Is Khodorkovsky question really a Jewish question?

Post Reply New Topic

There are very few proven cases where American Jews have been disloyal to the U.S. insofar as committing treason or illegal acts of espionage. Most American Jews know they live here and have no intention of ever going to Israel. America is -home- for them and they act accordingly. American Jews know full well that this country (U.S.) is the greatest thing that has happened to Jews in nearly two thousand years. Who in his right mind would do harm to the source of such great benefit?

Jews have a "family" feeling toward Israel. The Jews of Israel are family and kin-folk. We are Blood. But that in no wise implies disloyalty. I have more concern for my fellow Jews here in American than I do for Gentiles in general. Does this make me an enemy agent? I prefer giving to Jewish charities. Does this make me a hostile person? One looks after one's own. Family is very, very important and blood is thicker than water. Jewish feelings toward Israel are generally of a familial nature, not a national nature.

ruveyn

The other side of a coin is that judges are more corrupt than most people are. I have heard that in case of Khodorkovsky trial, someone read the verdict that was written by Kremlin before the trial ever started. This basically implied that it was decided ahead of time what the "conclusion" of the trial "should" be. Of course, judge didn't want that verdict read, since judge wanted to pretend that they first talk and then after much contemplation they write things down. But that proved to be a lie.

Also, from what my mom told me, the people who defended Khodorkovsky were able to demonstrate that the judges were making claims that contradict basic science. She even said that at some point defenders of Khodorkovsky had to bring elementary school science textbook or something along these lines in order to prove that Khodorkovsky couldn't have possibly done whatever he was accused of doing. Some of the accusations were downright ridiculous. For example, the amount of oil he supposedly stole equals to the amount of oil in the entire country.

Also the way he was treated while in jail shows clear bias. For example, my mom told me how he was punished for drinking coffee in the coffee room. But at the same time the coffee is standing there free for everyone to drink and everyone drinks it on daily basis. Basically the reason he was accused is that a certain period of time had passed during which he was "well behaved" and this makes him a candidate for early release. In order to prevent early release they had to accuse him of doing something wrong. Hence they were asked to make up a charge.

Also there was the other time when someone attacked Khodorkovsky (NOT that person, someone else) and they put Khodorkovsy in an "insulator" in order to "protect" him from being attacked. But at the same time, since he is in insulator this disqualifies him from early release. After all, usually people are put in insulator because THEY do something wrong. Therefore, being put in insulator is a formal disqualification from early release. So, cleverly enough, they decided to put Khodorkovsky in insulator in order to "protect" him while, at the same time, still apply this formal rule and thus not releasing him.

Also there was one criminal who was sitting with Khodorkovsky in the same room and he actually admitted to him that he might be asked to come up with false accusations against him in order to prevent his early release. Happologized in advance for planning to "confirm" whatever accusaitons they will be making against Khodorkovsky. He told Khodorkovsky that he knows the charges would be false, but he wants to present them anyway in order to get early release for himself.

As far as European courts, they were pressuring Russia for several years in order to release Khodorkovsky. In fact, Putin repeatedly expressed anger that Europe "pressures" Russia in its internal affairs. So quite frankly I was surprised by the outcome of the May 31, 2011 case. But still even then they never said he was guilty. They simply said "he never proved that he was innocent". But still the rule should be "innocent till proven guilty", not "guilty till proven innocent"!

Read what you just said. Basically, you are saying that Jews like America because America is the greatest thing that happened to JEWS. This means that they don't like it out of pure heart. They like it because they GET something from it. This only proves that they are "smart" enough to see what benefits "them". It doesn't prove anything about their attitudes towards the people they reside with.



Exactly. When you used the word "family" this is the exact description of how my mom views her fellow Jews. I guess Jews might have stronger "family values" in general than non-Jews do. Thats why Jews are known to stick to their parents and non-Jews find it abnormal just how often they call their parents. Now it is true that other people also have feelings towards their kins. For example if two Russians are to meet in USA the fact that they both speak Russian is instant bond. But still, in case of Jews it is much stronger. For example, Russians might easilly marry someone non-Russian; for Jews it is far bigger issue. I never said most races don't have family bonds. They do. What I say is that for Jews is it far more extreme and THIS is the problem. Everything is good up to a certain point and then when the line is crossed it is not so good any more.



