Discussion:
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair
(too old to reply)
Tommy
2005-09-11 13:32:45 UTC
Permalink
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in the
ass. Oy Vey!!


Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]

ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing to
scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as offensive
to Muslims.
They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass
murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of
other faiths.

The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by Blair to
tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the threat
to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
community.

Story continued at:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
i***@blueyonder.co.uk
2005-09-11 14:23:22 UTC
Permalink
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"


why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?
You are not saying that most muslims think either that the holocausts
did not happen or killing jews was a good idea,are you ?
Holocaust memorial day is ok with me providing everyone remembers that
it has to have a universal message,that all genocide and mass murder
is wrong,so muslim Turks killing Armenians was wrong,muslim Iraqi
troops killing Kurds was wrong.
jgarbuz
2005-09-11 14:35:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII, and the leader of the Palestinians, Haj AMin El
Husseini, the so-called "Grand Muifti" spent the war in Berlin urging
Hitler not to spare any Jews and planning his death camp for the Jews
of Palestine to be built as soon as Rommel broke through to Egypt and
Palestine.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
You are not saying that most muslims think either that the holocausts did not happen or killing jews was a good idea,are you ?<
That's a given. Anyone who believes otherwise is a hopeless Jewish
liberal moron!
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
Holocaust memorial day is ok with me providing everyone remembers that
it has to have a universal message,that all genocide and mass murder
is wrong,so muslim Turks killing Armenians was wrong,muslim Iraqi
troops killing Kurds was wrong.<
I agree that there should be no Holocaust Day in any other place than
Israel, and making one in other countries was indeed setting it up for
mockery. Nobody gives a shit about the mass murders of other people
than their own! Let's be honest, who gives a stuff about millions of
Cambodians, Rwandan Tutsis, and the many others who have been murdered
en masse since WWII? Only those who were affected, or their families or
that ethnicity that was targeted! That's simply human nature, and the
insipid attempts by liberal Jews and others to think that human nature
can be changed is delusional. Human nature can only be changed by
evolutionary changes taking many millennia. People can AFFECT a VENEER
of civility and even empathy, but to really believe that people can be
made to feel genuine remorse and sympathy for others not of their own
ethnic group is ludicrous. They can FAKE IT, but they don't really feel
it.
So as the child of Holocaust survivors I agree that there should be no
Holocaust days anywhere outside of Israel.
f***@verizon.net
2005-09-12 00:15:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
You are not saying that most muslims think either that the holocausts
did not happen or killing jews was a good idea,are you ?<
That's a given.
IOt's what most of them are taught, for sure.
Post by jgarbuz
Anyone who believes otherwise is a hopeless Jewish
liberal moron!
The morons are also those who refuse to accept that it's mostly non-Jews
w/that attitude.

Susan
The Department of Defense
2005-09-12 05:32:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII, and the leader of the Palestinians, Haj AMin El
Husseini, the so-called "Grand Muifti" spent the war in Berlin urging
Hitler not to spare any Jews and planning his death camp for the Jews
of Palestine to be built as soon as Rommel broke through to Egypt and
Palestine.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
You are not saying that most muslims think either that the holocausts did
not happen or killing jews was a good idea,are you ?<
That's a given. Anyone who believes otherwise is a hopeless Jewish
liberal moron!
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
Holocaust memorial day is ok with me providing everyone remembers that
it has to have a universal message,that all genocide and mass murder
is wrong,so muslim Turks killing Armenians was wrong,muslim Iraqi
troops killing Kurds was wrong.<
I agree that there should be no Holocaust Day in any other place than
Israel, and making one in other countries was indeed setting it up for
mockery. Nobody gives a shit about the mass murders of other people
than their own!
I have to disagree with you there, Jake/Jack, there are plenty of us that
know the horrors of what had happened to your people during WW2 and are
horrified by it. Even my own people had the Ustache and were a brutal bunch,
and I know why *some* of them did it, and can't understand why others joined
along for no good reason. I took a tour of Dakau and there is an exhibit of
a huge wooden mallet there with blood on it. I have no illusions of what it
was used for. Everyone in Europe suffered under the hands of the Nazi
shithead, but God knows that the Jews were at the forefront of a sinister
plan of extermination, so as long as we don't forget that it wasn't just the
Jews that suffered, I have no problems with the Jews having their
memorials, and will remember that this shit is not tolerable.

Let's be honest, who gives a stuff about millions of
Post by jgarbuz
Cambodians, Rwandan Tutsis, and the many others who have been murdered
en masse since WWII?
Again, I do and it makes me sick to my stomach, just as it makes me sick
that the Hindus have suffered more than the Jews under many Sultanates. Some
people *do* follow history Jake/Jack. Some of us really do know and we
really do care. I think the Hindus understand as well, and it pleases me to
see India and Israel forming alliences.

Only those who were affected, or their families or
Post by jgarbuz
that ethnicity that was targeted! That's simply human nature, and the
insipid attempts by liberal Jews and others to think that human nature
can be changed is delusional. Human nature can only be changed by
evolutionary changes taking many millennia. People can AFFECT a VENEER
of civility and even empathy, but to really believe that people can be
made to feel genuine remorse and sympathy for others not of their own
ethnic group is ludicrous. They can FAKE IT, but they don't really feel
it.
So as the child of Holocaust survivors I agree that there should be no
Holocaust days anywhere outside of Israel.
m***@yahoo.com
2005-09-14 09:44:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The
Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also
opposed Britain.

Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-14 12:54:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also opposed Britain.
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me. And the fact is, that Haj Amin El Husseini, working from Berlin,
even infiltrated agents to Palestine to try to poison the water sources
of Tel Aviv. Even after WWII, Syria and Egypt welcomed many Nazis to
come help them set up their security forces and even design rockets for
them to hit Israel.
I'm not saying that Arabs are any more antisemitic than anyone else,
but that during WWII their sympathies were clearly with the Germans.
Even in WWI, before Nazism, the Ottoman empire chose to align itself
with Germany before WWI. That's what led to the defeat and dissolution
of the Turkish empire after WWI.
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-14 14:25:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also opposed Britain.
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me.
The presence of jews creates 'anti-semitism'®. Nothing else does.
No jews in India - hence no 'anti-semitism®.

Likewise in sub-Saharan Africa: no 'anti-semitism® at all until you
reach South Africa: they don't call Johannesburg "Jewburg" for
nothing.

