Jewish community complaint alters Fasching parades

Why would he?

Because he cleary recognizes the fiber of the Israeli empire.

Looks like some folks have no sense of humour.

Yes dear.
It's two weeks since I've socialised in company that wasn't predominantly German and two weeks since I have spoken English socially.
What does that say about the chances of me being "Anti-German" ?


I think Germany is a racist state.
I think that since 1990 certain sections of the ruling class have been keen for it to expand its imperialist activities.

That obviously means I hate all Germans and welcome some crazy Austrians firing rockets over the border from Kufstein right?

None of that would prove that you aren't. I don't know for sure whether you are or not, but I don't rule it out.


Are you serious? Sounds rather anti-German to me. This country is many things, including a bit too Socialist, but it is absolutely not a racist state.

Just curious, but which countries do you consider to be "non-racist" states?

You are asking me to prove a negative?

Given that socially I speak mostly German, mostly socialise in German speaking environments and that the ajority of my friends are German.
That my ex partner is German, three of my last four "sport buddies" are German, that I'ved lived in Germany a long time and am in no hurry to leave.
I think it may be a fairly safe bet to say that I'm not "anti-German".

Germany socialist? PMSL. Go away and have a look at the relationship between the real incomes at the top and bottom of society.
Do come back and tell me where the working class are in control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.

It's true that the section of the ruling class that want it, haven't (yet) succeeded in pushing through the full on Thatcherism.
Long may that be the case.

Plenty of evidence could be put forward which would show anti-German feelings on your part. How about telling us which states aren't, IYHO, racist, MT?

Sorry to hear that you are so disappointed that Germany has not implemented Marxist theory to your heart's content. The free market has been proven to permanently lift large numbers of people out of poverty, a stark contrast to the damage wrought by your beloved Communism. Maybe it is no mere coincidence that Karl Marx himself was anti-Jewish.

Please feel free to post them here.


A good question.
I probably couldn't name one.
As class based societies use racism to divide people against each other.

On the surface, the USA has a good record on trying to drive racism out of the state and respect for that.
But one has to ask why young African American men are so often in prison, victims of violent crime etc.
And also question the physical racial segregation that seems to be very pronounced in the US.


But Trotsky was Jewish, as were other leading Bolsheviks etc etc.
I've heard it argued that Marx was anti Semitic before. I've also heard it argued that he, like any writer was a reflection of his times and social norms.
In my childhood, stuff was acceptable on TV that would be boycotted as racist now.

OK, MT, why do you think that the incarceration rate for African American males is so high, along with the fact that the primary victims of violent African-American male criminals are other African-Americans!
As for segregation in housing patterns, when was the last time you spent any significant time in the US?


Trotsky was of Jewish descent- his family did not practice Judaism. He was a Ukranian. I doubt any Bolshevik practiced Judaism.

I doubt many Bolsheviks practiced religion but Trotsky was culturally Jewish.
Certainly some aspects of Stalin's purges might well have been anti-Semitic but I'm not known of my ove for "Uncle Joe".

One could make a whole socilogical / criminalogical career on the issues surrounding young male African Americans and their perpetration and victimhood of crime.
It's not a unique US phenomena, you can see it sadly too often on the BBC as well with a spate of murders in London.

It's about education, training, jobs, male role models, "three strikes and you're out" type of sentcing, poor defence in court etc etc etc.
In many ways, the US is a leading light. perhaps things will get better if Obama is elected president?

MT, what made Trotsky, IYHO, "culturally Jewish" if he didn't practice Judaism? Religion is a major component of culture, after all.

A President Obama will, AOTBE, not make a difference in the lives of African-Americans in the US. He wouldn't only be the President of African-Americans, you know.

Just to try to get back to the original story - what will everyone here be doing on Sunday 27th? If you don't mind me asking.

Ummm... visiting Trotsky's grave?

I though that one could be culturally Jewish though not practice the religion?
Must be me being anti-semitic obviously.

27th?
Dancing my tits off in at a heema Fasching party, sleeping, and then heading out to an election party to (hopefully) see the racist Koch land on his arse.

Well, MT, you prove once again that you are not capable of adult discussion. I simply asked what your basis is for saying he was Jewish. How then was he "culturally Jewish"? What evidence is there to support your assumption that he was "culturally Jewish"?


But, if Germany is, as you posit, a racist state, wouldn't Ypsilanti also be a racist?

Well, Pas, I wonder what you think should have happened to European Jews after WWII?

And I wonder why the forced movement of peoples from their homes to make way for them seemed like a good solution.

No I don't think she is racist.
Where on EARTH did you get that idea from?

You seem to not separate individuals or groups of people from the state.

No wonder you didn't want to answer the question I posed to you. How about it, Pas, what should have been done? It is a bit more difficult to formulate solutions than to persecute Jews, isn't it?

The solution to which you refer both misleadingly and obliquely was conjured up by the UN and your own country. The Arabs rejected the UN's two-state solution. Surely the Palestinian people would have been better off with a state of their own in 1948?

The State is composed of people and their institutions, not of inanimate objects. What makes Koch, in your opinion, racist while Ypsilanti is, in your opinion, not racist?

Pas, you stated you are against the very existence of two states, Vatican and Israel.
But did not clarify yet why.

The fact that Koch has for the SECOND time run an election campaign based on an "anti" position towards people with migrant backgrounds.

I think the poster from earlier this weeks that simpy says

"Stopps Ypislanti, al Wazir und die Kommunisten" is deliberately designed to pander to racists.
To the extent that some leading member of the SPD directly accused him of it..

Anyway, seems to be getting a bit muddled here.
This thread is about the Fasching issue and going on about Hessen here is a bit of a tangent.

MT, what does the campaign poster refer to (other than Ypsilanti)- what was its context? That is rather thin gruel if that is all you have. Sounds to me as though you have a boilerplate accusation for every center-right person in the world.

No country in the world should have to tolerate crimes by foreign criminals. If people are going to demand things from society, they should at least have the decency to respect the society's laws and the rights of others. Is that too much to ask?

I am against religion and all the controlling that comes with it. The vatican is possibly worse as it is at the centre of the worlds largest mafia.

Israel does at least have some form of democracy and does have non Jews in it's population. The justification for it's existance being a 2000 year old book and the idea of correcting a historic wrong is to me wrong.

Yes the Jews were persecuted over more time than just the Nazi's and , to and C, he correctly identifed that the problem as the European Jews at the end of the war and the solution was to build a state for all Jews right in the middle of an area where they were always going to be hated. Emotions were clearly high at that time but was this the best solution for all time?

What's done was done though. Israel exists and should not be removed. As C also says , whould it have been better to have a palistinian state in 1948? We can't change it so it's a worthless question. With the benefit of hindsight possibly so but who knows what would have happened. Of course the intolerance of the Muslims and their actions are at least as bad , there are no hero's in that environment at the moment. Peace is a long way off.

I didn't see a solution there, Pas, just what basically amounts to a denunciation of religion- btw, Israel is no theocracy.

The only solution now to the Israel situation is the same as any conflict. Making both sides realise what they have in common and work on that rather than focus on what the differences are and fighting those. The cultural differences between the two sides is so wide at the moment that it is a long long way off though. The palistinians voting in of Hamas being a very big step in the wrong direction.

Pas, I meant the solution in 1945 (maybe that wasn't clear). What would you have done then about the plight of European Jews?

What's done is done. It's worthless thinking about what should have been done. Look to the future.

Pas, I think if you are going to criticize the solution devised by the UK and the UN back in 1948, it's pretty reasonable to ask what you think would have been the appropriate solution at that time.

And you are more than welcome to feel that it's reasonable.

Just as I have the right not to spend too long thinking about it.

I'm curious about why you keep throwning in the UK bit. I don't feel any ownership of the decision just as I feel no ownership of anything else the UK has done in the past.

There are already too many people complaining about things without offering any solutions. The UK was involved, like it or not, so their role and that of the UN cannot be ignored. No one is holding you personally responsible, Pas, don't worry. I do think it speaks volumes that you cannot even offer an opinion as to what should have been done in the 1940s.

