"Fred" wrote in message
. ..

"Isidor Gunsberg" wrote in message
om...
illspam (NoMoreChess) wrote in message
...
.
Yet Tueschen deliberately
labeled that person a "Jew and a Liar", and thereby created an
association between Jews and a negative characteristic (lying).

I won't comment on the rest of your post, but on this point alone I
believe
you are incorrect. No such association is created. If anything, it
highlights that no such association exists, for if there were such an
association, then to use the phrase " a Jew and a Liar" would be
redundant,
wouldn't it?

Don't get me wrong though, his use of the term "Jew" by itself seems
questionable at best , it is just that the statement you quoted creates no
such association.

So there.


You seem to have missed the original postings on this subject. Isidor's
"quote" is a somewhat sanitized version of the vicious statement Tueschen
actually made. As to the "lie" that the target of Tueschen's attack told,
that is nonsense. The man was expressing an opinion about a German
political figure, an opinion shared by others in Germany itself. His sin
was in using somewhat stronger language than necessary to get his point
across.

Entirely apart from that, even in the version of the quote posted by Isidor,
it should be clear to any reader that the intention is to use the word "Jew"
as a term of disparagement.

Bob Musicant

..
Some people just don't "get it." I sometimes wonder if this guy even
bothered to read what Mr. Tueschen actually wrote. Apparently, his panties
got in a wad just from reading the header, and the content below was missed
entirely.



Even if one were to stipulate that Tueschen
were correct, and the other party was "lying",


And no one here has disputed this, for Mr. Tueschen claimed that the party in
question was definitely not a fascist, though he was a German, and so, a
convenient target for the ever-popular "anti-semitic" cheapo: Bxh7+! ...Kxh7,
N-g5+! ...K-h8, Q-h5! Works every time!



then it would be
appropriate to call that person a liar. Yet Tueschen deliberately
labeled that person a "Jew and a Liar", and thereby created an
association between Jews and a negative characteristic (lying).


No. The only connection between 'being a Jew' and 'being a liar' here, lay
in the use BY A JEW of the ever-popular cheap trick of falsely labeling someone
-- preferably a German or a Nazi, as "anti-semitic," in order to kill the
messenger, and with him his unwelcome criticisms.



That is anti-Semitic, since the man's status as a Jew has no intrinsic
correlation or causal connection with the man's status as a liar.


Non sequitur. That man's status as a Jew put him in a good tactical position
to call someone critical of Sharon's policies "anti-semitic," as if in
self-defense.
However, as Mr. Tueschen correctly observed, that particular shoe did not
fit. Trying hard to "make it fit" only makes a fool of the shoe-man -- like in
a popular Disney animated classic.



Note that the actual "message," as it was called, that Mr. Tueschen
delivered, went whooshing right over some heads. To whit: if a random person
were to point out that someone at random had told a lie, this evil could easily
be exposed, by simply pointing out the actual facts of the case.
But here, we have A JEW, being nailed for lying, ABOUT A GERMAN, and the one
nailing his lie IS ALSO A GERMAN! In other words, we have a situation where
modern Germans, because of what some of their predecessors once did, are not
"allowed" to speak evil of Jews, and if they do, they are rubber-stamped as
"anti-semitic," and simply ignored, REGARDLESS of the merit of their case. Ad
hominist heaven!




What the heck does Bush's popularity have to do with whether or not
he is really screwing things up?


For one thing, his popularity and his huge advantage as the incumbent, may
very well allow him to CONTINUE to screw things up for four more years!
More to the point of your question, Dubya's bungling, so far, has not made
the primary question: which of the (Democrat) alternatives is the lesser evil?
Instead, the question is still: can any of those guys stand a chance against
Dubya, so long as we are perceived as being "at war" in Iraq? As someone
"predicted," even the long lost WMD's may somehow "turn up" just before
election time. Can the Democrats match that hat-trick? The best they can do
is have Dean brag about how, in Vermont (a tiny state, BTW), things are ever so
grand, thanks to him.




In any case, Bush will avoid an open, unscripted debate like The
Plague. He will probably arrange a format just like a press
conference, where all he has to do is answer a few softball questions.



Taxes?

Read my lips: no new taxes!


WMD's?

We got Saddam, okay?


Deficit?

What deficit? (turns to advisor)


Unemployment?

What unemployment? (turns to advisor)


My favorite color?

(turns to advisor, whereupon even Dad begins to worry)




Moreover, average fuel efficiency has gone down, as
car manufacturers have been able to exploit loopholes.


Trucks and SUV's may be more popular now than in the past, but this cannot be
blamed upon manufacturers or the government. Even though "trucks" have been
exempt from mandatory seatbealt-wearing laws in my state, for example, there
are now twin front airbags where there used to be nothing. Things are
improving over time, despite the latest manueverings of Congress and the extra
cost of developing such technologies.

If you buy, today, a Ford Ranger mini-pickup, you will get almost exactly the
same vehicle you would have seven years ago, with several small improvements,
yet the engine makes gobs more horsepower now. And what about the "sacrifice"
in gas mileage for all that extra horsepower? Zilch! In fact, I think the gas
mileage has gone up one notch, due to big improvements in efficiency.
Honda will soon have hybrid engines in, not just one, but several of their
models. It's not all gloom and doom.



Take a DEEP breath, and ask yourself: has Mr. Tueschen ever gone
over-the-edge about hating Jews or Arabs? Did he not get kicked out of a chess
forum for supposed ad hominem, while another ad hominist is still there, plying
his trade with immunity? Does the word "hypocrisy" spring to mind? How about
the word "bigotry," as in bigotry against innocent Germans, who are all
assummed to be out to get the Jews, like some of their ancestors once did.
Where you have utterly missed the boat is in failing to have noted Mr.
Tueschen's MANY anti-Nazi rants, in which he has unfailingly listed victims of
these Nazis, including one group he purportedly belongs to, himself. That
group may not get nearly as much media attention as the Jews have over this,
but then, that would tend to make them jealous, not hateful.


In summary, Mr. Tuschen noted that some critic, who happenned to be German,
was shot-down by a Jew via the "anti-semite" SCUD missile, whereupon Mr.
Tueschen attempted to point out an obvious lie, but likewise was fired upon,
and later excommunicated. In effect, both (German) critics were silenced,
while a (Jewish) liar was granted immunity. This reminds me of the way in
which critics of the war in Iraq are "dealt with." But then, some people will
never get it.

..
"You are dumb." -- a former troll :-)



I only wish these critics could read better.

There is no need to become an apologist for liars here, as there was no
question about the target's credibility problems.
The question related to his being a Nazi or a neo-Nazi, which he wasn't. For
some strange reason, Mr. Tueschen had an aversion to boldfaced lies, which he
expressed in a less-than polite manner. For his troubles, he was unjustly
mis-labelled and later kicked out.
Strangely enough, that forum had no particular aversion to liars; only to
certain critics of certain liars.



BTW, if you MUST label Mr. Tueschen as some general type, it would be more
appropriate, given his history of postings, to label him as a
psuedo-intellectual (i.e. pretentious fake), with a generally anti-American
attitude in that he is often critical (not so much *against*) of American
posters, our culture, etc.





PS: for an example of a real anti-semite, listen to Fischer's rantings on
BOMBA Radio.

"Fred" wrote in message ...
"Isidor Gunsberg" wrote in message
om...
illspam (NoMoreChess) wrote in message
...
.
Yet Tueschen deliberately
labeled that person a "Jew and a Liar", and thereby created an
association between Jews and a negative characteristic (lying).

I won't comment on the rest of your post, but on this point alone I believe
you are incorrect. No such association is created.

Really?? Well, that is good news. Of course, not for lack of trying
by Tueschen, who manifestly intended to create such an association in
the minds of the readers of his post.

If anything, it
highlights that no such association exists, for if there were such an
association, then to use the phrase " a Jew and a Liar" would be redundant,
wouldn't it?

You "logic" doesn't make any sense...

Are you claiming that it is **impossible** for Tueschen to employ
redundant phrases in his prose? [Certainly Jew/Liar is not a
tautology.] Or that if no such association actually exists, that
Tueschen is incapable of implying that there is such an association?


Don't get me wrong though, his use of the term "Jew" by itself seems
questionable at best ,

Indeed it is!

it is just that the statement you quoted creates no
such association.

Maybe not in your mind...

So there.

illspam (NoMoreChess) wrote in message ...
.
Some people just don't "get it." I sometimes wonder if this guy even
bothered to read what Mr. Tueschen actually wrote. Apparently, his panties
got in a wad just from reading the header, and the content below was missed
entirely.

Since my contention is that what Tueschen wrote in his subject
header is, on its face, anti-Semitic in nature, then it is incumbant
only to analysze the phrase that was used in the header. I'm not
claiming that Tueschen is an anti_Semite; I'm claiming that he wrote a
phrase that was Anti-Semitic.



