Palestinians have been using violence for decades, and support for them has only grown. They've made mistakes at times by killing an occasional non-Jew, but the more Jews the kill, the more the rest of the world loves them and sends them money.

People love dead Jews.

Well, reasonable people don't like having rockets fall on their kids. That's why Israel keeps needing to respond to people firing rockets at them.

Palestinians seem to love it when rockets fall on their kids. Maybe that's why they always keep their rockets and their kids in the same places. School and hospitals ftw.

There is no historical evidence that the arabs there respond to concessions with anything but hatred and violence. If palestine becomes a recognized state, they'll do the same thing they're doing now. Fire rockets into Israel and have plays in which preschoolers pretend to behead Jews while chanting Islamic slogans.

My general impression is that the people who enjoy discussing this topic the most know the least about the long and complicated history. Here's a good resource:

http://www.palestinefacts.org/

Ask yourself a few questions and be honest with yourself about whether or not you know the answers:

When was Palestine a country?

Who controlled the terroritory before WWI?

Who controlled the terroritory after WWI? How did this change come about? What agreements were made and between what parties?

Why did the UN recognize Israel as an independent nation, but not Palestine? [This is a trick question.]

Many Palestinians evacuated Israel after Israel declared its nationhood. How many were forced out and how many followed the advice of neighboring Arab countries who clearly said they were going to invade Israel? Did those countries declare war on Israel? How many wars have Israel's neighbors waged on her?

Did Jews have equal rights living in Arab countries at the time? Were Jews pushed out of those countries after the establishment of Israel? If so, do they have a right to return to those countries?

Do Jews have equal rights living in Arab countries today?

People refer to the "occupied territories" -- but this presupposes a certain view. Hamas believes all the land is occupied not just the "West Bank" and "Gaza." Regarding settlements being the problem, that argument would hold more weight if we didn't have the clear example of what happens when all the settlements are removed by Israel. This happened in Gaza. The reaction of the Palestinians was to elect Hamas, have an incredibly bloody civil war and then engage in years of rocket attacks into Israel. All while receiving sympathy and aid from around the world.

Is Breslau occupied by the Poles?

Is Constantinople occupied by the Turks?

Why does a map showing a population shifting towards having more Jews indicate something nefarious, but maps showing other population growths do not? Has there been a growth in Muslim population in Europe in the past 40 years? Is there a problem with that?

There's a reason why there's a standard to which Jews and only Jews are held. It's something deep down. Something that survives centuries as a mental virus. It's the same thing that means there can be a thread with a participant as a swastika and the following signature:


and it bothers no one. I give saddampduh credit though. He's honest about what he is.

But one thing, saddam, I am a living contradiction to your signature. Call me a Jew all you want. I have never denied it. I also wouldn't deny being black or gay, as there's nothing wrong with any of these things.

Even if people came to different conclusions than the ones I have, I just wish people would take some time to learn the basic history.

Yes, that's true. That's why I think it's highly likely that you've spent a lot of time growing up around dishonest people. The kind of people who would say "17 year olds aren't dangerous" and then contradict that in the same thread. I'm not saying this to argue with you. I'm saying it so there's clear evidence that you're not capable of having a rational conversation about a topic. It could be useful in later threads when people make the mistake of responding to you.

You've also given a good example of the phenomenon I mentioned earlier in the thread (when it was still about Bryce Weiner). A lot of people in the cryptocommunity (including me) are against the rising police/surveillance state. However, people who can't think very clearly can't see that both the police state and jihadists are real and dangerous. They aren't mutually exclusive. However, certain people give cues that indicate "We will think you are one of us if you believe jihad isn't really a problem." To be accepted as part of the group people parrot ridiculous and ahistorical nonsense. And make very dumb decisions like donating to ISIS.

The 17 year old "child" was arrested in Virginia according the link supplied. Maybe you don't know Virginia is part of the U.S. Maybe in addition to studying some basic logic you should brush up on your basic geography.

QuestionBasicLogic also switched from referring to the U.S. as a "great and powerful nation" to "murrican crazy land." Or maybe he's just misspelling "Moroccan."

Just in case anyone missed it, QuestionAuthority switched from arguing that 17-year olds aren't dangerous enough to worry about (they're just nice young buys working at the grocery store!) to arguing that child soldiers exist but are only dangerous because of 'murrica. Maybe a better handle for QuestionAuthority would be QuestionBasicLogic.

There's a cultural issue at play here. It's common for people involved in cryptocurrency to disapprove of many of the responses to jihad. They often complain about the invasion of privacy and loss of liberty. I agree with all of this. However, many people seem to have a problem believing that it's possible to disapprove of these responses while at the same time believing jihad is a very real and very serious problem. People new to the community probably pick up on these cues and see it's popular to complain about the response to jihad and that it's unpopular to say jihad is real. This naturally leads some people to say jihad isn't real -- that "jihadi" violence is all just a response to how terrible "we" are. I've heard Bryce Weiner (and other people in crypto I could name) make excuses for jihadis along these lines. I don't remember exactly what he said, just that I stopped the video right after he said it and thought, "What a goddamn idiot." The only video I'll watch of him in the future is if he's being beheaded by jihadis.