It may speak volumes for you and you tend to use that tactic with everybody you debate with.

I'll live with that.

Indeed it does speak volumes. I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt by letting you express your own thinking on the matter, but since you refuse to give a simple answer, I will draw my own conclusion. BTW, a person who has such strongly-held views on this matter as you is extremely unlikely to hold no opinion on what should have been done about the plight of European Jews in 1945, many, if not most of whom, BTW, were not religious at all.

Well Israel is not Theocracy nor "some form of Democracy". It is a full blown Democracy like any other. It's a country with a main religion like hmm errr ... most countries in this world, and with respect and support of other religions inside its own borders. From this perspective you should not be against the existence of Israel since you are not agains all those hundreds of countries.


First of all it is not what is written in a book. Jews where living there and were expelled, that is a fact. Another fact is that Jews, in minor quantities, always lived there. Another very important fact is that Jews kept the attachment to the land and always considered themselves living abroad and waiting for their return. It is not an event that occurred 2000 years ago but uninterrupted and continuous history. How strong are this points in absolute numbers we can discuss eternally and if you wish we can open another thread for that, please do not do it here. But we can certainly do it in relative numbers, and here we go.

You are not against the existence of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon or even Palestine (me neither BTW) just to name a few. However these countries never existed and do not have history. They even did not have their own language, religion, or culture, nor even their own people (they do now). Those countries were just post war creations. If you have nothing against the existence or creation of any those countries, well I would say you are a little unfair and biased against Israel, which has light years more grounds to stand on.


Well, as I said, there were always Jews there, and it was nobodies' land after the war. You could return those lands to Turkey, keep it as part of France and UK, or split it up. If you split it up you had some one claiming it for millennia. As to be in an area where you are hated, Germany is in one too. Some things take generations to heal. But do not underestimate the power of time.


You should then be more careful with some sensitive issues and and choose the right words. You are not against the existence of Israel, you were just against her creation (Germany was too), but now you are for her.


I am optimist. I feel peace is around the corner, and I wish I'm right

As pointed out, Israel is not a theocracy. There are many religious people in Israel who vote for religious parties to represent them, but this part of democracy, like it or not. There are religious parties in many other western countries; hell, you're even living in one.


Israel is as democratic as it gets. If you think otherwise, please tell us what is there to be improved. And remember, before blaming religion to be the justification behind its founding, that Herzl was a secular man. The state of Israel wasn't founded because of what happened in WWII, this is an anachronism that many people who know little about Zionism (this isn't a curse word for me as it probably is for you) seem to think.

The Jewish State was written in 1886. The first Zionist congress was convened the following year, and the reason for these moves so early on was the disappointment felt by many Jews in Western Europe about the failure of the so-called auto-emancipation of the Jews. The triggering of this landslide was the Dreyfus affair, which led Herzl, the proud Austrian nationalist at his time, to the understanding that Jews will never be accepted in Europe; the culture is too racist and too much based on family lines to accept even the most patriotic, non-religious Jews.


By the time WWII had started, all the institutions of an upcoming Jewish state were already established and functioning, ready to become ministries and uphold a nascent country the minute the last British soldier went back to his county. WWII and its attrocities were just a wake-up call for the international community. European Jews new long before that that their nation needs a country just like, if not even more than, everybody else. The ones who didn't believe that are mostly dead today. Many of the ones that did are thriving in Israel.


I actually think this is extremely naive and exposes a gross misunderstanding of the situation there these days. If you think there will be peace and understanding in the next 25 years, you're dreaming. My bet is around 70, the generation that's growing up today should die out or be replaced in leadership before we can do anything in the direction of peace. What is left to do is separate the peoples and reduce friction to a minimum to make even this possible even in 50 years.


The UK was responsible for most of the hatred that was stirred up between Jews and Arabs in the Palestinian mandate because of the way they pitted these two populations against each other instead of harnessing the combined national aspirations of both populations towards a common goal. Think of what the place would have looked like these days had they British not been a bunch of petty government officials looking for the easies way to entrench the status-quo.