We only have so much resources. So if you are more loyal to one group it always goes at the expense of other groups.



Now given that there are FAR MORE Gentiles than there are Jews, do you see how what you said is actually pretty extreme. You would rather sacrifice 100 non Jews just for the sake of one Jew.



"Hostile" and "enemy" is not the same. Enemy is someone who deliberately plots to hurt the other person. Hostile can be someone who is merely indifferent. The Jews I met rarely express a desire to hurt non Jews. But the extreme coldness towards non-Jews is commonplace. And yes, this means they are "hostile".



Family is "somewhat" important, not "very very" important. But yes, to Jews, "very very" is very much the case, and I feel it is their main mistake.




Exactly. And this implies that they are not objective any more. No one else views their country as their FAMILY. They view it as homeland but never FAMILY. But yes, for Jews it IS "family". And this makes it feel like they are too insecure to be far away from family or something.

Now, leaving the Jewish issue for a second, let me remind you that in America people are not trusted in some governmental agencies if they have too many foreign friends. Why? Because this will compromise their loyalties. Now, if what YOU have just said about "family relation with Israel" is true, it implies that Jews are not to be trusted since not only they have "foreign friends" but they have "foreign family", as they view ALL of the people in Israel as family. Now, lets say that there is some choice where the "opion A" is the best for USA and "opion B" is the best for Israel. For example, lets just suppose that the war in Iran will benefit Israel more than USA. In this case, if someone has a choice between country (USA) and their family (Israel), the obvious choice is family. This implies that if the Jew in question has some kind of influence this creates a problem for USA. Now lets take on a place of a Jew a Frenchman with similar dillemma. In this case it is far less of a problem since Frenchman views France as his homeland, not family. Foresaking interests of one's homeland is FAR easier than ones family. That is probalby the main reason Jews aren't trusted.

Every sane person supports and protects that which is beneficial to him and opposes or avoids that which is harmful to him. The idea of unconditional love is insane or infantile.

American is not only good for me and mine, it is good for the people who live here regardless of who or what they are. We have a substantial interest in looking out for the well being of the country. It is our house. It keeps the rain off our heads and keeps us warm in the winter.

As to attitudes toward my neighbors. They are civil and cordial to me and I am civil and cordial to them. I believe in Good Manners first and foremost. I do not love my fellow man, but I make sure that I am polite, civil and even cordial with him. It is much better to be at peace with one's neighbors than to be in conflict with them.

ruveyn

+1

Written like the true anti-Semite you are.

In the 19th century you would have been prime Know-Nothing material.

Have you ever been fitted out for a White Sheet?

ruveyn

I agree that "unconditional love" is infantile. But if you take a non-Jew, then they first get to know a given person and then they like or dislike them based on a combination of various personality traits, things they have in common, and so forth. In case of a Jews they have a preconceived barrier against forming such bonds with people outside of their own ethnic group before they even know the person in question. And I am not saying they "hate" that person. Rather they are "colder" towards them than they are towards other Jews. Non-Jews also are "colder" to some than others; but in case of non-Jews they get to konw a person before making such judgement.

Also think of how you view your other Jews. In their case you DO love them "as your family", just like you mentioned. This implies that you care about their well being even if you don't get anything out of it. So, yes, it is "conceivable" to do it. Now both Jews and non-Jews select SOME group of people they treat in this way. In case of non-Jews they select it based on how they get along. In case of Jews it is all pre-selected by how they are born. Now, a little kid has a pre-selected set of parents. But once a kid grows up he decides what they want to do with their lives and they make their own friends, often outside with the social group their parents belong to. So in this respect it feels that Jews simply didn't grow past that childhood stage and they are still attached to their parents and the ways they were born as opposed to making their own choices.