Even if one were to stipulate that Tueschen
were correct, and the other party was "lying",


And no one here has disputed this, for Mr. Tueschen claimed that the party in
question was definitely not a fascist, though he was a German, and so, a
convenient target for the ever-popular "anti-semitic" cheapo: Bxh7+! ...Kxh7,
N-g5+! ...K-h8, Q-h5! Works every time!

So, it amounts to Tueschen's word, vs. the word of the Jew that he excoriates. It sounds like there is at least some dispute there....

then it would be
appropriate to call that person a liar. Yet Tueschen deliberately
labeled that person a "Jew and a Liar", and thereby created an
association between Jews and a negative characteristic (lying).


No. The only connection between 'being a Jew' and 'being a liar' here, lay
in the use BY A JEW of the ever-popular cheap trick of falsely labeling someone
-- preferably a German

or a Nazi, as "anti-semitic,"


It would be pretty hard to "falsely label" a Nazi as being worse
than he is!

in order to kill the
messenger, and with him his unwelcome criticisms.


Yet, that (supposed) rhetorical "trick" can be used by non-Jew and
Jew alike. What is inherantly Jewish about making such a "cheap"
argument?

It is Tueschen who fixates on the Jewishness of his Nemesis. If
somebody creates false labels, then they merit criticism, irrespective
of their creed or background. Tueschen gets off-point when he chooses
to bring up religion, and then tie it to a person's propensity to lie.




That is anti-Semitic, since the man's status as a Jew has no intrinsic
correlation or causal connection with the man's status as a liar.


Non sequitur. That man's status as a Jew put him in a good tactical position
to call someone critical of Sharon's policies "anti-semitic," as if in
self-defense.

Nonsense. Tueschen's enthuasiastic defense of a purported Nazi is
what created the "tactical position" when Tueschen was vulnerable to
attack.



However, as Mr. Tueschen correctly observed, that particular shoe did not
fit. Trying hard to "make it fit" only makes a fool of the shoe-man -- like in
a popular Disney animated classic.



Note that the actual "message," as it was called, that Mr. Tueschen
delivered, went whooshing right over some heads. To whit: if a random person
were to point out that someone at random had told a lie, this evil could easily be exposed, by simply pointing out the actual facts of the case.
But here, we have A JEW, being nailed for lying, ABOUT A GERMAN, and the one
nailing his lie IS ALSO A GERMAN! In other words, we have a situation where
modern Germans, because of what some of their predecessors once did, are not
"allowed" to speak evil of Jews, and if they do, they are rubber-stamped as
"anti-semitic," and simply ignored, REGARDLESS of the merit of their case.

Well, I take the middle road: Tueschen (or other Germans) should
simply be ignored, when they begin to rant their grievances about
being demonized because they are Germans.



Ad
hominist heaven!




What the heck does Bush's popularity have to do with whether or not
he is really screwing things up?


For one thing, his popularity and his huge advantage as the incumbent, may
very well allow him to CONTINUE to screw things up for four more years!

I merely was pointing that just because a political leader is
popular, does NOT mean that he is performing his executive duties
well, or that he isn't "screwing up".


More to the point of your question, Dubya's bungling, so far, has not made
the primary question: which of the (Democrat) alternatives is the lesser evil?
Instead, the question is still: can any of those guys stand a chance against
Dubya, so long as we are perceived as being "at war" in Iraq? As someone
"predicted," even the long lost WMD's may somehow "turn up" just before
election time. Can the Democrats match that hat-trick? The best they can do
is have Dean brag about how, in Vermont (a tiny state, BTW), things are ever so
grand, thanks to him.

It would be funny if the Republicans were to go after Dean for a
supposed lack of experience, because he had merely been Governor of a
"small" state.

Dean has more experience acting as Governor than Bush did when he
ran for office. More importantly, in comparing Vermont to Texas, it is
clear that Dean has had more success during his tenure as Governor.




In any case, Bush will avoid an open, unscripted debate like The
Plague. He will probably arrange a format just like a press
conference, where all he has to do is answer a few softball questions.



Taxes?

Read my lips: no new taxes!


WMD's?

We got Saddam, okay?


Deficit?

What deficit? (turns to advisor)


Unemployment?

What unemployment? (turns to advisor)


My favorite color?

(turns to advisor, whereupon even Dad begins to worry)




Moreover, average fuel efficiency has gone down, as
car manufacturers have been able to exploit loopholes.


Trucks and SUV's may be more popular now than in the past, but this cannot be blamed upon manufacturers or the government.

Well, I can't blame the manufacturers, because one would expect
them to be lacking in social responsibility. But that is where the
Government ought to step in. Huge tax increases on gasoline would make
SUVs less popular, which would then create market pressure on the auto
companies to create a fleet of cars with better average fuel economy.


Even though "trucks" have been
exempt from mandatory seatbealt-wearing laws in my state, for example, there
are now twin front airbags where there used to be nothing. Things are
improving over time, despite the latest manueverings of Congress and the extra
cost of developing such technologies.

If you buy, today, a Ford Ranger mini-pickup, you will get almost exactly the
same vehicle you would have seven years ago, with several small improvements,
yet the engine makes gobs more horsepower now.

Why does the consumer need "gobs more horsepower" for a
mini-pick-up?

And what about the "sacrifice"
in gas mileage for all that extra horsepower? Zilch! In fact, I think the gas
mileage has gone up one notch, due to big improvements in efficiency.
Honda will soon have hybrid engines in, not just one, but several of their
models. It's not all gloom and doom.



Take a DEEP breath, and ask yourself: has Mr. Tueschen ever gone
over-the-edge about hating Jews or Arabs? Did he not get kicked out of a chess
forum for supposed ad hominem, while another ad hominist is still there, plying
his trade with immunity? Does the word "hypocrisy" spring to mind? How about
the word "bigotry," as in bigotry against innocent Germans, who are all
assummed to be out to get the Jews, like some of their ancestors once did.

Tueschen is a crank. For various socio-cultural reasons, Germany
produces its fair share of cranks. I dismiss Tueschen because he is a
crank, not because he is a German

Where you have utterly missed the boat is in failing to have noted Mr.
Tueschen's MANY anti-Nazi rants, in which he has unfailingly listed victims of
these Nazis, including one group he purportedly belongs to, himself. That
group may not get nearly as much media attention as the Jews have over this,
but then, that would tend to make them jealous, not hateful.


In summary, Mr. Tuschen noted that some critic, who happenned to be German,
was shot-down by a Jew via the "anti-semite" SCUD missile, whereupon Mr.
Tueschen attempted to point out an obvious lie, but likewise was fired upon,
and later excommunicated.


Good. Not every forum should be a "free-for-all". If he was
"kicked out" it implies that he was psoting to a moderated group. I
suspect that if Tueschen stays away, that the amount of "flames" and
discord in that group will diminish.
With Tueschen gone, there will be less noise, and more signal.

In effect, both (German) critics were silenced,
while a (Jewish) liar was granted immunity. This reminds me of the way in
which critics of the war in Iraq are "dealt with." But then, some people will
never get it.


I have read enough of Tueschen's garbage to realize that even when
he isn't accusing people of being liars, and even when he isn't
claiming that Jews are held to a double standard, he still adds
precious little to meaningful discourse in a forum.

Why don't you "Google" him and see all the crap that he has posted
over the years? It appears that you have been seduced by Tueschen's
guileful maneuvers to position himself as the White Knight fighting
thr good fight....

..
Since my contention is that what Tueschen wrote in his subject
header is, on its face, anti-Semitic in nature, then it is incumbant
only to analysze the phrase that was used in the header.


No. In order to understand what Mr. Tueschen actually meant, and not merely
what you THINK he must have meant, it is vital to read his entire posting.





So, it amounts to Tueschen's word, vs. the word of the Jew that he
excoriates.


Wrong again. It is easily determined whether or not a famous person is in
fact a Nazi or a neo-Nazi, and the fact that despite having a multitude of
"enemies" here, Mr. Tueschen's contention has yet to be challenged, leads me to
wonder why you alone cannot seem to grasp his point. We even have several
posters here who speak German, yet not one has come forward to "refute" the
annoying Tueschen's contention that, although anything but perfect, this fellow
was no Nazi -- a clearcut lie.





It would be pretty hard to "falsely label" a Nazi as being worse
than he is!


"Hitler was a very short, fat, ugly, albino, hare-lipped, homosexual fascist,
who never, ever bathed or brushed his teeth." How's that, for a start? "He
stank so bad that whenever he was around, the rats and flies began to gather,
attracted to the putrid stench." "Hitler's mother -- who was known for her
fondness of combat-boots,...."




Yet, that (supposed) rhetorical "trick" can be used by non-Jew and
Jew alike. What is inherantly Jewish about making such a "cheap"
argument?


As I explained earlier in this thread, when a Jew cries "anti-semite!" he is
often taken seriously, even without a close examination of the pertinent facts.
The same goes for the situation where any German is labeled a fascist.
Psychology plays a role here. We are "expecting" Jews to be the victims of
anti-semitism, and we are "expecting" Germans to be Nazis. Children/toys.
Dog/bone. Fish/water. Caro-Kan/draw. French Defense/lose. :-)





If somebody creates false labels, then they merit criticism,
irrespective of their creed or background.


Bingo. And when someone gets away with this, the messenger often turns up
"dead," like whiny old Mr. Tueschen did.




Tueschen gets off-point when he chooses
to bring up religion, and then tie it to a person's propensity to lie.


Yet he made no such assertion. This is merely YOUR misguided interpretation.





Tueschen's enthuasiastic defense of a purported Nazi


Purported Nazi -- exactl!y. LOL! You accept this attack without closer
examination, just as Mr. Tueschen complained of the others, who simply
dismissed the facts he attempted to present in defense.







Tueschen (or other Germans) should
simply be ignored, when they begin to rant their grievances about
being demonized because they are Germans.


That, my silly boy, is NOT the middle road!
That is a twisted path, too widely travelled.





Why don't you "Google" him and see all the crap that he has posted
over the years? It appears that you have been seduced by Tueschen's
guileful maneuvers to position himself as the White Knight fighting
thr good fight....


I see. I am presumed to be a newbie, who is quite unfamiliar with Mr.
Tueschen's many rants over the years. Perhaps if you payed a little more
attention, you might not so often drive off the road! :-)


No, I am not taken-in by Mr. Tueschen's attempts to position himself as a
White Knight here. In fact, I have criticised Mr. Tueschen often enough to be
accused of "stalking" him at times. But then, these are merely facts. Why not
just ignore the facts, and continue down the wrong road....

wrote:

"Fred" wrote in message
...

"Isidor Gunsberg" wrote in message
om...
illspam (NoMoreChess) wrote in message
...
.
Yet Tueschen deliberately
labeled that person a "Jew and a Liar", and thereby created an
association between Jews and a negative characteristic (lying).

I won't comment on the rest of your post, but on this point alone I
believe
you are incorrect. No such association is created. If anything, it
highlights that no such association exists, for if there were such an
association, then to use the phrase " a Jew and a Liar" would be
redundant,
wouldn't it?

Don't get me wrong though, his use of the term "Jew" by itself seems
questionable at best , it is just that the statement you quoted creates no
such association.

So there.


You seem to have missed the original postings on this subject. Isidor's
"quote" is a somewhat sanitized version of the vicious statement Tueschen
actually made. As to the "lie" that the target of Tueschen's attack told,
that is nonsense. The man was expressing an opinion about a German
political figure, an opinion shared by others in Germany itself. His sin
was in using somewhat stronger language than necessary to get his point
across.

Entirely apart from that, even in the version of the quote posted by Isidor,
it should be clear to any reader that the intention is to use the word "Jew"
as a term of disparagement.

Bob Musicant



That you are completely over the edge is also quite clear to me since we talked
about this matter here mentioned. I know for sure that you are wrong, although
you might be a good lawyer.

What this Isidor wrote is total bull**** and I will prove both him and yourself
totally wrong.

It is very easy stuff, so you can follow without any help from outside.

1. You are a liar.

Proof: That Jewish smear propaganda activist, the chess programmer Omid David
Tabibi, just about 30 y. of age, called the late German Minister a Nazi. He
wrote "German Nazi". - -

Now this is totally wrong and an intentional lie. Möllemann never was a Nazi or
right-wing or fascist or whatever, but he was simply a politician of one of the
legendary German Government Parties. The Free Democrats. His only fault he had
- in the eyes of Israeli Falcons - was that he criticised the Sharon policy of
the actual government. Formerly he was sort of aid for the Foreign Minister
Genscher in questions of Arabs and Palestinians. Later he was Minister of
Education, of Economy and was even Vice-Chancellor. End of the story.

So it is proven a lie if you say that the Germans themselves called him a
German Nazi. QED.

2. Now the story of the linkage between a Jew and being a Liar. After I
corrected the wrong statement of that Israeli shmock, he continued to write his
nonsense. Then I asked him if it didn't bother him to be called a liar, or, if
a Jew in that group perhaps had the extra right to lie! The guy didn't answer
and continued to spread his lie. Then he changed to other lies. Always
propaganda lies. He's the known Israeli propaganda liar in that group. Always
close on the line of executing Arafat or killing Palestinians or some such.

Now my appealling message into RGCM had a single meaning. How come that a Jew
does not feel ashamed when outed as proven liar. Is it perhaps the extra right
of Jews after the Holocaust to even spread lies if it helps their cause?

So - this "Isidor Gunsberg" layman is totally wrong when he insists that I had
insulted the Jews by putting together these two terms. Jew and Liar. It is
totally the opposite what I was telling. I was arguing against this "normality"
at least in this case and asked the group to explain the possible reasons for
this spooky behaviour. NB that normally people try to avoid lies and if caught
they try to excuse their lies. But here nothing the like.

The literally only person in RGCM who discovered the core idea of my message
was indeed NoMoreChess. Not a friend of mine. But he understood that the
offense in my message is NOT what I told you in the Header line but that the
Israeli liar tried to act as if he was immune against any ethical standards. As
if for him lies were the allowed tool in his political quarrels.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Perhaps the only nasty trick in my message was that I did NOT, what NoMoreChess
later did, explicitely explain what this Jew was in fact doing. Namely lying.
The trick was nasty because it showed with 99% success that the readers here,
in special many Jews, do NOT read at all carefully enough, but in complaining
or reporting Anti-Semitism they are as eager as bees. They come running from
all over the place and show their Jewish solidarity. In this case they all were
wrong.

Personally I am anything other than an Anti-Semite. But I am definitely against
stupid and pompous impostering and lies not to forget - also if they come from
some Jewish or Israeli side. Hence I have new messages to write on a daily
basis. ;-)

[Honestly I must add that the analysis of this Omid Tabibi phenomenon and then
the reactions here in RGCM was highly interesting for me as a psychologist. I
think I have found a really terrible degeneration in the ethics of certain Jews
who seem to tolerate the fact of lies if they can attack a possible
Anti-Semitism in combination. In other words a possible Anti-Semitism is always
more evil than a violation of one of the 10 commandements. - Let's not fuss
around, this is exactly the base of the actual policy in Israel against the
Palestinians. It is inhuman and illegal, to say the least, and Israel was
already condemned because of racism in that famous conference right before the
still unsolved attack on the WTC in 2001. - Möllemann BTW also faught against
this strange phenomenon that always someone in Germany criticised Sharon and
his policy, that then the representatives of the German Jewish council, in
special Michel Friedman, condemend for misuse of cocaine just recently, came
running and calling this Anti-Semitism in Germany! Perhaps you don't understand
this. The German Jews defended Sharon's policy against German critics by simply
calling this Anti-Semitism or trying to destroy the critic personally. At such
a moment such a German politician is "dead" because no big party in Germany can
allow such a case the Jews then take for their propaganda. Until now the
parties excluded such politicians. But note, that Anti-Semitism is existent in
many countries in Europe. Not especially high in Germany. Note also that the
most active Jew in Germany who played the role of the moral hypocrite and
head-hunter, that was Michel Friedman. Who always ordered Ukrainian
prostitutes, shortly, who preached water and drank wine. A known phenomenon in
the histories of the Bible.]

I hope that at least a single reader realises that if I write about such topics
it is NOT to defame but to support Jews. Who is it?


Rolf

illspam wrote:



Since my contention is that what Tueschen wrote in his subject
header is, on its face, anti-Semitic in nature, then it is incumbant
only to analysze the phrase that was used in the header.


No. In order to understand what Mr. Tueschen actually meant, and not
merely
what you THINK he must have meant, it is vital to read his entire posting.





So, it amounts to Tueschen's word, vs. the word of the Jew that he
excoriates.


Wrong again. It is easily determined whether or not a famous person is in
fact a Nazi or a neo-Nazi, and the fact that despite having a multitude of
"enemies" here, Mr. Tueschen's contention has yet to be challenged, leads me
to
wonder why you alone cannot seem to grasp his point. We even have several
posters here who speak German, yet not one has come forward to "refute" the
annoying Tueschen's contention that, although anything but perfect, this
fellow
was no Nazi -- a clearcut lie.





It would be pretty hard to "falsely label" a Nazi as being worse
than he is!


"Hitler was a very short, fat, ugly, albino, hare-lipped, homosexual
fascist,
who never, ever bathed or brushed his teeth." How's that, for a start? "He
stank so bad that whenever he was around, the rats and flies began to gather,
attracted to the putrid stench." "Hitler's mother -- who was known for her
fondness of combat-boots,...."




