"Yes, Len, Jews in Israel are under siege by the hateful, selfish, jealous, subhuman Arabs. Arabs do not want to share the land with Christians and Jews, and except for the brave Jews and Christians of Palestine, all others have fled the violent, subhuman Arabs."
Message 21460259
This supremacist language is not from a neo-nazi quoting from Hitler's Meine Kampf but rather the typical language of a Jewish/Zionist supremacist working to advance the racist Israeli agenda. Why is this racist Jewish supremacist language acceptable while Pilch's allegorical and metaphoric language in defense of the sanctity of human life verboten?
Pilch was having a fundamental heated debate with the Jewish supremacist and abortionist Robert Barry when you suddenly pulled the plug on Johannes Pilch and, to my knowledge, allowed the real the real hater and supremacist to gain an an uncallenged forum for his racist Zionist supremacism. Why? We are all for the Christian and American values of free speech and intellectual dialog but how can we have an honest dilog when one side is arbitrarily removed at the whim of ignorance? Pilch was perhaps my greatest critic on SI and his criticisms were always in defense of the Jewish people and Israel. His sharp criticisms of my views were often misinformed both politically and theologically, but the spirit of his criticism was always in defense of the Jewish people and the universal value of justice for all humanity. His commitment to universal justice and human rights for all were clear. His love for the Jewish people was demonstrated time after time. Although Johannes misunderstood my own position and motives, his criticism always showed a deep concern for the innocent Jewish masses caught up in the political and theological warfare of our era. When Pilch's language was non-allegorical and non-metaphorical, there was never even the slightest hint of hatred for the Jewish people.
I said all this to establish a foundation that would enable you to understand Pilch's unique position in his debates with the fanatic Zionist and Jewish supremacist Robert Barry. Pilch was using extreme allegories and metaphors to help Barry penetrate the absurdities of his own Zionist supremacism and his life-hating abortionist/mercy-killing ideology. Barry pretends horror at the Nazi Holocaust but find nothing wrong with wholsale slaughter of 30 million innocent babies or pulling the plug on the innocent helpless victims in a hospital.
Pilch's language was clearly allegorical and never intended to be taken literally. Did you miss the Pilch's metaphorical or allegorical language, or did you base your decision without carefully reading the raging debate in context? If you love truth and respect justice, then I would suggest that you do a little research and correct this wrong. Barry's supremacist Zionist ideology is open and in your face at all times. Barry has one clear objective and that is to advance the Zionist and Israeli agenda. Pilch, on the other hand, has always, to my knowledge, repudiated any kind of racist supremacist ideology.
Has SI become a microcosmic reflection of our servile and decaying politically correct culture? A Jewish supremacist like Barry can openly use Nazi-like language to reduce an entire race and people to a subhuman status (subhuman Arabs) in order to dehumanize them and SI considers this acceptable. But when Pilch attempts to use extreme allegories and metaphors to correct this Zionist extremist and supremacist, he is falsely painted with the brush of the extremist and supremacist he is trying to correct and then censored. |