And I never said Jews were not civil. If anything, Jews are elite, so they would never stoop down to doing anything non civil. In fact if I hear of any "common" crime (stealing, and so forth) I would bet a criminal in question is a non-Jew. A Jew would get what they want by far more "elite" means than that, such as manipulations that don't strictly speaking involve directly hurting anyone or directly violating any laws.

But this doesn't change the fact that the attitude of not caring about the other person is the same. Yes a Jew is "too cultured" or "too polite" to do certain things, but the bottom line is that his politeness is not sincere. In fact, as an aspie, I wish sometimes people were more honest since then at least things can be openly discussed. But when NT-s give a cold shoulder of "politeness" it is quite frustrating.

By the way, I am equally frustrated by how Europe treats Israeli Palestinian conflict. They are also very polite. You see, the main reason that Europe supports Palestine is probably that they "ignore" everything that Palestinians are doing to the Jews. So if Palestinians don't do any terror and then Jews attack them "out of the blue" then "of course" Europe would object, why not? This is one example of being "polite". Europe is "indifferent" to what Palestinians do to the Jews. Europe never says that Jews deserve it or anything like that; but at the same time, it doesn't really care when Palestinians do stuff to Jews, either.

Now if we take the way Europe treats Israel, and put it together with the Jewish attitudes towards non Jews you just described, you will find that the two attitudes are nearly the same. So in a sense Europe simply gives Jews "the taste of their own medicine". Now, two wrongs doesn't make it to right. So Europe should change its attitude regardless of whether Jews change theirs or not. But I just wanted to illustrate an analogy for you just to make you realize how this type of thing might feel.

I never made a blanket statement that "any" Jew in power is a threat. On a contrary, an assimilated Jew is not. And I am not talking about self haters like Naom Chomsky. Even if you have a pro-Israel Jew that is also fine, as long as that Jew is pro-Israel in the same way as non-Jews are. You see, there are plenty of non-Jews that are pro-Israel, but they formed their views based on objective thinking, NOT based on Jews being "their family". I wish Jews did the same. If a Jew stops viewing Israel as "their family", and identifies himself as first and foremost American and THEN forms pro-Israel views, that is fine and well. But when a Jew insists Israel is their family THAT is when their loyalty to America becomes questionable.

Yes I notice this too. I believe that during the 1991 election, almost all Jews, if not all of them, voted for Yeltsin. I also believe that antisemites are largely against Yeltsin.

By the way the other interesting thing I have noticed is that, while Putin is angry at olegarchs, he never denounced Yeltsin for having arranged such a regime. Likewise, Yeltsin never denounced Putin for fighting olegarchs. In fact, I believe few years after his resignation, Yeltsin said something in approval of Putin. He didn't make any reference to olegarchs though. He just made a vague statement that Putin knows what is best for Russia. So of course it is possible that Yeltsin disagrees with Putin when it comes to Khodorkovsky. But I guess since Khodorkovsky is rather a big issue in Russia it is hard to see why wouldn't he mention this disagreement with Putin.

I heard one theory that the goverment actually set up a system in such a way that people would HAVE to cheat in order to get rich. And government WANTS them to cheat because this gives them something to blackmail olegarchs with in order to ask them not to get into politics. So basically people like Obramovich also made their crimes but they are free since they are not getting into politics; but Khodorkovsky got into politics, hence he is punished for "financial" crimes.

Now from this point of view, it is possible that Yeltsin and Putin are "on the same side" and thats why they don't denounced each other. Yeltsin did the first step of helping Oligarchs to cheat and then Putin does a second step of using that cheating to blackmail them. Of course the natural question arizes as to why didn't Yeltsin himself do the second step. The possible answer is that it is less obvious if these two steps are done by different people. So perhaps Yeltsin was planning for Putin to come and do that second step all along? And perhaps Yeltsin also had this in mind when he asked people to vote for Putin upon his resignation. What do you guys think of this possibility?