Yet, that (supposed) rhetorical "trick" can be used by non-Jew and
Jew alike. What is inherantly Jewish about making such a "cheap"
argument?


As I explained earlier in this thread, when a Jew cries "anti-semite!" he
is
often taken seriously, even without a close examination of the pertinent
facts.
The same goes for the situation where any German is labeled a fascist.
Psychology plays a role here. We are "expecting" Jews to be the victims of
anti-semitism, and we are "expecting" Germans to be Nazis. Children/toys.
Dog/bone. Fish/water. Caro-Kan/draw. French Defense/lose. :-)





If somebody creates false labels, then they merit criticism,
irrespective of their creed or background.


Bingo. And when someone gets away with this, the messenger often turns up
"dead," like whiny old Mr. Tueschen did.




Tueschen gets off-point when he chooses
to bring up religion, and then tie it to a person's propensity to lie.


Yet he made no such assertion. This is merely YOUR misguided
interpretation.





Tueschen's enthuasiastic defense of a purported Nazi


Purported Nazi -- exactl!y. LOL! You accept this attack without closer
examination, just as Mr. Tueschen complained of the others, who simply
dismissed the facts he attempted to present in defense.







Tueschen (or other Germans) should
simply be ignored, when they begin to rant their grievances about
being demonized because they are Germans.


That, my silly boy, is NOT the middle road!
That is a twisted path, too widely travelled.





Why don't you "Google" him and see all the crap that he has posted
over the years? It appears that you have been seduced by Tueschen's
guileful maneuvers to position himself as the White Knight fighting
thr good fight....


I see. I am presumed to be a newbie, who is quite unfamiliar with Mr.
Tueschen's many rants over the years. Perhaps if you payed a little more
attention, you might not so often drive off the road! :-)


No, I am not taken-in by Mr. Tueschen's attempts to position himself as a
White Knight here. In fact, I have criticised Mr. Tueschen often enough to
be
accused of "stalking" him at times. But then, these are merely facts. Why
not
just ignore the facts, and continue down the wrong road....




Gents!!

Just to remind you:

Schröder is the Chancellor of Germany.

Rau is the actual President until May.

Fischer is the Secretary of State.

Tueschen is just the Pope. Read GOOGLE.

So I must admit, our kid "Isidor", the anonymous Einstein, has an edge somehow.
I'm bad and I'm nation-wide.

Har-de-Har-Har.

And remember: No drugs while posting!

Rolf

This is a Chess related group!!!

"Rolf Tueschen" schreef in bericht
...
wrote:

"Fred" wrote in message
...

"Isidor Gunsberg" wrote in message
om...
illspam (NoMoreChess) wrote in message
...
.
Yet Tueschen deliberately
labeled that person a "Jew and a Liar", and thereby created an
association between Jews and a negative characteristic (lying).

I won't comment on the rest of your post, but on this point alone I
believe
you are incorrect. No such association is created. If anything, it
highlights that no such association exists, for if there were such an
association, then to use the phrase " a Jew and a Liar" would be
redundant,
wouldn't it?

Don't get me wrong though, his use of the term "Jew" by itself seems
questionable at best , it is just that the statement you quoted creates
no
such association.

So there.


You seem to have missed the original postings on this subject. Isidor's
"quote" is a somewhat sanitized version of the vicious statement Tueschen
actually made. As to the "lie" that the target of Tueschen's attack
told,
that is nonsense. The man was expressing an opinion about a German
political figure, an opinion shared by others in Germany itself. His sin
was in using somewhat stronger language than necessary to get his point
across.

Entirely apart from that, even in the version of the quote posted by
Isidor,
it should be clear to any reader that the intention is to use the word
"Jew"
as a term of disparagement.

Bob Musicant



That you are completely over the edge is also quite clear to me since we
talked
about this matter here mentioned. I know for sure that you are wrong,
although
you might be a good lawyer.

What this Isidor wrote is total bull**** and I will prove both him and
yourself
totally wrong.

It is very easy stuff, so you can follow without any help from outside.

1. You are a liar.

Proof: That Jewish smear propaganda activist, the chess programmer Omid
David
Tabibi, just about 30 y. of age, called the late German Minister a Nazi.
He
wrote "German Nazi". - -

Now this is totally wrong and an intentional lie. Möllemann never was a
Nazi or
right-wing or fascist or whatever, but he was simply a politician of one
of the
legendary German Government Parties. The Free Democrats. His only fault he
had
- in the eyes of Israeli Falcons - was that he criticised the Sharon
policy of
the actual government. Formerly he was sort of aid for the Foreign
Minister
Genscher in questions of Arabs and Palestinians. Later he was Minister of
Education, of Economy and was even Vice-Chancellor. End of the story.

So it is proven a lie if you say that the Germans themselves called him a
German Nazi. QED.

2. Now the story of the linkage between a Jew and being a Liar. After I
corrected the wrong statement of that Israeli shmock, he continued to
write his
nonsense. Then I asked him if it didn't bother him to be called a liar,
or, if
a Jew in that group perhaps had the extra right to lie! The guy didn't
answer
and continued to spread his lie. Then he changed to other lies. Always
propaganda lies. He's the known Israeli propaganda liar in that group.
Always
close on the line of executing Arafat or killing Palestinians or some
such.

Now my appealling message into RGCM had a single meaning. How come that a
Jew
does not feel ashamed when outed as proven liar. Is it perhaps the extra
right
of Jews after the Holocaust to even spread lies if it helps their cause?

So - this "Isidor Gunsberg" layman is totally wrong when he insists that I
had
insulted the Jews by putting together these two terms. Jew and Liar. It is
totally the opposite what I was telling. I was arguing against this
"normality"
at least in this case and asked the group to explain the possible reasons
for
this spooky behaviour. NB that normally people try to avoid lies and if
caught
they try to excuse their lies. But here nothing the like.

The literally only person in RGCM who discovered the core idea of my
message
was indeed NoMoreChess. Not a friend of mine. But he understood that the
offense in my message is NOT what I told you in the Header line but that
the
Israeli liar tried to act as if he was immune against any ethical
standards. As
if for him lies were the allowed tool in his political quarrels.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Perhaps the only nasty trick in my message was that I did NOT, what
NoMoreChess
later did, explicitely explain what this Jew was in fact doing. Namely
lying.
The trick was nasty because it showed with 99% success that the readers
here,
in special many Jews, do NOT read at all carefully enough, but in
complaining
or reporting Anti-Semitism they are as eager as bees. They come running
from
all over the place and show their Jewish solidarity. In this case they all
were
wrong.

Personally I am anything other than an Anti-Semite. But I am definitely
against
stupid and pompous impostering and lies not to forget - also if they come
from
some Jewish or Israeli side. Hence I have new messages to write on a daily
basis. ;-)

[Honestly I must add that the analysis of this Omid Tabibi phenomenon and
then
the reactions here in RGCM was highly interesting for me as a
psychologist. I
think I have found a really terrible degeneration in the ethics of certain
Jews
who seem to tolerate the fact of lies if they can attack a possible
Anti-Semitism in combination. In other words a possible Anti-Semitism is
always
more evil than a violation of one of the 10 commandements. - Let's not
fuss
around, this is exactly the base of the actual policy in Israel against
the
Palestinians. It is inhuman and illegal, to say the least, and Israel was
already condemned because of racism in that famous conference right before
the
still unsolved attack on the WTC in 2001. - Möllemann BTW also faught
against
this strange phenomenon that always someone in Germany criticised Sharon
and
his policy, that then the representatives of the German Jewish council, in
special Michel Friedman, condemend for misuse of cocaine just recently,
came
running and calling this Anti-Semitism in Germany! Perhaps you don't
understand
this. The German Jews defended Sharon's policy against German critics by
simply
calling this Anti-Semitism or trying to destroy the critic personally. At
such
a moment such a German politician is "dead" because no big party in
Germany can
allow such a case the Jews then take for their propaganda. Until now the
parties excluded such politicians. But note, that Anti-Semitism is
existent in
many countries in Europe. Not especially high in Germany. Note also that
the
most active Jew in Germany who played the role of the moral hypocrite and
head-hunter, that was Michel Friedman. Who always ordered Ukrainian
prostitutes, shortly, who preached water and drank wine. A known
phenomenon in
the histories of the Bible.]

I hope that at least a single reader realises that if I write about such
topics
it is NOT to defame but to support Jews. Who is it?


Rolf

Cowardly "XaqaX" wrote anonymously:


This is a Chess related group!!!

Of course and his is why the message is here in RGCM because the Jew in the
story is the famous chess programmer Omid David Tabibi. Didn't you know that?
And therefore the worshipping of lies is a real problem in the development of
chess.

Rolf