I would think your time scales are realistic. Hopefully a little on the long side but you never know. Northern Ireland has calmed down , although it would be nieve to think solved: Perhaps there can be some shortening of this conflict but it will take some effort or a couple of great men/women capable of galvanising both sides to forget the past and try and form a common future. Sadly I'm non too optimistic on this as the gulf seems too great at the moment and the general Muslim/Christian conflict that has erupted will not aid things.

I've oft thought that Israel is at the centre of the conflict but that may well now not be true. The internal war in the Muslim world seems to have overtaken that issue. Perhaps it could be possible for this microcosm of the problem to show the way for the larger world now?

Establish Gaza and the West Bank as a soverign state with the right of transit by land between the two parts.
Establish Jerusalem as a "Free City"
Allow a soverign Palestine to use it's airport and construct an international harbour.

For a period of X years, the customs service of Palestine, the border between Palestine and Israel, the land transit route and the establishment of a free administration in Jerusalem to be secured by UN/EU/International Joint Body etc.

Now, I'm getting back to listening to my faschings hits CD.

Given the inability of Egypt to secure its own border with Gaza, I don't think Israelis are going to be too keen about giving Palestinians access to the corridor you promote so heartily under international supervision (EU??? now that's funny). Do you honestly think EU countries or the UN can guarantee Israeli security, or, even more importantly, that Israel or the Palestinians would deem such a commitment credible?

You also haven't said anything about the so-called "right of return", an issue which can't be ignored, plus a foreign administration of Jerusalem would be anathema to both sides!

At least you made a stab, MT, but it's half-baked. Think it through a bit more.

As mentioned above, it's about a compromise solution.
Palestine becomes a soverign state but there is recognition of the demand of Israel for the security of its citizens.

Pas mentioned Northern Ireland. Both the British State and the IRA realised that they were in a stalemate situation.
Both sides and the Republic of Ireland made compromises to reach a situation where the issues are not over by any means but we have moved on from terrorist bombing of shopping malls or the British state operating in a most repressive manner.

Perhaps Guinness could sponsor the party to celebrate the founding of a soverign Palestine?

Ooooooh, now it's "Er gehört zu mir" playing.

MT, although I do wish fervently for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, I think that citing Northern Ireland, which is a much different situation, is not a vaild comparison, and using that experience to come up with solutions that are not applicable to the Middle East will lead you astray.

You didn't say anything about the issue of the so-called "right of return" which may be the most intractable. Additionally, to say that there will be knowing nods to the need of Israel for security is much ado about nothing because it is not going to do anything to guarantee that security.

There are 101 threads on Israel and Palestine and I'm sure there will be again.

MT has discovered the Clinton proposal, so it seems. Unfortunately similar things have already been suggested in Camp David, then in Taba and rejected or disregarded by Yasser Arafat without him suggesting even one single counter proposal.

Seems like this naive idea of a "zick zack this that finished" solution works only in the failed politics of the drivers of the peace process in the 90s. The experiment was already conducted, on live humans without anesthesia, and failed. Why do you think we should follow this exact same path again?

Genie, it was a one minute, back of a fag packet suggestion based on the untrue allegation from Conq. that no one critical of Israel has any solution to offer.
Maybe it is an idea from the 90s. But i don't see any other workable idea having emerge more recently.

unless you are either Jewish or German how the hell can you understand the importance of Holocaust Memorial Day? Once apon a time there was a 1000 year old German/European Jewish World, only 60 years ago its was wiped out in cold blood. What remains now is a tiny fraction of a world that covered German science, arts and political brilliance and genius and millions of ordinary Europeans and their humble lives. Only a German or Jew understand the importance. Its clear that you dont.

Wrong, grobah. The Jews do not have the monopoly to mourn the Holocaust, they just do a good job of putting themselves into the limelight. You cannot determine what I or MonksTown or anyone else in the world understands or not.

I was deeply offended by this route, having been rudely awakened by bad Tom Jones songs and Schlager at 10:30 am on a Sunday after a long hen night out. I don't think I've heard anything so loud in my entire life.

of course not and we welcome other victim groups to benefit from our ability to overcome the ignorance of the goyim