So I'm not surprised at all that Weiner felt comfortable donating to ISIS. He probably considers them "freedom fighters" against the real bad guys in the world. I am pleasantly surprised there hasn't been more support for ISIS in this thread.

While I'm not a big fan of Christianity, the infamous Luke Jr. may have done Bitcoin a big favor by writing Catholic prayers into the Bitcoin blockchain. People should spread the word that it's in there. If Bitcoin were to be declared haram, jihadis could move on to a halal altcoin.


Option 2 is good for most people in the world (including Canadians like me), but from what I've read it doesn't apply to Americans. The U.S. government still demands taxes from its citizens if they move away. They also demand huge "exit taxes" to give up citizenship. (Read about Roger Ver's case.) Basically, if you're an American and you don't want to pay taxes to support lots of very bad things, the only realistic option is suicide.

I can give a brief "testimonial." Last year I bought some ads on FTL using bitcoins. I dealt with Mark Edge, and found him to be very helpful. FTL has a lot of cohosts. Mark stands out as the sane one. If you have a website or product to promote, you should definitely get in touch with him.

I get the feeling all these threads connecting bitcoin with jihadists always have a link to a (poorly written) post at bitforum dot info. I guess it's an odd marketing campaign for the site.

Or maybe bitforum dot info is run by terrorists.

In the spirit of posts with questioning titles I will ask:

Should the owners of bitforum dot info be killed in drone strikes?

Na, that's too clear. Give me a second chance.

Miss the bitforum info owns did drone stirke out?

That seems about right.

OK...just so you don't think I'm just ignoring you. I read your comments, but then I always start wondering what you mean. If it's unclear to me, I try not to make assumptions.

Anyone without blinders on can see how incredibly different the two links look.

The pictures of concentration camps show methodical starvation, extermination and mass graves.

The pictures of Gaza look like the result of a bombing campaign.

Compare to pictures of the result of the Dresden bombings in WW II:

https://www.google.co.za/search?q=gaza&rlz=1C1GGGE___ZA510ZA510&espv=2&biw=1664&bih=866&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=e3voVPrLIsT8UInAg4gP&ved=0CCYQsAQ#tbm=isch&q=dresden+bombing+victims&revid=1805872498

It takes incredible historical blindness to look at those pictures and think: those poor Nazis.

I am speaking out against fascism. You're being a shield for it.

I'm also against people removing their double standards. That's why I encourage people to learn some of the basics. There is no way, without a truly insane double standard, that Israel looks worse than those opposed to Israel. Think.

Everyone can see that Tusk did not respond to the clear evidence I gave that this thread is about hating Jews rather than criticizing Israel.

It's also clear that Tusk is suggesting that the reaction to the man in the video is due to the people knowing specifically who he was, rather than that he was dressed as a Jew. I believe the people in the video only knew the man looked Jewish. I also believe Tusk believes the people in the video only knew the man looked Jewish. Each reader will need to determine for themselves the reason Tusk is suggesting otherwise.

Imagine a similar video of someone dressed as a Muslim in a western country walking and being treated in such a bigoted and aggressive. Do you think Tusk or TECSHARE would make excuses for it? Would they say that it's a symptom of the fact that there are groups like ISIS beheading people/burning people alive? Or would they say it's wrong to blame a random Muslim for the action of groups like ISIS and instead blame the aggressive bigots on the street? If they would react differently in that situation, why? Again, readers have to answer these questions for themselves and determine the motivations.


Before clicking on this link, I suggest people ask themselves the following question: What will this story be about? What will be the context? Will it be a reaction to something? If so, what kind of thing?


Why does Tusk refer to Netanyahu as the "Zionist butcher"? Is it because he has authorized attacks on Palestinians? If so, what were the objectives of such attacks? Were they primarily to "butcher" Palestinians? Or were they in response to something?

Personally, I am willing to listen to the arguments of people who criticize Israel, but only if I have heard them previously criticize groups who have killed far more people -- far more Muslims -- than Israel -- by far. Also, they have to demonstrate that they have some basic background knowledge of the situation. They have to know about who Hamas is and what they openly believe -- what kind of a "deal" Hamas would accept. They have to know about the deals that Israel has offered and made with her enemies over the years. They have to have some realistic alternative for what Israel could do now to live in peace with her neighbors. It's also helpful if they are familiar with the Ottoman empire, the Balfour declaration, British control of the terroritories after WW I, the UN 1947 partition plan, then 1948 conflict, the 1967 conflict, the six day war, the trouble with the PLO include the Munich massacre, airline hijackings, the Achille Lauro, and so on.

Now when you read quotes from this thread like...

saddampbuh: "shouldn't have killed jesus"
saddampbuh: "the jews collectively as a people have a lot to answer for is a truth almost universally understood outside american christian zionist circles"
saddampbuh: "jewish culpability in the crucifixion and collective guilt were mainstream christianity's official line until 50 years ago when everyone felt bad because of the holohoax"
budgie: "what about a video of 10 hours walking in israel as someone that looks like an arab?"
TECSHARE: "The only problem with this scenario is there would be about 10 minutes of walking then 9 hours and 50 minutes of him bleeding out."
Tusk: "a bit rich to claim that his movement is restricted when Israel has systematically annexed Palestine forcing its people either into exile or apartheid ghetto concentration camps while building illegal settlements on their land."
TECSHARE: "There isn't a rising "Jew hatred" happening all over the world"
Tusk: "Thats is equivalent to denying the holocaust, nice try."
Tusk: "your zionist fascist state is no different from the attempts by the nazis to create Lebensraum"

...do you get the impression these people know about any of these things?

The good thing I'll say about saddampbuh is that at least he seems to know he would've sided with the Nazis 80 years ago. The others have fallen for the strange idea that the Israelis are the "real Nazis" so you're actually fighting the Nazis by demonizing Jews.

If this topic is so important to so many people, then why haven't they read anything about it?
If the people on this thread were criticizing Israel, it would be a discussion about better policies Israel could have to live in peace. The reason it's not that discussion is because they are not interested in such an outcome. All they want is one thing. The same thing Hamas wants. The same thing the PLO wanted. The same thing the Nazis wanted. Dead Jews. As many as possible.

I encourage people to be rational. Read about the complicated history. When events happen put them into context. Then decide if it's more rational to oppose the Nazis like the "allies" did or remain neutral and work with both sides like the Swiss did. Admittedly, neutrality with the Nazis didn't work out terribly for Switzerland.

Yes, amazing...

Here's a few facts about this thread:

1. The video in the OP shows a Jew being harassed by Muslims in France.
2. The second post accuses Jews, not Israelis, of killing Jesus.
3. Israel is not mentioned until the 5th post which said "what about a video of 10 hours walking in israel as someone that looks like an arab?"
   (I suppose this is the first post that counts as "criticism" of Israel, but the criticism is not supported by the *fact* that Israel has a significant Arab population.)
4. Many of the first replies are direct criticism of Jews, not of Israel, of Jews. Anyone can go back and read them. Here is a snapshot in case people start editing/deleting:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150219215827/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=958135.0;all
5. The 10th and 15th replies include denying the holocaust.
6. Your (TecShare's) first contribution to this thread was replying "The only problem with this scenario is there would be about 10 minutes of walking then 9 hours and 50 minutes of him bleeding out."
  (Again, what you are stating is blatantly false, as many Arabs live in Israel and are not, in fact, killed for walking through the street. Do you care about facts?)
7. Someone said that asserting "Palestine was never a country"* is equivalent to denying the holocaust.

People can decide for themselves if this is a thread about hating Jews or a thread about criticizing Israel. Can you point me to the "criticism of Israel" in this thread?

You also said: 'There isn't a rising "Jew hatred" happening all over the world.' People can look up the facts about hate crimes by race/religion in European countries, at least the ones that collect such statistics. People can look up for themselves whether or not Jewish cemeteries in Europe are being vandalized with swastikas. Indeed Jews are being literally targetted and killed for being Jewish. Not just recently: look up Ilan Halimi. The video in the OP makes it quite clear what the situation is. It doesn't do much good to look up the situation for Jews in the Muslim world, since that part of the world has been mostly "cleansed" of Jews already.

* What does it mean to say "X is a country"? Is it about recognition of "X" as a country? If so, by whom? What is the criteria? A statement like "Palestine was a country" is hopelessly vague. If someone wanted to support the claim "Palestine was a country" then they would need to say what that means and when the criteria was satisfied. If someone wants to learn more about the history of that region generally, palestinefacts.org is a good resource.

Maybe it's good to give an example distinguishing fact from opinion.

Fact: In the past 100 years, more Muslims have been killed by Muslims than have been killed by Jews.

Opinion: The reason why Israel is criticized more than Jordan [see Black September] for fighting Palestinian terrorists is because the ones making the criticism have a problem with Jews.

We aren't having a debate. A debate involves clear statements and the presentation of evidence to support or refute the statements. Even if we were to have a debate and I were to "win" it would be a hollow victory. Eventually the day is likely to come when you get your millions of dead Jews (again). On that day you can loudly celebrate, while I will quietly wonder if I could've done more.

I often feel like I'm not doing enough to speak out against the rising Jew-hatred in today's world. It's something of a relief (not to mention a badge of honour) to have an internet Nazi throw some Jew-hatred directly at me. I must be doing something right. Thanks!

Ha! Thanks, but trust me: if I seem sane, it's only by contrast.

What about the Jews forced out of Muslim dominated lands during a similar time frame?

http://www.meforum.org/263/why-jews-fled-the-arab-countries

Also, what if someone made a map of France for the past few decades (or any number of other European countries) using one color for non-Muslims and another color for Muslims. How would that look? Would it indicate a problem? If so, why? If not, why not?