<b'rissed>
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-14 20:37:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also opposed Britain.
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me.
The presence of jews creates 'anti-semitism'®. Nothing else does.
No jews in India - hence no 'anti-semitism®. <
Well, that's not quite true. Granted a few thousands Jews amongst a
population of hundreds of millions won't exactly show up, the fact is
that there is a considerable community of Indian Jews in Israel,
called Bene Israel, who wear saris and everything, most of whom live
around Dimona and the Negev. Actually, a few of them in a little
apartment in Beersheba I owned, and felt sorry for the clan, being
pregnant and all. Kept getting sob stories every time I came for the
rent. Cleaned me out :) I lost three thousands bucks on unpaid rents,
stolen fridge, oven, etc., but later they were rounded up for passing
around about $50,000 in bad checks in Beersheba. I got a judgement from
the leftist female judge, who naturally tended to side with them, they
being "underpriveleged" welfare trash, albeit I did get a judgement
where I was supposed to get about $60 bucks a month via the court from
them. I got about three payments and that was the last I heard about
it. But otherwise, most of them are nice people, but welfare trash is
welfare trash everywhere. It's all the same everywhere. But yes, there
are Indian Jews and a few even held prominent positions in India,
including one General Jacobs, I believe was his name, who was
intrumental in defeating the Pakis in the India-Paki war of 1971. But
in general, India has been traditionally tolerant of anyone as long as
they don't destroy Hindu temples as the Muslims did.
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Likewise in sub-Saharan Africa: no 'anti-semitism® at all until you reach South Africa: they don't call Johannesburg "Jewburg" for
nothing.<
Well, of course, because liberal South African Jews helped defeat
apartheid. What else would you expect? :)
m***@yahoo.com
2005-09-15 12:00:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also opposed Britain.
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me.
The presence of jews creates 'anti-semitism'®. Nothing else does.
No jews in India - hence no 'anti-semitism®. <
Well, that's not quite true. Granted a few thousands Jews amongst a
population of hundreds of millions won't exactly show up, the fact is
that there is a considerable community of Indian Jews in Israel,
called Bene Israel, who wear saris and everything, most of whom live
around Dimona and the Negev. Actually, a few of them in a little
apartment in Beersheba I owned, and felt sorry for the clan, being
pregnant and all. Kept getting sob stories every time I came for the
rent. Cleaned me out :) I lost three thousands bucks on unpaid rents,
stolen fridge, oven, etc., but later they were rounded up for passing
around about $50,000 in bad checks in Beersheba. I got a judgement from
the leftist female judge, who naturally tended to side with them, they
being "underpriveleged" welfare trash, albeit I did get a judgement
where I was supposed to get about $60 bucks a month via the court from
them. I got about three payments and that was the last I heard about
it. But otherwise, most of them are nice people, but welfare trash is
welfare trash everywhere. It's all the same everywhere. But yes, there
are Indian Jews and a few even held prominent positions in India,
including one General Jacobs, I believe was his name, who was
intrumental in defeating the Pakis in the India-Paki war of 1971. But
in general, India has been traditionally tolerant of anyone as long as
they don't destroy Hindu temples as the Muslims did.
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Likewise in sub-Saharan Africa: no 'anti-semitism® at all until you reach South Africa: they don't call Johannesburg "Jewburg" for
nothing.<
Well, of course, because liberal South African Jews helped defeat
apartheid. What else would you expect? :)
Of course liberal South African Jews helped defeat apartheid, just like
they are helping to defeat Zionist apartheid. We in the rest of the
world are well aware of the decent and brave Jewish citizens around the
world---including Israel itself---who are utterly opposed to the
fascism of the zionist movement and its outrageous expression in the
outlaw Israeli state.

Anyone of good faith will realize that your own deranged, subhuman
sentiments ("I wish there had been a genocide against the
Palestinians") are not representative of most Jewish people.
Hic occultus occulto occisus est
2005-09-15 13:59:00 UTC
Permalink
" Israel itself---who are utterly opposed to the
fascism of the zionist "

Israel opposed to zionism???? BahahaHA
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-15 15:36:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Likewise in sub-Saharan Africa: no 'anti-semitism® at all until you reach South Africa: they don't call Johannesburg "Jewburg" for
nothing.<
Well, of course, because liberal South African Jews helped defeat
apartheid. What else would you expect? :)<
Of course liberal South African Jews helped defeat apartheid, just like they are helping to defeat Zionist apartheid. We in the rest of the world are well aware of the decent and brave Jewish citizens around the world---including Israel itself---who are utterly opposed to the fascism of the zionist movement and its outrageous expression in the outlaw Israeli state.<
Hogwash. The national liberation movement of the Jewish nation, and its
right to self-determination within its own national homeland, as
confirmed by the League of Nations in 1920 and reaffirmed by the United
Nations General Assembly with the vote to partition Palestine into
JEwish and Arab states, makes the Zionist movement the most legimate
national liberation movement ever in the annals of history.
Few other movements for liberation and self-determination can even hold
a candle to it. Elements of the Jewish nation-in-exile, mostly using
its own inner resources, struggled for, strived for, and fought for the
reclamation of its stolen and illegitimately occupied soil by foreign
elements who mostly despoiled it. But those insipid, leftist so-called
"Jews" who had been too busy squandering Jewish resources to "liberate"
others either too inept or lazy to liberate themselves simply drained
away Jewish resources from the Jewish national liberation movement.
Had these same supposedly "enlighted Jews" chosen instead to reoccupy
and rebuild their own homeland in Palestine from 1917 to 1939 as they
did to liberate blacks and others who have done nothing to repay the
favor, not only would there have been no Holocaust, but Jewish state
today would be the envy of the world! But while wasting their time and
energies on spreading communism, socialism and other repugnant,
self-destructive, and ulitimately failed dystopian causes, Hitler came
and destroyed actually not enough of them and their resources, because
too many escaped Germany to the US and Palestine to continue their
inane and insane attempts to spread chaos. Most of the antizionists are
either German Jews or Hungarian Khazars posing as "ultraorthodox."
Zionism in reality is the only productive and intelligent cause that
(some) Jews have engaged in in the last century and a half. The rest
has been hogwash, wasteful and utterly self-destructive.
Anyone of good faith will realize that your own deranged, subhuman
sentiments ("I wish there had been a genocide against the
Palestinians") are not representative of most Jewish people.<
Most Jewish people are DEAD because too many waited around in Europe
spreading communism and pornogaphy for two decades after the League of
Nations in 1920 confirmed that the Jewish homeland is in Palestine. As
for American Jews and their ilk who still think and act the in same
way, their own destruction, while it will not be in the same manner,
will be by "korus," of being "cut off," for not having sufficient
children, due to aborting them, or by engaging in sterile gay
marriages, or by advocating and engaging in all of the antisocial,
anti-Torah self-annihilating activities that amount to self-inflicted
ethnic suicide. But that's okay, as long as this does not completely
takeover Israel, which is my fear. Because then we are talking about
the end of the Jewish nation, the last of the "Mohicans," so to speak.
As for the Arabs, they have plenty of children and plenty of land, so
many in fact that they have no compunction strapping bombs onto them to
kill the precious few Jewish children in ISrael, and even mass
murdering their OWN! They genuinely NEED a TRUE, HITLER STYLE
HOLOCAUST, to see their children GASSED AND BURNED BY THE BUSHEL so
that maybe then, and perhaps only then, when their children are as few
and as precious to them as a Jewish child used to be to old-style
Jewish mothers like my own, whose innards were torn to pieces when her
own were brutally extirpated virtually in front of her eyes, maybe
then they will understand how important both peace and children really
are. And nothing, certainly no loss of land or houses, would EVER again
bring them the thought of strapping bombs to them to go out and blow up
Jews or other innocent civilians!
My mother lost a helluva lot more than ANY Palestinian ever could
imagine, but never would she strap a bomb on to me or any other child
to go and kill Nazis, much less innocents. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING
that Israel has ever done to them warrants what these sandNazis have
been doing.
But the Arabs are getting their own holocaust now anyway, not from
Israel, but from their own jihadists who are murdering hundreds of them
daily! God works in strange ways. A few years of innocent Arabs getting
blown up daily might bring them to an appreciation of the importance of
civilized behavior, I hope.
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-15 17:14:48 UTC
Permalink
Do fuck off, those same Jews in South Africa are ZIONIST, you fucking
NAZI pig.


<***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:***@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...


Of course liberal South African Jews helped defeat apartheid, just like
they are helping to defeat Zionist apartheid. We in the rest of the
world are well aware of the decent and brave Jewish citizens around the
world---including Israel itself---who are utterly opposed to the
fascism of the zionist movement and its outrageous expression in the
outlaw Israeli state.

Anyone of good faith will realize that your own deranged, subhuman
sentiments ("I wish there had been a genocide against the
Palestinians") are not representative of most Jewish people.
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-20 17:39:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The A=
rabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also oppos=
ed Britain.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me.
The presence of jews creates 'anti-semitism'=AE. Nothing else does.
No jews in India - hence no 'anti-semitism=AE. <
Well, that's not quite true. Granted a few thousands Jews amongst a
population of hundreds of millions won't exactly show up, the fact is
that there is a considerable community of Indian Jews in Israel,
called Bene Israel, who wear saris and everything, most of whom live
around Dimona and the Negev. Actually, a few of them in a little
apartment in Beersheba I owned, and felt sorry for the clan, being
pregnant and all. Kept getting sob stories every time I came for the
rent. Cleaned me out :) I lost three thousands bucks on unpaid rents,
stolen fridge, oven, etc., but later they were rounded up for passing
around about $50,000 in bad checks in Beersheba. I got a judgement from
the leftist female judge, who naturally tended to side with them, they
being "underpriveleged" welfare trash, albeit I did get a judgement
where I was supposed to get about $60 bucks a month via the court from
them. I got about three payments and that was the last I heard about
it. But otherwise, most of them are nice people, but welfare trash is
welfare trash everywhere. It's all the same everywhere. But yes, there
are Indian Jews and a few even held prominent positions in India,
including one General Jacobs, I believe was his name, who was
intrumental in defeating the Pakis in the India-Paki war of 1971. But
in general, India has been traditionally tolerant of anyone as long as
they don't destroy Hindu temples as the Muslims did.
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia. Whatever jew blood they may once have
had was diluted away over thousands of years by intermarriage with
natives.
Likewise in sub-Saharan Africa: no 'anti-semitism=AE at all until you re=
ach South Africa: they don't call Johannesburg "Jewburg" for
nothing.<
Well, of course, because liberal South African Jews helped defeat
apartheid. What else would you expect? :)
While not so liberal jews from 'Israeel' were on excellent terms with
the apartheid regime. Again, as you might expect.
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-21 14:32:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia.<
Anyone who is accepted by the orthodox rabbinate into the tribe of
Judah is a Jew, just as anyone accepted
by the Navajos into their tribe becomes a Navajo. About 1/3rd of all
American Indians look black or caucasian, but if their ancestors were
accetped into the tribe, then they are in. I don't know anything about
Filipino Jews, but I do know that Moses married a Cushite after he let
Zipporah the Midianite who bore him two lousy sons go.
Miriam, the sister of Moses was not happy about it, and the rabbis say
it wasn't because Moses took a black wife, but that he let Zipporah go
so abruptly. Well, she was a Midianite, i.e., an Arab, so what kind of
sons could she have produced for him? IN general, the Ethiopian Jews
claim descent from Solomon and Sheba and have preserved many ancient
Hebrew ways.
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Whatever jew blood they may once have
had was diluted away over thousands of years by intermarriage with
natives.<
Be it as it may, recent DNA analysis has shown that half of all
"Cohens" or those supposedly of the priestly caste according to their
name, do indeed carry the gene from nearly 2,000 years ago when the
Temple was destroyed. Also, DNA analysis of Jewish blood in general
indicates very strong Middle Eastern semitic relatationship, certainly
closer than to to the caucasian. This is due to very strong, ancient
traditions against
intermarriage, albeit this has gone the by in the last century or
thereabouts.
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Likewise in sub-Saharan Africa: no 'anti-semitism=AE at all until you re=
ach South Africa: they don't call Johannesburg "Jewburg" for
nothing.<
Well, of course, because liberal South African Jews helped defeat
apartheid. What else would you expect? :)
While not so liberal jews from 'Israeel' were on excellent terms with
the apartheid regime. Again, as you might expect.
reng=+n.org (The Revrnd)
2005-09-22 16:33:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia.<
Anyone who is accepted by the orthodox rabbinate into the tribe of
Judah is a Jew, just as anyone accepted
by the Navajos into their tribe becomes a Navajo.
That is only according to jews and injuns.
Post by j***@netzero.com
About 1/3rd of all
American Indians look black or caucasian, but if their ancestors were
accetped into the tribe, then they are in.
I've never seen a black injun.
Post by j***@netzero.com
I don't know anything about
Filipino Jews, but I do know that Moses married a Cushite after he let
Zipporah the Midianite who bore him two lousy sons go.
Miriam, the sister of Moses was not happy about it, and the rabbis say
it wasn't because Moses took a black wife, but that he let Zipporah go
so abruptly. Well, she was a Midianite, i.e., an Arab, so what kind of
sons could she have produced for him?
These are all figures from jew mythology: they didn't exist.
Post by j***@netzero.com
IN general, the Ethiopian Jews
claim descent from Solomon and Sheba and have preserved many ancient
Hebrew ways.
Such as female circumcision?
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Whatever jew blood they may once have
had was diluted away over thousands of years by intermarriage with
natives.<
Be it as it may, recent DNA analysis has shown that half of all
"Cohens" or those supposedly of the priestly caste according to their
name, do indeed carry the gene from nearly 2,000 years ago when the
Temple was destroyed. Also, DNA analysis of Jewish blood in general
indicates very strong Middle Eastern semitic relatationship, certainly
closer than to to the caucasian. This is due to very strong, ancient
traditions against
intermarriage, albeit this has gone the by in the last century or
thereabouts.
Can you acquire jew DNA through 'conversion'? Even if you're Irish???
Sara Salzman
2005-09-22 16:43:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by reng=+n.org (The Revrnd)
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia.<
Anyone who is accepted by the orthodox rabbinate into the tribe of
Judah is a Jew, just as anyone accepted
by the Navajos into their tribe becomes a Navajo.
That is only according to jews and injuns.
Post by j***@netzero.com
About 1/3rd of all
American Indians look black or caucasian, but if their ancestors were
accetped into the tribe, then they are in.
I've never seen a black injun.
Just because you're an idiot, doesn't mean there are not black Indians.
Suggesting that you read something is probably too much to ask, but
maybe your Mommy can tell you about York, William Clark's slave, who
accompanied them on the Corps of Discovery.

<Cue insulting but brainless response from the Fake Reverend>

Sara
--
The Jews may think all people are stupid when I reality the are watch ever
move you people make.

An old German saying is the Jews will give nothing for what you did have
before. The Jews supporting poor black people means there will be absolutely
no return of some of the money this alone speaks for itself.
-- Kurt Knoll.
reng=+n.org (The Revrnd)
2005-09-23 04:46:14 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 10:43:57 -0600, Sarah Schmaltzman
Post by Sara Salzman
Post by reng=+n.org (The Revrnd)
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia.<
Anyone who is accepted by the orthodox rabbinate into the tribe of
Judah is a Jew, just as anyone accepted
by the Navajos into their tribe becomes a Navajo.
That is only according to jews and injuns.
Post by j***@netzero.com
About 1/3rd of all
American Indians look black or caucasian, but if their ancestors were
accetped into the tribe, then they are in.
I've never seen a black injun.
Just because you're an idiot, doesn't mean there are not black Indians.
You've been watching too many Mel Brooks movies, Schmaltzmann.
Post by Sara Salzman
Suggesting that you read something is probably too much to ask, but
maybe your Mommy can tell you about York, William Clark's slave, who
accompanied them on the Corps of Discovery.
A schvartze accompanying injuns is still a schvartze, you stupid jew
cunt.
Post by Sara Salzman
Sarah
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-22 21:03:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia.<
Anyone who is accepted by the orthodox rabbinate into the tribe of
Judah is a Jew, just as anyone accepted
by the Navajos into their tribe becomes a Navajo.
That is only according to jews and injuns.<
Well, the last statistic I saw states the existence of about 2.5
million native American indians in the US in all the tribes, but
roughly 1.6 million are "pure bred" as we used to say in pre-PC days.
The rest may be mixed race and often look more caucasian or in a few
cases negro, but are nonetheless full members of the tribes with full
right to live on native tribal lands.
Post by j***@netzero.com
About 1/3rd of all
American Indians look black or caucasian, but if their ancestors were
accetped into the tribe, then they are in.
I've never seen a black injun.
Post by j***@netzero.com
I don't know anything about
Filipino Jews, but I do know that Moses married a Cushite after he let
Zipporah the Midianite who bore him two lousy sons go.
Miriam, the sister of Moses was not happy about it, and the rabbis say
it wasn't because Moses took a black wife, but that he let Zipporah go
so abruptly. Well, she was a Midianite, i.e., an Arab, so what kind of
sons could she have produced for him?
These are all figures from jew mythology: they didn't exist.<
Probably not, but the same could be said of Greek and Roman
mythological figures, yet myths are a significant part of any nation's
cultural and national heritage. A nation with no myths has no ancient
history. Even American children are taught some myths, which is what
makes a nation a nation. The Palestinians have no ancient myths, which
is why they make up new ones all the time, to try to convince
themselves and everyone else that they are a nation. And how would
Europe have developed if it didn't have the common myth of Jesus and
the Resurrection which united "Christendom" to a certain extent? Quest
for the Holy Grail, and all that stuff? The myths of King Arthur and
his knights of the round table? And so on.
Post by j***@netzero.com
IN general, the Ethiopian Jews
claim descent from Solomon and Sheba and have preserved many ancient
Hebrew ways.
Such as female circumcision?<
No, that is not a Hebrew custom. It is not biblical. That is something
tribal from Africa, albeit male circumcision also began in Africa.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Whatever jew blood they may once have
had was diluted away over thousands of years by intermarriage with
natives.<
Be it as it may, recent DNA analysis has shown that half of all
"Cohens" or those supposedly of the priestly caste according to their
name, do indeed carry the gene from nearly 2,000 years ago when the
Temple was destroyed. Also, DNA analysis of Jewish blood in general
indicates very strong Middle Eastern semitic relatationship, certainly
closer than to to the caucasian. This is due to very strong, ancient
traditions against
intermarriage, albeit this has gone the by in the last century or
thereabouts.
Can you acquire jew DNA through 'conversion'? Even if you're Irish???<
No, you can't. However, orthodox Jews do not marry outside the tribe or
faith, and actually there are relatively few converts to Judaism, most
of whom probably post here :) Many converts soon revert, or their
progeny often does. Nonetheless, the earliest Hebrews were a mixed
multitude, made up primarily of Canaanites, but also Sumerians,
bedouins, Egyptians, and others, who settled down at a specific time in
history when the Egyptian and Mesopotamian empires were weak and did
not control Canaan very well giving those tribes some space to coalesce
into a nation increasingly under the idea of a single god El. When any
of those empires gained some power, it was difficult for the Hebrews to
sustain independence and so they were more often than not ruled over by
others. But they never, ever totally gave up their desire for an
independent national existence in that land. An old common joke in
Israel is about one old jew in Israel wailing, "For 2,000 years we
waited and waited, so why did it have to happen to me? :)
f***@verizon.net
2005-09-23 04:41:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by j***@netzero.com
IN general, the Ethiopian Jews
claim descent from Solomon and Sheba and have preserved many ancient
Hebrew ways.
Such as female circumcision?<
No, that is not a Hebrew custom. It is not biblical. That is something
tribal from Africa, albeit male circumcision also began in Africa.
He knows this.
He's been told the truth every time he brings up the lie,
but he - as always - prefers the lie.

Susan
ren=====n.org (The Revernd)
2005-09-23 05:19:22 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 04:41:08 GMT, Suzy the foul-mouthed convert
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by j***@netzero.com
IN general, the Ethiopian Jews
claim descent from Solomon and Sheba and have preserved many ancient
Hebrew ways.
Such as female circumcision?<
No, that is not a Hebrew custom. It is not biblical. That is something
tribal from Africa, albeit male circumcision also began in Africa.
He knows this.
He's been told the truth every time he brings up the lie,
but he - as always - prefers the lie.
You know you're not a real jew. If I've told you once, I've told you
a hundred times. But you - as always - prefer the lie.
Post by f***@verizon.net
Suzy
ren=====n.org (The Revernd)
2005-09-23 07:24:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
These so-called "Indian jews" are no more jewish than Filipino jews or
the schvartzes from Ethiopia.<
Anyone who is accepted by the orthodox rabbinate into the tribe of
Judah is a Jew, just as anyone accepted
by the Navajos into their tribe becomes a Navajo.
That is only according to jews and injuns.<
Well, the last statistic I saw states the existence of about 2.5
million native American indians in the US in all the tribes, but
roughly 1.6 million are "pure bred" as we used to say in pre-PC days.
It's a mongrel country. Some intermarriage is inevitable.
Post by j***@netzero.com
The rest may be mixed race and often look more caucasian or in a few
cases negro, but are nonetheless full members of the tribes with full
right to live on native tribal lands.
Full rights to welfare and getting paralytically drunk?
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by j***@netzero.com
About 1/3rd of all
American Indians look black or caucasian, but if their ancestors were
accetped into the tribe, then they are in.
I've never seen a black injun.
Post by j***@netzero.com
I don't know anything about
Filipino Jews, but I do know that Moses married a Cushite after he let
Zipporah the Midianite who bore him two lousy sons go.
Miriam, the sister of Moses was not happy about it, and the rabbis say
it wasn't because Moses took a black wife, but that he let Zipporah go
so abruptly. Well, she was a Midianite, i.e., an Arab, so what kind of
sons could she have produced for him?
These are all figures from jew mythology: they didn't exist.<
Probably not, but the same could be said of Greek and Roman
mythological figures, yet myths are a significant part of any nation's
cultural and national heritage.
So are children's fairy tales.
Post by j***@netzero.com
A nation with no myths has no ancient
history. Even American children are taught some myths, which is what
makes a nation a nation. The Palestinians have no ancient myths, which
is why they make up new ones all the time, to try to convince
themselves and everyone else that they are a nation. And how would
Europe have developed if it didn't have the common myth of Jesus and
the Resurrection which united "Christendom" to a certain extent?
That's only a "myth" according to the jews.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Quest
for the Holy Grail, and all that stuff? The myths of King Arthur and
his knights of the round table? And so on.
All that stuff doesn't form the basis for anything.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by j***@netzero.com
IN general, the Ethiopian Jews
claim descent from Solomon and Sheba and have preserved many ancient
Hebrew ways.
Such as female circumcision?<
No, that is not a Hebrew custom. It is not biblical. That is something
tribal from Africa, albeit male circumcision also began in Africa.
So did jews.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by reneg''n.org (The Revd)
Whatever jew blood they may once have
had was diluted away over thousands of years by intermarriage with
natives.<
Be it as it may, recent DNA analysis has shown that half of all
"Cohens" or those supposedly of the priestly caste according to their
name, do indeed carry the gene from nearly 2,000 years ago when the
Temple was destroyed. Also, DNA analysis of Jewish blood in general
indicates very strong Middle Eastern semitic relatationship, certainly
closer than to to the caucasian. This is due to very strong, ancient
traditions against
intermarriage, albeit this has gone the by in the last century or
thereabouts.
Can you acquire jew DNA through 'conversion'? Even if you're Irish???<
No, you can't. However, orthodox Jews do not marry outside the tribe or
faith, and actually there are relatively few converts to Judaism, most
of whom probably post here :) Many converts soon revert, or their
progeny often does. Nonetheless, the earliest Hebrews were a mixed
multitude, made up primarily of Canaanites, but also Sumerians,
bedouins, Egyptians, and others, who settled down at a specific time in
history when the Egyptian and Mesopotamian empires were weak and did
not control Canaan very well giving those tribes some space to coalesce
into a nation increasingly under the idea of a single god El. When any
of those empires gained some power, it was difficult for the Hebrews to
sustain independence and so they were more often than not ruled over by
others. But they never, ever totally gave up their desire for an
independent national existence in that land. An old common joke in
Israel is about one old jew in Israel wailing, "For 2,000 years we
waited and waited, so why did it have to happen to me? :)
Most jews can't stand 'Israeel'. Hence Fformby-Smythe's First Law of
Zionism: "The importance of 'Israeel' to any given jew is directly
proportional to the square of the distance between that jew and
'Israeel'."

Jim F.
2005-09-14 17:12:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by m***@yahoo.com
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The
Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also
opposed Britain.
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me.
A number of Indian nationalists did support the Axis powers
during WW II, most notably, Subhas Chandra Bose, who
helped organize the Indian National Army with Japanese
assistance. Gandhi, on the other hand, did back the
British during the war, but made that support contingent
upon the British agreeing to evacuate India after the war,
which they did.

Lots of nationalists in other countries that were under
British colonial rule did similar things. After all, if
they were fighting British oppression, and the Axis
were fighting the British, then the old principle that
"the enemy of my enemy is a friend" came into play
here. As you probably know, even some Zionists,
like Avraham Stern and Lehi took a similar stance when
during WW II, Stern made a proposal to the
Third Reich for an alliance to drive the British
out of Palestine and the whole Middle East.
Post by j***@netzero.com
And the fact is, that Haj Amin El Husseini, working from Berlin,
even infiltrated agents to Palestine to try to poison the water sources
of Tel Aviv. Even after WWII, Syria and Egypt welcomed many Nazis to
come help them set up their security forces and even design rockets for
them to hit Israel.
I'm not saying that Arabs are any more antisemitic than anyone else,
but that during WWII their sympathies were clearly with the Germans.
Even in WWI, before Nazism, the Ottoman empire chose to align itself
with Germany before WWI. That's what led to the defeat and dissolution
of the Turkish empire after WWI.
gab
2005-09-15 03:12:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by m***@yahoo.com
Post by jgarbuz
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
offends muslims"
DITCH THE MUSLIMS AND ADVISER.
why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?<
Because the overwhelming majority of them were full supporters of
HItler during WWII,
You've confused anti-British politics with pro-Nazi sentiments. The
Arabs were no more Nazi than the Irish nationalists, many of whom also
opposed Britain.
Why are you posting, when you obviously know nothing?<
I guess it takes ignorance to know it, huh? As for Arabs being any more
antisemitic than the IRish, I wouldn't know about that one way or the
other, because there is plenty of antisemitism amongst Jews themselves,
and having lived in Israel for ten years, I know whereof I speak.
However, the INdians (Hindus) were also quite anti-British colonialism
but I am not aware either of much antisemitism in India, nor of much
pro-Nazi activities there during the war. If I'm wrong, please correct
me. And the fact is, that Haj Amin El Husseini, working from Berlin,
even infiltrated agents to Palestine to try to poison the water sources
of Tel Aviv. Even after WWII, Syria and Egypt welcomed many Nazis to
come help them set up their security forces and even design rockets for
them to hit Israel.
I'm not saying that Arabs are any more antisemitic than anyone else,
but that during WWII their sympathies were clearly with the Germans.
Even in WWI, before Nazism, the Ottoman empire chose to align itself
with Germany before WWI. That's what led to the defeat and dissolution
of the Turkish empire after WWI.
Binyamin Dissen
2005-09-11 20:43:39 UTC
Permalink
On 11 Sep 2005 07:23:22 -0700 "***@blueyonder.co.uk"
<***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

:>re "advisers propose scrapping of holocaust memorial day because it
:>offends muslims"

:>why should holocaust day be offensive to muslims?

It won't be long before the moslem arabs complain about the 9-11 memorial day
as being offensive to them.

:>You are not saying that most muslims think either that the holocausts
:>did not happen or killing jews was a good idea,are you ?

Actually the cowardly arab moslems believe both.

:>Holocaust memorial day is ok with me providing everyone remembers that
:>it has to have a universal message,that all genocide and mass murder
:>is wrong,so muslim Turks killing Armenians was wrong,muslim Iraqi
:>troops killing Kurds was wrong.

To the moslem arab, who typically is a coward, it is OK to murder non-moslems.
And it is even OK to murder moslems, as long as there is a chance that they
can kill a Jewish baby at the same time.
--
Binyamin Dissen <***@dissensoftware.com>
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.

I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
jgarbuz
2005-09-11 14:26:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tommy
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in the
ass. Oy Vey!!
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing to
scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as offensive
to Muslims.
They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass
murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of
other faiths.<
I WISH there had been a Palestinian GEnocide, but unfortunately, no
such thing ever happened. I would have loved to have been a
concentration camp guard in Gaza exterminating a million terrorist Arab
babies the same way a million innocent Jewish babies, including my half
brother were murdered for nothing, but again, unfortunately, no such
holocaust occurred. All that happened in "Palestine" was that 3/4s of a
million Arabs thought the Arab armies were going to kill another
600,000 Jews in Palestine, but unexpectedly instead the Jews won the
war. But did the Jews murder 3/4s of a million Arabs in revenge? NO.
And these same Arabs were rooting for Hitler all through WWII. THeir
leader, Haj Amin El Husseini was in Berlin throughout WWII urging
Hitler not to dare let any Jews escape to Palestine,and planning a
concentration camp to be set up in Nablus for Jews as soon as Rommel
broke through to Egypt and then Palestine.
Post by Tommy
The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by Blair to
tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the threat
to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
community.<
I agree that there should be no "Holocaust Day" because it is only a
mockery to the memory of my family, to ask gentiles who were at heart
sympathetic to the aims of the Nazis to shed crocodile tears every year
for Jews they had always wanted either dead of out of their lives
either way.
The only "Holocaust Day" should be in a strong, united and nuclear
armed Israel that will make certain that any nation that wants to try a
repeat of it will be burned to the ground before it has the chance
again.

But naturally Muslims would be against a Holocaust Day for Jews because
they were full supporters of Hitler throughout WWII.Why doesn't
Britain have a Hitler Day instead dedicated to the Muslims and their
skinhead Nazi sympathizers instead? I'm sure there would be no protests
by Muslims or their neoNazi supporters against that.
Post by Tommy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
i***@blueyonder.co.uk
2005-09-11 15:23:07 UTC
Permalink
you do not understand irony do you,take it you are an American(sorry
that is a racist generalization).
I am a atheist Brit social democrat,not a liberal Jewish yank.
My point was that the holocaust was wrong,and would have been wrong if
only red haired people or left handed people had been killed,it was of
course mainly about jews,but what about Romany,gays,political prisoners
and so on.
Genocide is wrong whoever the victims are,you don't agree and want to
kill all arabs.
You claim,like a lot of people,that the muslims supported Hitler during
world war 11.
It is true that many muslim leaders on paper supported the nazis,but as
to what the majority of muslims felt,then as now who knows ,it is not
a democratic religion,a but like the Roman Catholics.
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-11 17:40:10 UTC
Permalink
And you do not understand what the Holocaust Memorial Day is!

It memorialises ALL people (civilians) that were systematically murdered
by the NAZIS, not just Jews.

It is not a claim, but HISTORICAL FACT that the majority of Muslims and
nearly all ARABS supported NAZISM and the extermination of Jews.

It is a historical fact that Muslim nations kicked out nearly all of
their Jews after 1948, creating 900,000 Jewish refugees, 33% more than
Palestinian refugees -- over 600,000 of those Jewish refugees were
absorbed immediately by the State of Israel -- not one Jewish refugee
exists today, except of course for the thousands of Jews displaced by
Hurricane Katrina.

So why are there so many Arab refugees still today, 57 years later?



