere of experience and the English did
> not (and perhaps still do not) 'know what they do does', to quote another
> idea of Foucault. If a whole nation attend monthyly meetings that reinforce
> the notion that Jews are meant to be in Isreal then they will gain
> satisfaction in seeing that take place.
>
> Just an idea. Not paranoiaic.
>
> After reading a bit of Foucualt, I get the feeling that the English race
> does not understand alegory to the same degree that the French and Russians
> do.
>
> ---------------
> guillame debord <guydeborder@xxxxxxxx>
> Some of those things that you are saying are quite
> parnoiaic. Very good and nice, I like that mad
> critical nuts which reads things into those weird
> movements de la passe!!
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp