How does Trayon White still have a job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soros quotes from an interview:

“I don’t deny the Jews their right to a national existence–but I don’t want to be part of it.”

“My mother was quite anti-Semitic, and ashamed of being Jewish. Given the culture in which one lived, being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma, disadvantage, a handicap-and, therefore, there was always the desire to transcend it, to escape it.” He confirmed what someone had told me-that his family name had long ago been changed from Schwartz. “So the assimilationist Jews of Hungary had a deep sense of inferiority and it took me a long time to work through that,” he said, adding, however, that he succeeded in doing so many years ago… “I am escaping the particular. I think I am doing exactly that by espousing this universal concept”-of open society. “In other words, I don’t think that you can ever overcome anti-Semitism if you behave as a tribe… the only way you can overcome it is if you give up the tribalness.”


For a lot of Jews, this IS anti-Semitic behavior - disassociating yourself from Jewishness so anti-Semitism can't exist.

PP here who was reserving judgment about Soros, due to lack of knowledge....

What does he mean by giving up tribalness? Give up the traditions and laws that keep the Jewish people in existence? If he thinks the only way to overcome antisemtism is to abandon that which makes us Jews, then yes....he would prefer to see Jews assimilate into non-.existence. That is crossing the line into an Antisemtic attitude.

Disparaging Jews who choose to assimilate as assimilating into 'non existence' , how tolerant of you ?

Soros seems to be saying that the only way to get rid of Antisemtism is for ALL Jews to assimilate so they can't be recognized. That's pretty damn shitty, yes.

You sure love arguing with Jews, don't you? How about some condemnation for Trayon White, for his poor behavior? After all, he's the one who made a remark about the Rothschilds owning the World Bank, who associates with and donates to Farrakhan, who walks out of the Holocaust tour with a lie. But no, turn it around against Jews who have the audacity to object to that behavior.

Saying the rothschilds control the world bank isn't anti Semitic , walking out of the holocaust museum isn't a crime ( though I'm not sure why he went there to begin with ), donating money to Farrakhan if in violation of campaign finance laws should be met with the appropriate reprimand .

What exactly would you consider anti-Semitic?

If Mr White had said Jews manipulate the weather , I'd consider it unequivocally anti Semite. He said no such thing .

[Anonymous]

I can't believe this guy still has a job. Serious question.Does anyone living in the hood know if he has the support of his constituents? Does he have any redeeming qualities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soros quotes from an interview:

“I don’t deny the Jews their right to a national existence–but I don’t want to be part of it.”

“My mother was quite anti-Semitic, and ashamed of being Jewish. Given the culture in which one lived, being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma, disadvantage, a handicap-and, therefore, there was always the desire to transcend it, to escape it.” He confirmed what someone had told me-that his family name had long ago been changed from Schwartz. “So the assimilationist Jews of Hungary had a deep sense of inferiority and it took me a long time to work through that,” he said, adding, however, that he succeeded in doing so many years ago… “I am escaping the particular. I think I am doing exactly that by espousing this universal concept”-of open society. “In other words, I don’t think that you can ever overcome anti-Semitism if you behave as a tribe… the only way you can overcome it is if you give up the tribalness.”


For a lot of Jews, this IS anti-Semitic behavior - disassociating yourself from Jewishness so anti-Semitism can't exist.

PP here who was reserving judgment about Soros, due to lack of knowledge....

What does he mean by giving up tribalness? Give up the traditions and laws that keep the Jewish people in existence? If he thinks the only way to overcome antisemtism is to abandon that which makes us Jews, then yes....he would prefer to see Jews assimilate into non-.existence. That is crossing the line into an Antisemtic attitude.

Disparaging Jews who choose to assimilate as assimilating into 'non existence' , how tolerant of you ?

Soros seems to be saying that the only way to get rid of Antisemtism is for ALL Jews to assimilate so they can't be recognized. That's pretty damn shitty, yes.

You sure love arguing with Jews, don't you? How about some condemnation for Trayon White, for his poor behavior? After all, he's the one who made a remark about the Rothschilds owning the World Bank, who associates with and donates to Farrakhan, who walks out of the Holocaust tour with a lie. But no, turn it around against Jews who have the audacity to object to that behavior.

Saying the rothschilds control the world bank isn't anti Semitic , walking out of the holocaust museum isn't a crime ( though I'm not sure why he went there to begin with ), donating money to Farrakhan if in violation of campaign finance laws should be met with the appropriate reprimand .