You don't get it. There are close relatives and far away relatives. My closest relatives (family) are U.S. born and here they live. If I have to worry about Family I am going to worry first about my -nearest- and dearest. You seem to be incapable of grasping the idea of extended family which is no surprise. In America the small unit family rather detached from prior generations and less related blood is the norm. The Italians have this down pretty well as well as Greek folks. But WASPS just don't seem to get it. Think of it this way: being Protestant can be a serous stumbling black to clear thought and decent feelings. You have to be a descendant of people whose ancestors wet their toes in the Mediterranian Sea to grasp the concept.

Your tendency toward proto-anti-Semitic thinking is clear to see. What do you want from Jews. Do you want them to Worship the Nation? That is just plain heathen idol worship and that rather rubs me the wrong way. I don't do idols.

What you call loyalty is nonsense. Loyalty is a willingness to obey the laws and conform to the customs of the land. It means paying one's share of maintaining the entity that affords one safety and prosperity. It is rational love based on Self Interest and Family Interest which is the only reliable sentiment a human is capable of. Love for family and one's self is primary. Love for abstract entities such as Nation and Race is perverse idol worship. I will leave idol worship and stewing over "loyalty" to you. It is just thing your Gentile intellect is suitable for.

ruveyn

Even so, the fact remains that the domestic policy that USA affects differently Americans as a whole versus its Jewish subgroup. This is evident, for example, from the fact that Jews are overwhelmingly democrat. Now, I am not sure exactly in what way democrate presidents favor Jews more than republican do (in fact, republicans are more likely to support Israel, and republicans are also more likely to support the rich segment of society, to which Jews largely belong). But still, since Jews vote democratic there must be something else they are getting out of it which I am not aware of. And since gentiles vote a lot more evently, it seems that this "something else" benefits Jews more than gentiles. Now if republicans did something else which favor Americans as a whole, Jews would sacrifice the latter in favor of whatever democrates are trying to do. This is one example of lack of loyalty.



I agree. Back in Russia, where I was originally from, the family relations were a lot closer than what I see in America. But still, Jews have "even" tighter family bonds than Russians. Basically, on one end of the spectrum you have Jews with very tight family bonds, on the other end of the spectrum you have Americans, where family bonds virtually do'nt matter, and somewhere in the middle you have Russians, Greeks, and so forth.



I know that Italians and Greeks have tighter family bonds than Americans. This is evident from the fact that there seems to be something "distinct" about their culture, which won't be preserved without these bonds. What I am saying is that Jewish bonds are even stronger. I mean, Italians and Greeks don't mind marrying outside their ethnic groups, but to Jews it is far bigger of a deal. It is not necesserely true that Italians and Greeks will side with their fellow Italian or Greek; for Jews it is true. Also, Italians and Greeks are all along the political spectrum, while for Jews there is a distinct pattern (such as preferring democrates over republicans, overwhelming support for Yeltsin back in 1991, and so forth).



I am Jewish by blood, so i DO grasp it -- I have seen the way my mom operates all my life. But I guess at least in case of my mom it appears to look like lack of confidence and close mindedness more than anything else. This is part of what motivates me to write the kind of stuff I do.



I never said they should "worship the nation". If anything "worship of nation" sounds very similar to Nazism or Communism, and there is a reason why both regimes didn't lead to anything good. What I "want from the Jews" is for them to think for themselves and find their own friends and associates regardless of how they were born and then identify with the subgroup of society they "grew" to belong to (as opposed to "born into"). This is exactly what most people in America do who come from other ethnicities. Especially as a teens, they rebell against their family and identify with their peers. Then later on in life they grow back closer to their family, but by then they have already formed their own distinct identities from their parents. So, as close as they might be to their parents later on, they already have learned that they are their own people. It seems like this is the stage that Jews never go through and, as a result, they miss out on the apportunity of deciding who or what they want to be in life.



There are many different meanings of the word "loyalty". You are talking in loyalty on a more basic sense, as in obeying laws; I am talking of loyalty in a sense of what you feel deep down, as opposed to what you do in order to survive. Both meanings are valid in their respective contexts.