<***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:***@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
: you do not understand irony do you,take it you are an American(sorry
: that is a racist generalization).
: I am a atheist Brit social democrat,not a liberal Jewish yank.
: My point was that the holocaust was wrong,and would have been wrong if
: only red haired people or left handed people had been killed,it was of
: course mainly about jews,but what about Romany,gays,political
prisoners
: and so on.
: Genocide is wrong whoever the victims are,you don't agree and want to
: kill all arabs.
: You claim,like a lot of people,that the muslims supported Hitler
during
: world war 11.
: It is true that many muslim leaders on paper supported the nazis,but
as
: to what the majority of muslims felt,then as now who knows ,it is not
: a democratic religion,a but like the Roman Catholics.
:
Kurt Knoll
2005-09-11 21:20:47 UTC
Permalink
Who Cares.
kk
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
And you do not understand what the Holocaust Memorial Day is!
It memorialises ALL people (civilians) that were systematically murdered
by the NAZIS, not just Jews.
It is not a claim, but HISTORICAL FACT that the majority of Muslims and
nearly all ARABS supported NAZISM and the extermination of Jews.
It is a historical fact that Muslim nations kicked out nearly all of
their Jews after 1948, creating 900,000 Jewish refugees, 33% more than
Palestinian refugees -- over 600,000 of those Jewish refugees were
absorbed immediately by the State of Israel -- not one Jewish refugee
exists today, except of course for the thousands of Jews displaced by
Hurricane Katrina.
So why are there so many Arab refugees still today, 57 years later?
: you do not understand irony do you,take it you are an American(sorry
: that is a racist generalization).
: I am a atheist Brit social democrat,not a liberal Jewish yank.
: My point was that the holocaust was wrong,and would have been wrong if
: only red haired people or left handed people had been killed,it was of
: course mainly about jews,but what about Romany,gays,political
prisoners
: and so on.
: Genocide is wrong whoever the victims are,you don't agree and want to
: kill all arabs.
: You claim,like a lot of people,that the muslims supported Hitler
during
: world war 11.
: It is true that many muslim leaders on paper supported the nazis,but
as
: to what the majority of muslims felt,then as now who knows ,it is not
: a democratic religion,a but like the Roman Catholics.
The Department of Defense
2005-09-12 07:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kurt Knoll
Who Cares.
kk
Hey kurt, go fuck yourself. You are a slimey piece of shit.
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-12 16:01:18 UTC
Permalink
Who Cares.<
For once, we agree! Each to their own, I say! Jews funded the NAACP at
its start! Why?
For what? What did we get in return? If Jews had invested everything in
Israel from day one, back
back in 1923 onwards (when the League ruled the Jewish homeland was
indeed in Palestine), we could have had a Jewish state by 1938, and
there would have been no Holocaust! It's precisely because
Jews wasted so much on everyone else, that now Israel has turned itself
into a beggar state!
There was no reason for it! Jews once had immense resources, but Hitler
destroyed much
of it, and in the US today, Jews are going down as well, economically
that is.
If Israel held all the patents of inventions and ideas that JEws
invented in all the other countries,
they were grudgingly tolerated in, it would be far and away the
wealthiest country in the world, proportionately
speaking! The guy who was instrumental in creating the communication
protocols
software for (D) ARPA (TCP/IP, the essence of the Internet) is a Jew.
And the list is endless.
The patent for the nuclear chain reaction, originally filed by Leo
Szilard in Britain, and later
forced by General Groves (military head of the Manhattan project) to
be turned over to the United States government, was a Jew! Israel
would need no foreign aid, and indeed could be a big provide of it
if only just the royalties from patents from Jewish inventions were all
in the hands of the
Israeli patents office.
kk
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
And you do not understand what the Holocaust Memorial Day is!
It memorialises ALL people (civilians) that were systematically murdered
by the NAZIS, not just Jews.
It is not a claim, but HISTORICAL FACT that the majority of Muslims and
nearly all ARABS supported NAZISM and the extermination of Jews.
It is a historical fact that Muslim nations kicked out nearly all of
their Jews after 1948, creating 900,000 Jewish refugees, 33% more than
Palestinian refugees -- over 600,000 of those Jewish refugees were
absorbed immediately by the State of Israel -- not one Jewish refugee
exists today, except of course for the thousands of Jews displaced by
Hurricane Katrina.
So why are there so many Arab refugees still today, 57 years later?
: you do not understand irony do you,take it you are an American(sorry
: that is a racist generalization).
: I am a atheist Brit social democrat,not a liberal Jewish yank.
: My point was that the holocaust was wrong,and would have been wrong if
: only red haired people or left handed people had been killed,it was of
: course mainly about jews,but what about Romany,gays,political
prisoners
: and so on.
: Genocide is wrong whoever the victims are,you don't agree and want to
: kill all arabs.
: You claim,like a lot of people,that the muslims supported Hitler
during
: world war 11.
: It is true that many muslim leaders on paper supported the nazis,but
as
: to what the majority of muslims felt,then as now who knows ,it is not
: a democratic religion,a but like the Roman Catholics.
i***@blueyonder.co.uk
2005-09-12 16:54:44 UTC
Permalink
I think you get a bit excited here and lose touch with reality.
You don't see that the Zionist movement was not supported by 100 per
cent of jews,it is still not.
So it was possible,and prior to the creation of Israel,essential , for
jews to be jews but also citizens of their own countries.
Prior to the nazis taking over in Germany in Jan 1933 there was little
cause for jews in western europe to leave europe for Palestine where
the arabs were revolting at British policy of letting some jews settle
there.

It was the nazi policy towards the jews from 1933 but especially after
the intorduction of the Nuremberg anti jewish laws in 1935 that
increased the number of jews trying to get out of Germany,some of them
wanting to go to Israel and so support for zionism increased.
The idea that somehow Britain would walk away from Palestine and the
arabs would be happy to let lots of jews settle there,and finally that
Israel would be a economic success and not need foreign aid is not
realistic.
What do you mean by foreign aid?,lets be honest,whatever you think of
it it is a fact that the USA has been a sponsor of Israel since 1947.
Israel is a unique state because of its history.
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-12 17:58:03 UTC
Permalink
Little cause???????

Again you show your complete ignorance of Jewish History in Europe.

I have a degree in Jewish Studies, that includes all of Jewish history.
What kind of conditions do you think the Jewish people lived in
throughout most of Eastern Europe in the 1930's????

Ever hear of a shtetl or pogroms?