What exactly would you consider anti-Semitic?

If Mr White had said Jews manipulate the weather , I'd consider it unequivocally anti Semite. He said no such thing .

Keep talking nonsense. It just underscores the ridiculous black privilege and double standards on display in DC politics.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I thought Sarah Palin was a symbol of everything wrong with the Republican national party in 2008, but I was still appalled at the sexism that characterized the attacks against her.

It is possible to both disagree with someone politically and recognize when they're right about prejudice...

That's what's happening here, in some instances. The Jews who are being raked over the coals for recognizing White's antisemtism and calling it like it is are being vilified because they are not going along with the liberals, and in this case it means to find ways to excuse or deny antisemitism among liberals. Now, if we were to bring up bigotry by conservatives, we'd be cheered on.

And they are being led on by the moderator. For shame!

Stating facts is apparently considered "raking over the coals". I simply don't think that White has met the bar to be called an anti-Semite. Apparently, most of the DC Council agrees.

Yes, and the fact that the DC Council has turned every which way to give the guy the benefit of the he doubt, as you have, simply shows that DC liberals have a different standard when it comes to antisemtitism. They would NOT give the same benefit of the doubt, nor would you, if a DC council member said or committed three Islamaphobic or racist statements/actions on three different occasions. You'd be screaming for his head on a plate.

The one that bothers me the most is his support of Farrakhan, by the way. We don't need any more young black males being converted to Farrakhanism.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I thought Sarah Palin was a symbol of everything wrong with the Republican national party in 2008, but I was still appalled at the sexism that characterized the attacks against her.

It is possible to both disagree with someone politically and recognize when they're right about prejudice...

That's what's happening here, in some instances. The Jews who are being raked over the coals for recognizing White's antisemtism and calling it like it is are being vilified because they are not going along with the liberals, and in this case it means to find ways to excuse or deny antisemitism among liberals. Now, if we were to bring up bigotry by conservatives, we'd be cheered on.

And they are being led on by the moderator. For shame!

Stating facts is apparently considered "raking over the coals". I simply don't think that White has met the bar to be called an anti-Semite. Apparently, most of the DC Council agrees.

Yes, and the fact that the DC Council has turned every which way to give the guy the benefit of the he doubt, as you have, simply shows that DC liberals have a different standard when it comes to antisemtitism. They would NOT give the same benefit of the doubt, nor would you, if a DC council member said or committed three Islamaphobic or racist statements/actions on three different occasions. You'd be screaming for his head on a plate.

The one that bothers me the most is his support of Farrakhan, by the way. We don't need any more young black males being converted to Farrakhanism.

If he had made Islamophobic statements, you would either agree with him or stay silent. Don’t talk to me about double standards.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I thought Sarah Palin was a symbol of everything wrong with the Republican national party in 2008, but I was still appalled at the sexism that characterized the attacks against her.

It is possible to both disagree with someone politically and recognize when they're right about prejudice...

That's what's happening here, in some instances. The Jews who are being raked over the coals for recognizing White's antisemtism and calling it like it is are being vilified because they are not going along with the liberals, and in this case it means to find ways to excuse or deny antisemitism among liberals. Now, if we were to bring up bigotry by conservatives, we'd be cheered on.

And they are being led on by the moderator. For shame!

Stating facts is apparently considered "raking over the coals". I simply don't think that White has met the bar to be called an anti-Semite. Apparently, most of the DC Council agrees.

Yes, and the fact that the DC Council has turned every which way to give the guy the benefit of the he doubt, as you have, simply shows that DC liberals have a different standard when it comes to antisemtitism. They would NOT give the same benefit of the doubt, nor would you, if a DC council member said or committed three Islamaphobic or racist statements/actions on three different occasions. You'd be screaming for his head on a plate.

The one that bothers me the most is his support of Farrakhan, by the way. We don't need any more young black males being converted to Farrakhanism.

If he had made Islamophobic statements, you would either agree with him or stay silent. Don’t talk to me about double standards.

Wow again. There you are, accusing me of being Islamaphobic. Why not give ME the benefit of the doubt??

You're just proving the point. Quick to accuse someone you don't even know of Islamophobia, yet give the benefit of the doubt to the guy whose repeated actions lean very, very, VERY heavily to antisemtism.
.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soros quotes from an interview:

“I don’t deny the Jews their right to a national existence–but I don’t want to be part of it.”

“My mother was quite anti-Semitic, and ashamed of being Jewish. Given the culture in which one lived, being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma, disadvantage, a handicap-and, therefore, there was always the desire to transcend it, to escape it.” He confirmed what someone had told me-that his family name had long ago been changed from Schwartz. “So the assimilationist Jews of Hungary had a deep sense of inferiority and it took me a long time to work through that,” he said, adding, however, that he succeeded in doing so many years ago… “I am escaping the particular. I think I am doing exactly that by espousing this universal concept”-of open society. “In other words, I don’t think that you can ever overcome anti-Semitism if you behave as a tribe… the only way you can overcome it is if you give up the tribalness.”


For a lot of Jews, this IS anti-Semitic behavior - disassociating yourself from Jewishness so anti-Semitism can't exist.

PP here who was reserving judgment about Soros, due to lack of knowledge....

What does he mean by giving up tribalness? Give up the traditions and laws that keep the Jewish people in existence? If he thinks the only way to overcome antisemtism is to abandon that which makes us Jews, then yes....he would prefer to see Jews assimilate into non-.existence. That is crossing the line into an Antisemtic attitude.

Disparaging Jews who choose to assimilate as assimilating into 'non existence' , how tolerant of you ?

Soros seems to be saying that the only way to get rid of Antisemtism is for ALL Jews to assimilate so they can't be recognized. That's pretty damn shitty, yes.

You sure love arguing with Jews, don't you? How about some condemnation for Trayon White, for his poor behavior? After all, he's the one who made a remark about the Rothschilds owning the World Bank, who associates with and donates to Farrakhan, who walks out of the Holocaust tour with a lie. But no, turn it around against Jews who have the audacity to object to that behavior.

Saying the rothschilds control the world bank isn't anti Semitic , walking out of the holocaust museum isn't a crime ( though I'm not sure why he went there to begin with ), donating money to Farrakhan if in violation of campaign finance laws should be met with the appropriate reprimand .

What exactly would you consider anti-Semitic?

If Mr White had said Jews manipulate the weather , I'd consider it unequivocally anti Semite. He said no such thing .

Keep talking nonsense. It just underscores the ridiculous black privilege and double standards on display in DC politics.

If you say so , but if someone uses words like Jewish lobby or Jewish influence you will feel entitled to call them anti semite right ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I thought Sarah Palin was a symbol of everything wrong with the Republican national party in 2008, but I was still appalled at the sexism that characterized the attacks against her.

It is possible to both disagree with someone politically and recognize when they're right about prejudice...

That's what's happening here, in some instances. The Jews who are being raked over the coals for recognizing White's antisemtism and calling it like it is are being vilified because they are not going along with the liberals, and in this case it means to find ways to excuse or deny antisemitism among liberals. Now, if we were to bring up bigotry by conservatives, we'd be cheered on.

And they are being led on by the moderator. For shame!

Stating facts is apparently considered "raking over the coals". I simply don't think that White has met the bar to be called an anti-Semite. Apparently, most of the DC Council agrees.

Yes, and the fact that the DC Council has turned every which way to give the guy the benefit of the he doubt, as you have, simply shows that DC liberals have a different standard when it comes to antisemtitism. They would NOT give the same benefit of the doubt, nor would you, if a DC council member said or committed three Islamaphobic or racist statements/actions on three different occasions. You'd be screaming for his head on a plate.

The one that bothers me the most is his support of Farrakhan, by the way. We don't need any more young black males being converted to Farrakhanism.

If he had made Islamophobic statements, you would either agree with him or stay silent. Don’t talk to me about double standards.

Wow again. There you are, accusing me of being Islamaphobic. Why not give ME the benefit of the doubt??

You're just proving the point. Quick to accuse someone you don't even know of Islamophobia, yet give the benefit of the doubt to the guy whose repeated actions lean very, very, VERY heavily to antisemtism.
.

^^^ and....I was the poster on the thread you started re Bolton and anti-Muslim attitudes/actions and brought up the connection between him and Pam Geller, who is an anti-Islamist activist. So don't accuse me of staying silent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soros quotes from an interview:

“I don’t deny the Jews their right to a national existence–but I don’t want to be part of it.”

“My mother was quite anti-Semitic, and ashamed of being Jewish. Given the culture in which one lived, being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma, disadvantage, a handicap-and, therefore, there was always the desire to transcend it, to escape it.” He confirmed what someone had told me-that his family name had long ago been changed from Schwartz. “So the assimilationist Jews of Hungary had a deep sense of inferiority and it took me a long time to work through that,” he said, adding, however, that he succeeded in doing so many years ago… “I am escaping the particular. I think I am doing exactly that by espousing this universal concept”-of open society. “In other words, I don’t think that you can ever overcome anti-Semitism if you behave as a tribe… the only way you can overcome it is if you give up the tribalness.”


For a lot of Jews, this IS anti-Semitic behavior - disassociating yourself from Jewishness so anti-Semitism can't exist.

PP here who was reserving judgment about Soros, due to lack of knowledge....

What does he mean by giving up tribalness? Give up the traditions and laws that keep the Jewish people in existence? If he thinks the only way to overcome antisemtism is to abandon that which makes us Jews, then yes....he would prefer to see Jews assimilate into non-.existence. That is crossing the line into an Antisemtic attitude.

Disparaging Jews who choose to assimilate as assimilating into 'non existence' , how tolerant of you ?

Soros seems to be saying that the only way to get rid of Antisemtism is for ALL Jews to assimilate so they can't be recognized. That's pretty damn shitty, yes.

You sure love arguing with Jews, don't you? How about some condemnation for Trayon White, for his poor behavior? After all, he's the one who made a remark about the Rothschilds owning the World Bank, who associates with and donates to Farrakhan, who walks out of the Holocaust tour with a lie. But no, turn it around against Jews who have the audacity to object to that behavior.

Saying the rothschilds control the world bank isn't anti Semitic , walking out of the holocaust museum isn't a crime ( though I'm not sure why he went there to begin with ), donating money to Farrakhan if in violation of campaign finance laws should be met with the appropriate reprimand .

What exactly would you consider anti-Semitic?

If Mr White had said Jews manipulate the weather , I'd consider it unequivocally anti Semite. He said no such thing .

Keep talking nonsense. It just underscores the ridiculous black privilege and double standards on display in DC politics.

If you say so, If someone uses words like Jewish influence or Jewish lobby they'd be anti Semite right ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Soros quotes from an interview:

“I don’t deny the Jews their right to a national existence–but I don’t want to be part of it.”

“My mother was quite anti-Semitic, and ashamed of being Jewish. Given the culture in which one lived, being Jewish was a clear-cut stigma, disadvantage, a handicap-and, therefore, there was always the desire to transcend it, to escape it.” He confirmed what someone had told me-that his family name had long ago been changed from Schwartz. “So the assimilationist Jews of Hungary had a deep sense of inferiority and it took me a long time to work through that,” he said, adding, however, that he succeeded in doing so many years ago… “I am escaping the particular. I think I am doing exactly that by espousing this universal concept”-of open society. “In other words, I don’t think that you can ever overcome anti-Semitism if you behave as a tribe… the only way you can overcome it is if you give up the tribalness.”


For a lot of Jews, this IS anti-Semitic behavior - disassociating yourself from Jewishness so anti-Semitism can't exist.

PP here who was reserving judgment about Soros, due to lack of knowledge....

What does he mean by giving up tribalness? Give up the traditions and laws that keep the Jewish people in existence? If he thinks the only way to overcome antisemtism is to abandon that which makes us Jews, then yes....he would prefer to see Jews assimilate into non-.existence. That is crossing the line into an Antisemtic attitude.

Disparaging Jews who choose to assimilate as assimilating into 'non existence' , how tolerant of you ?

Soros seems to be saying that the only way to get rid of Antisemtism is for ALL Jews to assimilate so they can't be recognized. That's pretty damn shitty, yes.

You sure love arguing with Jews, don't you? How about some condemnation for Trayon White, for his poor behavior? After all, he's the one who made a remark about the Rothschilds owning the World Bank, who associates with and donates to Farrakhan, who walks out of the Holocaust tour with a lie. But no, turn it around against Jews who have the audacity to object to that behavior.

Saying the rothschilds control the world bank isn't anti Semitic , walking out of the holocaust museum isn't a crime ( though I'm not sure why he went there to begin with ), donating money to Farrakhan if in violation of campaign finance laws should be met with the appropriate reprimand .

What exactly would you consider anti-Semitic?

If Mr White had said Jews manipulate the weather , I'd consider it unequivocally anti Semite. He said no such thing .

Keep talking nonsense. It just underscores the ridiculous black privilege and double standards on display in DC politics.

If you say so, If someone uses words like Jewish influence or Jewish lobby they'd be anti Semite right ?

DP. Not that, but if someone said, "those powerful Jews," I would. I also consider people who donate to Farrakhan or go to his rallies anti-Semites.

