From: v140pxgt@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Daniel B Case)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Expose famous historical figures who hated Jews
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:57:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Bz8A4H.7s3@dscomsa.desy.de>, Hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes...
[stuff deleted]

>I think that the above are not so much examples of anti-semitism but of the
>mindset of career politicians in general.

Yeah, so do I, but it's interesting that good ol' boy Jim Baker seems to think
that a) American Jews all vote the same, and b) they all vote purely on the 
basis of US policy toward Israel. Both assumptions have connotations that
coincide with classic anti-Semitism: that the Jews think all as one, and that
they are loyal toward Israel over whatever other country they live in. The 
overall effect is one of a perception of Jews as aliens.

>>If the voters knew the cynical lengths that politicians go to they would be
>amazed. I have seen maps drawn with the consitituency boundaries on and the
>planning of refuse collection rearranged so that the marginal wards see vast>improvements in service just before an election.
>

I'm not surprised by any of this, just read any good American political 
magazine (The New Republic, now edited by one of your countrymen, is especially
good for that).

>Racist language on the left is pretty much non-existent, but racist attitudes
>are very much present. On the right the racist language appears in private. If
>the British conservative party spoke in public as I have heard them speak in
>private they would be ostracised. Of course there is possibly an element of
>deliberatly attempting to shock me personaly because it is well known that I am
>left wing despite the family connections.

I'm not surprised by that either-people will always do that deliberately, of 
course. But I suppose in Britain they might not know any better-at my brother's
school in Washington, they had a British exchange student a few years back who,
when asked what he liked most about America, said that he thought Americans were
a lot more aware of what constitutes casual racism than Brits were.

> 
>James Baker was making a calculation that Clinton will also have made,
>ultimately the Israeli lobby has little real power becasue most of it's
>supporters are committed to one party or the other anyway and won't swing on the

Actually, AIPAC has a great deal of power when it comes to financial and 
organizational support. They may vote one way or the other, but if AIPAC likes
someone, they can make it much easier for him or her to show why the electorate
should vote for them on other issues.

>issue. The Republican party supported Israel because it needed an aly in the
>region during the cold war. As soon as they got a permanent base in Iraq they
>could afford to say "fuck the Jews".

Pretty true. I doubt they would ever admit they think that way, but Baker did, 
and as you can see, he paid for it.

> 
>The cynicism of Baker and co can be seen from their attacking Clinton for going
>to "elitist" "left wing" Oxford. Funny I would have though that a scholarship to
>Oxford was rather less elitist than Bush's father paying for him to go to Yale.
>As for left wing, Oxford produced that well known pinko, fellow traveller
>Margret Thatcher.

Someone suggested that Clinton should have chided Bush over it with a debate 
one-liner "What's the matter, George? Are you embarrassed because you went to
Yale? It not good enough for you or something?"
> 
>Bush and his ilk hate anything and anyone who stand in the way of them getting
>status. This may well be the same motive that drives the petty street corner
>bigot too, if they haven't got anything to be proud of at least they can be
>proud of not being a Jew/Black/Catholic/Arab/etc.
> 
>--
>Phill Hallam-Baker

							Dan Case
					V140PXGT@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu