Author Topic: Anti-Semitic graffiti daubed on Anglo HQ (Read 921 times)

John Grace · « **on:** June 05, 2013, 08:50:14 AM »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/antisemitic-graffiti-daubed-on-anglo-hq-29322775.html

Quote

CORMAC MURPHY – 05 JUNE 2013

VANDALS have daubed the names of a developer, bankers, the Taoiseach and Tanaiste in red paint on the unfinished Anglo Irish Bank building in Dublin city’s North Wall Quay.

The site was to be the defunct lender's new headquarters but was sold last year to the Central Bank.

Overnight, vandals gained access and painted ‘S Dunne', ‘Drumm', ‘US Fed Reserve' and other phrases across several floors of the concrete shell.

The graffiti is a reference to developer Sean Dunne, who borrowed huge sums from Anglo, and David Drumm, the lender's former chief executive. Gardai confirmed today they have been notified about the incident and are looking into the matter.

“We've had a few queries in relation to it. Store Street gardai are aware of it and are investigating. We heard about it this morning,” a spokesman told the Herald.

Some of the graffiti is anti-Semitic including ‘Jєωιѕн financial terrorism’.

The individual or individuals responsible managed to climb to the very top floor of the building.

Last year, NAMA reached an agreement with the Central Bank to sell the unfinished block to the Central Bank for €7m.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #1 on:** June 06, 2013, 02:41:38 AM »

.

What makes something 'anti-Semitic'?

Quote

Some of the graffiti is anti-Semitic including ‘Jєωιѕн financial terrorism’.

That would be, "including" but not limited to ‘Jєωιѕн financial terrorism’.

The term "Jєωιѕн financial terrorism" is a good example of something
that the Jєωs don't like to see, especially as GRAFFITI on THEIR BUILDING.

And you can be quite sure that any other 'anti-Semitic' graffiti found
there (which they curiously do not quote or mention) would also be
something the Jєωs don't like to see there.

In fact, it is quite impossible to find any so-called anti-Semitic ANYTHING
that is NOT something the Jєωs don't like to see.

Therefore, a thing is 'anti-Semitic' if it is something the Jєωs don't like.

And its being something the Jєωs don't like is what makes it 'anti-Semitic.'

That is, if it is something the Jєωs LIKE, it cannot be anti-Semitic.

Similarly, if it is something the Jєωs don't care about, it's not anti-Semitic.

It has to be something the Jєωs don't like, and THEN it's anti-Semitic.

Consequently, WHENEVER YOU SEE "ANTI-SEMITIC" you can simply
replace those words with "something the Jєωs don't like" and you will
have the same content, objectively, but you will then have a much
better comprehension of the sentence in which the words are found,
because "something the Jєωs don't like" is DEFINITIVE and TRUE, and
it is not ambiguous, deceptive and FALSE like "anti-Semitic" is.

A case in point:

Quote

Some of the graffiti is something the Jєωs don't like, including (but not limited to) ‘Jєωιѕн financial terrorism’.

PatrickG · « **Reply #2 on:** June 07, 2013, 01:46:17 PM »

Bravissimo!

BTNYC · « **Reply #3 on:** June 09, 2013, 02:38:18 PM »

The mere fact that "anti Semitic" is supposed to mean "anti Jєωιѕн" is evidence of Jєωs' obsession with the "superiority" of their race. Only they matter and everyone else can go to Hell. Why isn't someone who hates Arabs, or Chaldeans or (my own ethnic group) the Maltese an "anti Semite?" We have Semitic blood and speak a Semitic language. But apparently that's not good enough.

This gets all the more absurd when one stops to consider the fact that the people who claim this term wholly for themselves are by and large of eastern European / Khazar extraction and have an infinitely more dubious claim to being victims of "anti-Semitism" than do the aforementioned groups.