Scarfe touches a raw nerve

[teamsaint]

What's that got to do with things?

#

Should have said " Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons".
If you read back, you will see that Israel, according to some people, only acts in self defence. I'm not quite sure who is actually threatening Israel with nuclear weapons. Iran doesn't have them.
I mentioned about nukes, because it is a clear indication of Israel's stance on defence issues. They have at least 75 warheads, at the most conservative count. You really don't need that for self defence.

[Flosshilde]

#
If you read back, you will see that Israel, according to some people, only acts in self defence. I'm not quite sure who is actually threatening Israel with nuclear weapons. Iran doesn't have them.

Iran first started a nuclear programme (not nuclear weapons) in the 1950s with the support of the USA. It was abandoned after the revolution as the Ayatollah Khomeini had religious reservations about nuclear weapons. It re-started in 1989.

Israel has had nuclear weapons from the late 1960s. Self defence? from whom?

[Mr Pee]

Did you mean this one ?

Ah, the joys of anonymity. Now repost it under your real name and wait for the fanatics to come at you.....

Anyway, back to Israel's right to defend itself from those same fanatics. The naivety and complacency of many here in the West never ceases to amaze. Imagine, if you will, that Britain was subject to daily attacks, randomly targeting civilian areas. That an atrocity on the scale of 7/7 was not an isolated incident, but a regular occurence. That suicide bombers routinely targeted cafes, buses, and restaurants. And that the leader of one of your nearest neighbouring countries openly called for you to be wiped from the map.

What would you expect our politicians to do? Lie back and let it carry on? Or take all necessary steps to bring such activity to a halt, including developing an effective deterrent and targeting those areas from which the rocket attacks and terrorists were originating?

Israel is a democratic state- itself an anathema to many in the Middle East- and recognized as such by the UN, since 1947. It has every right to defend itself and its citizens. We should admire the courage and determination of the Israeli people and their Government in facing up to years of aggression.

[Lateralthinking1]

The odds are obviously over 350-1 that the cartoon should have coincided with Holocaust Day. I assess the assurances given by Scarfe, a highly aware political observer of many decades, in that light. My, what an extraordinary coincidence!

I also agree with post number 15. And the facts in post number 1 hardly tell the whole story. My reading of the situation is that Jewish people had their European homes destroyed and then on moving faced a "no immigration" policy further to the East.

Personally, I think the publication of any cartoon that is hugely offensive to Islam is also quite unnecessary and it could be risky to any site that publishes it and its supporters. I don't think it does help to restore any balance either but rather that this does:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9818648/Holocaust-Memorial-Day-survivor-stories.html

[Pabmusic]

Political correctness is the left's last redoubt: it knew it had lost politically so it invented a form of cultural blackguardism by which anyone who disagreed with standard left-liberal positions on a range of cultural issues could be conveniently labelled as sexist/racist/homophobic/ageist/delete as appropriate.

Those who deny that such a thing as political correctness exists are being dishonest and attempting to delude others: evidence of it is abundant everywhere - in the preposterous 'equality' policies operated by councils, colleges and universities; in Labour's preposterous 'Human Rights' act; and in the overpaid public sector academic 'Mary Beard' telling an ordinary member of the public that 'immigration is not a problem'. In fact, it's all over the public sector like terminal cancer.

It can also be seen in the postings on this forum made by brain-dead leftists whose views were formed decades ago by what they were told by the Guardian, Spare Rib (RIP), Red Dwarf(RIP), New Society (RIP) and the New Statesmen (soon, hopefully, to be RIP).

Political correctness is a cancer that insidiously infects all areas, and I wish it could be seen for what it is - usually an excuse to discriminate in favour of one of against another (often the majority group) or to censor 'non-PC' language and, ultimately, thought. It arose in the mid-60s on American campuses and quickly took hold. Fairness, though, should be distinguished from PC.

However, worse still is 'anti-PC-ness', which dismisses so much it does not agree with as being 'PC'. The Human Rights Act does nothing more than allow our own courts to make decisions on cases brought under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Convention has been there since 1950, but previously the UK chose to make its citizens exhaust internal procedures (up to the House of Lords) before they could bring a case in Strasbourg - a process that was expensive and took about seven years. The HR Act removed that requirement and allowed British citizens to bring ECHR cases in British courts - a right most Europeans had enjoyed for 60 years or so.

Difficult to call that PC. Remember that it was the UK (principally) that drafted the ECHR in the first place, some 15 years before anyone had heard of PC.

As for the main point of this thread. The cartoon makes (to me) a reasonable point about one side of a very complicated situation. But for it to be published on Holocaust Day was tasteless in the extreme, as it inevitably invites the link between Jews and Israelis. It is very difficult to believe the newspaper didn't realise what it was doing.

[teamsaint]

Mr Pee makes the point that democracy is anathama to many in the Middle East. I asume he means many leaders in the Middle East, since I would assume that most people in that area don't like living under autocratic and repressive regimes which are frequently sold arms by countries like the US and the UK.

Its always interesting to see those who are perceived as being on the left have "accusations"such as this thrown at them.

"It can also be seen in the postings on this forum made by brain-dead leftists whose views were formed decades ago by what they were told by the Guardian, Spare Rib (RIP), Red Dwarf(RIP), New Society (RIP) and the New Statesmen (soon, hopefully, to be RIP)."

Those elsewhere on a political spectrum presumably develop their views independently, through thorough research and creative thought, and not through reading Murdoch's rags?
Personally, I think that more people developing their views from Red Dwarf would probably make the world a better place.

[amateur51]

As you are so fond of definitions
can you tell me (from Oxford dictionaries online) what you find so offensive about this ?



Seems fine to me .......

And to me, MrGG.

The Scarfe cartoon seems spot-on to me too, but it's publication date was a terrible miscalculation whichever way you look at it, because it allows Netanyahu's apologists to distract the world from Scarfe's point.

I note that several pro-Israeli commentators have raised the spectre of a Blood Libel in the cartoon - I've found over the years that once that phrase enters the argument, all is lost.

[MrGongGong]

And to me, MrGG.

The Scarfe cartoon seems spot-on to me too, but it's publication date was a terrible miscalculation whichever way you look at it, because it allows Netanyahu's apologists to distract the world from Scarfe's point.

I note that several pro-Israeli commentators have raised the spectre of a Blood Libel in the cartoon - I've found over the years that once that phrase enters the argument, all is lost.

I think that (as with in Northern Ireland) using dictionary definitions is very dangerous indeed. Reading some pro-Israeli comments elsewhere that define "antisemitism" as more or less anything that they disagree with is chilling and an insult to people who did suffer terrible things in the past.


(when I was growing up January 27th was a great day, I got a cake and a Stockhausen CD and celebrated Mozart, Jane Fonda and Nic Mason's Birthdays .....now I get John Humphrey's telling me how dreadful humans are which is NOT to say that it's NOT important or significant etc etc etc etc )

[jean]

I note that several pro-Israeli commentators have raised the spectre of a Blood Libel in the cartoon...

You don't have to be pro-Israeli to have noticed that.

A blood libel, remember, is the taking by Jews of non-Jewish blood to be used for some specific purpose.

If Scarfe did not want that inference to be drawn, he might have referred to the shedding of blood, but would have been wise to have refrained from illustrating its use as a building material.

If the spectre was raised, it was Scarfe who raised it.

[amateur51]

You don't have to be pro-Israeli to have noticed that.

A blood libel, remember, is the taking by Jews of non-Jewish blood to be used for some specific purpose.

If Scarfe did not want that inference to be drawn, he might have referred to the shedding of blood, but would have been wise to have refrained from illustrating its use as a building material.

If the spectre was raised, it was Scarfe who raised it.

I quite understand jean but my point in mentioning it is that tends to be used as a debating trump card, stifling further debate..

[scottycelt]

As you are so fond of definitions
can you tell me (from Oxford dictionaries online) what you find so offensive about this ?



Seems fine to me .......

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that and I wholeheartedly support the ethos as defined.

However, in reality it is used to enforce a conformity which in practice also excludes, marginalises or insults groups of people who are discriminated against.

Those who bang on about 'discrimination' are often the very ones doing the discriminating!

[MrGongGong]

However, in reality it is used to enforce a conformity which in practice also excludes, marginalises or insults groups of people who are discriminated against.

You mean like the churches do with the teachings of their pacifist founder ?

The trouble with those who "bang on" about "PC" is that it almost always turns out to be a "straight banana" story , simply made up nonsense OR a misunderstanding. There ARE things that are wrong and need challenging BUT this label (maybe in the same way that the label "classical" prevent some people hearing great music ?) is useless and has come to mean something other than it's definition in a book.

There was no "Baa Baa Green Sheep" , "Snow Green and the 7 persons of restricted growth" etc etc (But there IS a green Clarinet as the cyclist will attest ! )

[amateur51]

Be fair, Mr Pee, twas the Murdoch Empire that caused this brou-ha-ha

[scottycelt]

You mean like the churches do with the teachings of their pacifist founder ?

The trouble with those who "bang on" about "PC" is that it almost always turns out to be a "straight banana" story , simply made up nonsense OR a misunderstanding. There ARE things that are wrong and need challenging BUT ...

No 'BUTS' please that would be clear discrimination.

If you state (correctly) that 'things ARE wrong and need challenging' it is therefore logical to assume that some things are not always 'a straight banana story', surely?

Those of a PC 'inclination' don't accept anything is wrong and simply won't accept any 'challenging', that is the whole point.

However, I do very much appreciate the odd recommendation or two directing me towards the 'correct' literature ... life is one big learning curve for all we incorrect hoi-polloi, after all.

[Lateralthinking1]

I guess I missed this year's thread commemorating Holocaust Day.

Just in from Sky........Israel Election: How the Pundits Got It Wrong -

http://news.sky.com/story/1043980/israel-election-how-the-pundits-got-it-wrong