Would you consider me a white supremacist if I donated money to David Duke or Richard Spencer, or went to one of their meetings? My guess is YES. My guess is if you found out about it and I was on the DC Council, you'd be screaming racist and demanding my ouster.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ and....I was the poster on the thread you started re Bolton and anti-Muslim attitudes/actions and brought up the connection between him and Pam Geller, who is an anti-Islamist activist. So don't accuse me of staying silent.

All you did is ask me if I was concerned. You did state any position on the fact that our National Security Advisor is an Islamophobe. No condemnation or criticism. A much different reaction than if he were an anti-Semite. Perfect example.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ and....I was the poster on the thread you started re Bolton and anti-Muslim attitudes/actions and brought up the connection between him and Pam Geller, who is an anti-Islamist activist. So don't accuse me of staying silent.

All you did is ask me if I was concerned. You did state any position on the fact that our National Security Advisor is an Islamophobe. No condemnation or criticism. A much different reaction than if he were an anti-Semite. Perfect example.

Wow. Look how you twist my concern about the Pam Geller connection into a negative! Why are you not giving ME the benefit of the doubt, like you say we should give to White? Can't you see that you are demonstrating the very double standards we are pointing out?

I say.....give ME the benefit of the doubt and assume my question about whether the Geller connection was concerning was reflecting my own concern. You are so quick to attribute negatives to Jews you disagree with politically, and give the benefit of the doubt with those with whom you do agree. Can't you see that? Are you really that biased?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ and....I was the poster on the thread you started re Bolton and anti-Muslim attitudes/actions and brought up the connection between him and Pam Geller, who is an anti-Islamist activist. So don't accuse me of staying silent.

All you did is ask me if I was concerned. You did state any position on the fact that our National Security Advisor is an Islamophobe. No condemnation or criticism. A much different reaction than if he were an anti-Semite. Perfect example.

Wow. Look how you twist my concern about the Pam Geller connection into a negative! Why are you not giving ME the benefit of the doubt, like you say we should give to White? Can't you see that you are demonstrating the very double standards we are pointing out?

I say.....give ME the benefit of the doubt and assume my question about whether the Geller connection was concerning was reflecting my own concern. You are so quick to attribute negatives to Jews you disagree with politically, and give the benefit of the doubt with those with whom you do agree. Can't you see that? Are you really that biased?

I have read your posts for a long time. When have you ever condemned Islamophobia? I gave you the benefit of the doubt. You failed. What are your concerns with Geller or Bolton? You certainly haven't expressed them.

[Anonymous]

Why don't you two just give it a rest. People post all sorts of stuff on here that is nasty, inconsistent, non-factual, misleading, bigoted, etc. It's not that big of a deal.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ and....I was the poster on the thread you started re Bolton and anti-Muslim attitudes/actions and brought up the connection between him and Pam Geller, who is an anti-Islamist activist. So don't accuse me of staying silent.

All you did is ask me if I was concerned. You did state any position on the fact that our National Security Advisor is an Islamophobe. No condemnation or criticism. A much different reaction than if he were an anti-Semite. Perfect example.

Wow. Look how you twist my concern about the Pam Geller connection into a negative! Why are you not giving ME the benefit of the doubt, like you say we should give to White? Can't you see that you are demonstrating the very double standards we are pointing out?

I say.....give ME the benefit of the doubt and assume my question about whether the Geller connection was concerning was reflecting my own concern. You are so quick to attribute negatives to Jews you disagree with politically, and give the benefit of the doubt with those with whom you do agree. Can't you see that? Are you really that biased?

I have read your posts for a long time. When have you ever condemned Islamophobia? I gave you the benefit of the doubt. You failed. What are your concerns with Geller or Bolton? You certainly haven't expressed them.

You keep demonstrating your double standards. You are not giving me the benefit of the doubt.

The fact that I brought up a concerning connection between Bolton and Geller IMPLIES both concern and criticism. Duh. Even if you think it doesn't, it COULD, could it not? GIVE ME THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. Why not think, "hey, this woman has actually brought up a concerning point about Bolton that questions his suitability for this office." Instead, I didn't specifically say, " and I'm concerned about this point I brought up," so you twist around to see it as a negative. How many posters do you have that didn't contribute to that thread at all?

But true, I don't usually jump onto threads about Islamophobia. But I certainly don't jump onto a thread about it and MAKE EXCUSES for the guy who by all accounts appears to harbor anti-Muslim feelings, as you have toward the guy who appears to harbor anti-Semitic feelings.