I mean there is more to a person than just obeying the laws. If the only purpose a person has was to obey laws, then we might as well live in a dictatorship. The whole reason why democracy is better is that people can contribute. And in order to contribute you need more than just obeying laws.

Now I know you pointed out that Jews made their contributions. But the point is that they were committed to whatever they were contributing to. I mean take the Jews such as Einstein or Feynmann. Neither of them were just "law obeying students" who had to pass the physics course because they were asked to. Likewise, they weren't doing physics "in order to survive", either. They could have earned far more by doing business. They were committed to physics on a much deeper level, and that is what allowed them to do their respective contributions.

Now, my quesiton is: are they committed on the same level to their own country? I mean, it wasn't an idolatry for Einstein or Feynmann to be passionate about physics; so why is it an idolatry to be committed to something involving non-Jews?



See, you have listed "race" as one of the examples of idolatry. But Jews DO love "race" (namely Jewish race). So based on what you said yourself, what Jews are doing is just as idolatrous as what "nation worshippers" are doing.



You can't refer to my intellect as "gentile" given that I am born Jewish. Yes I chose to assimilate but that doesn't change the fact that I am born a Jew.

You think like a Gentile. You chose to park your brains at the door. Your choice. And a poor one at that.

ruveyn

The last time I voted for a Democrat was in 1960 when I voted for JFK. My motive was to put an end to the anti-Catholic nonsense. I am not a member of any political party and I have not voted for a major party candidate since Barry Goldwater was squashed in 1964 because of slander from the Democrat side. After that I gave up on major party candidates. I have no portion with the liberal Democrats. They are destroying this country.

ruveyn

So ruveyn has more concern for jews in America than he does for Gentiles, because jews are his own (i.e., his kin-folk aka extended family aka race) and because blood is thicker than water. This is all perfectly natural and understandable. However, I will just make two points.

(1) You can be fairly certain that pretty soon ruveyn will be showing up on some other thread singing the praises of individualism and repeating his mantra about how "there is only one race: the human race"

(2) Where are all the White liberals on this thread? Aren't you missing a trick here? Shouldn't you all be lecturing ruveyn about how people should only be judged by the content of their character (blah blah blah)?



Again, so much for racial equality. The jewish contribution to science and medicine is certainly high (and the high average IQ for ashkenazis must be a factor). It only really took off in the 20th Century though. Historically speaking, it is still not as high as that of White Europeans. I wonder if it would be socially acceptable to say that without Whites, the world would be poorer and less healthy? (Or must we view people like Newton, Galileo and Pasteur as just individuals?)



I agree. I don't think Roman quite gets it. But I will come on to that later.



I agree that the extended family has traditionally played a relatively small part in Northwest-European life, and that this correlates with relatively high individualism among so-called "WASPS". "WASP" tribal feeling was understandably awakened by the experience of settling on different continents, and in recent decades that feeling has been dampened (perhaps partly by Protestantism, but largely thanks to media and educational propaganda). Of course this is contrary to what a large percentage of White liberals believe, since they act as if they believe "WASPS" are (still) the most ethnocentric people on the planet.



The doublethink is starting already. A race is an extended family, so according to the reasoning you have already provided on this thread, loyalty towards ones race is rational. (I see Roman has already made a similar point.)

I think I am in danger of losing some of my premium by reading Roman's rants. I salute you for taking up the Standard of Reason against him, but see to your own intellectual welfare before you get sucked into a black hole so dense even sanity cannot escape!

[/snarkiness]

I don't think Hitler view jews as stupid at all.

I think he viewed them as being "not creators". E.g., he thought that whereas many Germans lived through agriculture and industry, many jews lived through financial speculation and exploitation, and that whereas many Germans used their access to the arts and media to create uplifting works, many jews used their access to the arts and media to lower the cultural tone and to denigrate German ideals.

Ultimately, I think Hitler viewed jews as exploiters and corrupters of the German people, which would imply at least some sort of cleverness on the part of jews and some sort of weakness on the part of Germans.