Comments on: Quakers Are True To Their Principles

By: amie

amie — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 09:06:57 +0000

mettaculture: Well I am confused, as the discourse on the Quaker forum and the Quakers I have been in personal dialogue with recently seems pretty theist to me.

Anyway, just to place on record that I have just picked up the message sent to me on Friday via my Jewish Women’s org address in the same wording as in the main post here. Will be expressing our appreciation to Friends House shortly.

By: mettaculture

mettaculture — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:20:23 +0000

Morgoth

Quakers, properly speaking are not theists. Cut em some slack. I have met pedantic Quakers even ones who are capable of something close to cruelty in a rather detached and non involved way.

I have never met a knowingly cruel, sadistic or evil Quaker.

Indeed these personal qualities of Quakers, led juries even when arrested and imprisoned to refuse to convict Quakers of heresy in 17th C and 18th C England

By: Anat

Anat — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 19:47:57 +0000

About a particular venue in London being “hired out” to Yontiff crowds: so they are willing to take Jewish money, BFD. Do they charge the synagogues more than they were about to charge this latest group? Anyway, it changes nothing, business is business, after all.

When I was a girl the Anglican church next to our temple always lent us their sanctuary for no charge for our High Holidays, none of which changes the way the Episcopal Church in the United States is disgustingly anti-Israel and more and more lately, anti-Semitic.

One swallow does not a summer make.

By: zkharya

zkharya — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:15:46 +0000

Re. STW’s ties with Hizbullah, Hamas etc, I think it fair to call PSC a “wipe Israel off the map” organization:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371116381&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

In defence of the Israel tourism map, it did at least show a 1967 border. Nothing doing on the PSC logo.

By: Gordon Bennet

Gordon Bennet — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 13:34:00 +0000

I think one could make a case for saying that the invasion of Sinai by Israel in 1956 was not directly in response to aggression.

One could, but one would be entirely ignorant. For example, one would never have heard of the constant aggression against Israel from that direction throughout the early and mid-1950s. Or perhaps one wouldn’t worry too much about peaceful Israeli citizens being murdered in their beds by such aggression.

By: Gordon Bennet

Gordon Bennet — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 13:28:22 +0000

The notion that there are no Palestinian Territories and therefore no occupation is a remarkable one.

There was no legal entity called ‘Palestinian Territories’ in 1967 (or at any time before or since) to be ‘occupied’ within any meaningful construction of the term ‘occupied’ as used in the field of international events. I am sorry that your grasp of history and geography, and of the consequences of the LoN’s mandate terms, is so slim that this to be pointed out to you.

By: Gordon Bennet

Gordon Bennet — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 13:22:23 +0000

Gordon Bennett. I rather added the point in order to forestall the kind of cretinous nudge nudge wink wink stuff from ultra-right thickos like you.
You are frothing muppet, and there is no requirement for me to prove my pristine hardman tendencies to you, you twat.
Now fuck off and don’t insult my (impeccably “Decent”) intelligence.

Anyone who told you, on the basis of such sub-moronic nonsense as the above (for example, I am not ultra-right: I am well left of centre) that you are ‘intelligent’, was having a laugh at your expense.

By: Blackprince2911

Blackprince2911 — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:52:56 +0000

The lesson we all need to learn from this story is that Stop the War’s credentials are displayed clearly: it is not a peace group but is strongly tied into groups that advocate and put their faith in the use of violence as a (perhaps the primary) means of change. Stop the War’s contradiction is that it opposes violence by non-Islamic actors but sees a right in Hamas and Hezbollah et al to use it. Any member of the public that comes into contact with this organization will soon discover this hypocrisy; and as result, I believe, its support base will wither, as it seems to be, and only the extremists will remain. The same goes for groups like Respect.

By: Alec

Alec — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:49:42 +0000

Exactly true, Michael.

By: MITNAGED

MITNAGED — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:19:30 +0000

Jo, surely time will tell as to whether this decision will set a precedent that has all Friends’ Meeting Houses refusing to allow their premises to be used to spread hatred, or even to allow their courtyards to be used as collection points (as did the Friends in Manchester) for “We are all Hezbollah Now” banner carrying idiots from the Stop the War Coalition after the Lebanon war.

And to your “Be the change you want to see” I would add my own suggestion – that the Quakers themselves continue by following your advice.