Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Why isn't the ADL considered a controversial group?

  1. #1

    Question Why isn't the ADL considered a controversial group?

    This Jewish organization headed by Abe Foxman silences anyone who dares portray an accurate event such as the Passion of the Christ or forgets to put Jews in the group they talk about such as Buchanan's article about American boys fighting and not labelling a soldier with a Jewish name. They love to silence any opposition by the world-renowned phrase, "anti-semite."



  • #2

    Default

    Well, if you ask me, they're quite controversial. Look at this absolute BS from Foxman that proves they don't give a rat's ass about American soldiers:

    The assumptions Gen. Petraeus presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee wrongly attribute "insufficient progress" in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and "a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel" as significantly impeding the U.S. military mission in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in dealing with the Iranian influences in the region. It is that much more of a concern to hear this coming from such a great American patriot and hero.

    The General's assertions lead to the illusory conclusion that if only there was a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the U.S. could successfully complete its mission in the region.

    Gen. Petraeus has simply erred in linking the challenges faced by the U.S. and coalition forces in the region to a solution of the Israeli-Arab conflict, and blaming extremist activities on the absence of peace and the perceived U.S. favoritism for Israel. This linkage is dangerous and counterproductive.

    Whenever the Israeli-Arab conflict is made a focal point, Israel comes to be seen as the problem. If only Israel would stop settlements, if only Israel would talk with Hamas, if only Israel would make concessions on refugees, if only it would share Jerusalem, everything in the region would then fall into line.
    The audacity of this guy makes me ill, and the pathetic thing is that people will believe these outright lies.

  • #3

    Unhappy

    Quote Originally Posted by amy31416 View Post
    Well, if you ask me, they're quite controversial. Look at this absolute BS from Foxman that proves they don't give a shit about American soldiers:



    The audacity of this guy makes me ill, and the pathetic thing is that people will believe these outright lies.
    Just so they will not be called *gasp* anti-semetic.

  • #4

    Default

    Are you saying that you are pro-defamation

  • #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Are you saying that you are pro-defamation
    I do not hate anyone.

  • #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Are you saying that you are pro-defamation
    And no I do not believe in slander.

  • #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,286

    Default

    Here is a very good film on the ADL called "Defamation". It came out in 2009 and is directed by Israeli filmmaker Yoav Shamir. If you have an hour and a half I would recommend watching it. I thought it was a spectacular film on the ADL from a non bias perspective. Through his non bias filmmaking he really brings to light some amazing things about the ADL, Anti Semitism and the Zionist Psyche.

    http://wideeyecinema.com/?p=7208

  • #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Are you saying that you are pro-defamation
    "Defaming" someone who would get other people killed for their own agenda is quite a mild response, relatively speaking.

  • #9

    Default

    Ya i was just making the point that when you have an organization with such a noble title it makes it more difficult to discredit them...

    HOWEVER it takes a lot more than a noble title to gain the power that the ADL has.

  • #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pat Buchanan Conservative View Post
    Why isn't the ADL considered a controversial group?
    Fear, ignorance, laziness and political ideology. Create an organization that represents a protected group equals automatic power. The media is lazy and will automatically seize on it to create an easy story without question of the organization making the claims. Reporters make assumptions out of ignorance, laziness, are politically driven or not dare to cross the line on reporting the facts about a protected group out of fear for their career.

    Just look at "Color of Change" and Glenn Beck controversy. It's founder a partisan, former member of moveon.org and an open Communist. But he is black and has an organization called "Color of Change" so all that was over looked. Some advertisers shit their pants out of ignorance or for reasons stated in that first sentance.

  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •