Anyway, apparently we're all anti-semites as well. Seems we don't like anyone much.

[Berni]

Mind you, it does rather smack of 'Poll specifically designed to highlight anti-semitism finds anti-semitism'.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/uk-jewish-antis emitism-rise-yougov-poll (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/14/uk-jewish-antisemitism-rise-yougov-poll)

[Ashberto]

The Guardian's frequent depictions of Israelis as monsters, I wonder?

[Monty91]

media"

How is that one statement not two?

[Berni]

You know, the north of England that has the most concentrated and homogenous communities of muslims?

[Berni]

Otherwise, I would agree that it's a f**king weird question.

[Snin]

anti isil ..VERY anti RT..anti russia ..pro ukraine..anti facist...pro facist..its af**king joke of a paper

[Monty91]

[Luis Anaconda]

that that's the bit you are fixating on

[Berni]

All in all, though, it's a pisspoor sort of a poll because it couches potentially uncontroversial questions in deliberately racist terms.

After all, we have all known or observed Jewish people referencing the Holocaust as a way of explaining their outlook on society and world events – and understandably so. This happens frequently and one wouldn’t have to work hard to find examples of it all over the media. No problem as far as I’m concerned. Any attempt to explain the Jewish world-view without reference to the Holocaust would be patently ludicrous.

However, the real problem here is the rather underhand use of the phrase ‘in order to gain sympathy’ in the question. What does that mean? If it means ‘to get people to understand and hopefully agree with their point of view’, then I would answer yes to such a question. If, however, it is meant to mean ‘in order to obfuscate and pull the wool over the eyes of their interlocutors’, then I would answer ‘no’.

There is clearly an ocean of semantic nuance separating these two interpretations, but one interpretation may justifiably be called ‘anti-semitic’ and the other may not. However, to answer a categorical ‘no’ to this question would be dishonest, while answering a categorical ‘yes’ would be crude.

The same could equally be said of some of the other ‘elephant-trap’ questions. Rephrase ‘chase money’ as ‘are proportionately more economically successful than other ethnic groups’ and no-one would feel bad about saying yes. Replace ‘have too much power in the media’ with ‘are wildly over-represented in the upper echelons of media relative to their proportion of the population’ and once again no-one would mind. These differences highlight the way in which stating observable and demonstrable facts can easily be twisted into something more sinister in the black and white world of surveys.

[Snin]

[Peter]

Its an odd question anyway. I mean, just how much power should jews have in the media? Is there an ideal amount?

[Peter]

[Peter]

What the f**k does that mean? The 30s in britain or in europe?