<***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:***@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
:I think you get a bit excited here and lose touch with reality.
: You don't see that the Zionist movement was not supported by 100 per
: cent of jews,it is still not.
: So it was possible,and prior to the creation of Israel,essential ,
for
: jews to be jews but also citizens of their own countries.
: Prior to the nazis taking over in Germany in Jan 1933 there was little
: cause for jews in western europe to leave europe for Palestine where
: the arabs were revolting at British policy of letting some jews settle
: there.
:
: It was the nazi policy towards the jews from 1933 but especially after
: the intorduction of the Nuremberg anti jewish laws in 1935 that
: increased the number of jews trying to get out of Germany,some of them
: wanting to go to Israel and so support for zionism increased.
: The idea that somehow Britain would walk away from Palestine and the
: arabs would be happy to let lots of jews settle there,and finally that
: Israel would be a economic success and not need foreign aid is not
: realistic.
: What do you mean by foreign aid?,lets be honest,whatever you think of
: it it is a fact that the USA has been a sponsor of Israel since 1947.
: Israel is a unique state because of its history.
:
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-13 12:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
I think you get a bit excited here and lose touch with reality.
You don't see that the Zionist movement was not supported by 100 per cent of jews,it is still not.<
True. But if even only 10% of all Jews in the world in 1922 (when the
League of Nations confirmed that the Jewish homeland was indeed in
Palestine) were zionists, it still represented nearly 1 million Jews
(out of ten million then) and still outnumbered the number of Arabs
lving in Palestine at the time, which was less than 700,000. The fact
that the majority of Jews were NOT zionists only confirms how deluded
most were believing that their begrudgingly achieved citizenship
somehow actually made them part of the nations in which they resided.
The simple fact is, that a nation is an ethnicity, whereas as a
nation-state may indeed incorporate many ethnicities. But a nation
should not be confused with a nation-STATE. For example, the State of
Israel is a nation-state which contains many Arabs and other non-Jewish
ethnic citizens. But the State of Israel is also the ancient HOMELAND
of the Jewish nation. This is true of many nation-states, particularly
in modern times. The German nation is the nations of the Germanic
tribes, but it also has Jews and other non-Germanic citizens as well.
So many minorities, especially Jews, are CONFUSED. You can be a loyal,
patriotic citizen of any nation-state that grants you citizenship, but
your genuine national identity is your ethnicity. And it always comes
out in the end anyway. As soon as the majority ethnicity becomes
demographically challenged by minorities, it suddenly "discovers" its
ethnic roots.
Plainly put, birds of a feather flock together.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
So it was possible,and prior to the creation of Israel,essential , for jews to be jews but also citizens of their own countries.
Prior to the nazis taking over in Germany in Jan 1933 there was little
cause for jews in western europe to leave europe for Palestine where
the arabs were revolting at British policy of letting some jews settle
there.<

They had begrudgingly made citizens of the countries they often had
inhabited for centuries, but in the end, in most cases, most of their
neighbors were more than ready to turn them over to the Nazi occupiers,
albeit not in all cases. There were notable and noble exceptions that
have been noted, but exceptions is what they were. But you are correct
that MOST Jews who went to Israel were PUSHED towards it, rather than
PULLED by it. In other words, the majority were not zionists and came
only due to having little or no acceptable recourse.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
It was the nazi policy towards the jews from 1933 but especially after the intorduction of the Nuremberg anti jewish laws in 1935 that
increased the number of jews trying to get out of Germany,some of them wanting to go to Israel and so support for zionism increased.
The idea that somehow Britain would walk away from Palestine and the arabs would be happy to let lots of jews settle there,and finally that Israel would be a economic success and not need foreign aid is not realistic.<
And even AFTER the Nuremberg laws, most German Jews clung on until the
bitter end, after Kristalnacht, after which there was no place to run
to.
As for the Arabs not being happy about seeing Palestine turn into a
majority Jewish country, and hence becoming a minority in a land they
believed to be their own, that is understandable. Who wants to become
a minority in their own country? The leftwing socialist Jewish zionists
deluded themselves into believing that if they build a small
classless, socialist economy therein, where ethnicity and class
distinctions, and religion and superstitions were mitigated, that the
Arabs would eventually come around and join in. Of course, this was
crazy, but many socialist zionists convinced themselves of it at the
time.
But the many fewer RIGHT wingers, led by Zev Jabotinsky, seeing the
violent opposition by the Arabs against Jewish rights, saw through such
delusions. After 1923, Jabotinsky prophetically wrote about the "iron
wall" that would have to be constructed against which the Arabs would
have to batter their heads against until the Jewish entity became so
entrenched and strong that its uprooting would never again be feasible.
He wasn't talking about a physical wall, as is being finished as we
speak, but about the WILL to resist Arab onslaughts no matter what.

But as for Israel becoming a success without foreign aid, it might be
intructive for you to learn that between 1929 and 1936, Jewish
Palestine was undergoing a great surge in prosperity while the US and
much of the world were mired in a great depression! Yes, a lot of it
had to do with input of capital from JEws around the world contributing
to the "cause," but there was a lot of employment at the time in
Palestine, and the new Jewish enterprises flourished.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
What do you mean by foreign aid?,lets be honest,whatever you think of it it is a fact that the USA has been a sponsor of Israel since 1947.<
After WWII, the first country that brought up the idea of a Jewish
state in the United Nations was the USSR, when Andre Gromyko first
uttered the words that perhaps the JEws deserved a state of their own
after all that they had suffered. Once that utterance was out,
President Truman practically had no choice but to oppose his State
Department which almost to a man opposed the idea of a Jewish state in
Palestine. It had a lot to do with the US rushing to be first to
recognize the State of Israel after it declared its independence,
beating the Soviet Union by some 11 minutes. As Abba Eban remarked,
that once it was heard that the Soviet Union was prepared to accept a
JEwish state, he knew that the State of Israel was a shoo-in. Of
course, Stalin was anticipating a pro-communist, anti-British Jewish
state to give the USSR a foothold in the Middle East. When that did not
happen, he turned viciously against the Jews in Russia whom he formerly
could not touch as a group due to their strong pro-communist support in
the formative years. Bt he probably would have wiped the JEws of Russia
out had he not died in 1953. Needless to say, the Soviets soon turned
anti-Israel and pro-Arab, but beforehand, in 1948, it was Russian arms
that saved the nascent Jewish state from obliteration. The US and most
of the West had a strong arms embargo which in the case of the US
lasted until the 1960s.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
Israel is a unique state because of its history.<
Yes.
Jim F.
2005-09-13 16:11:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
I think you get a bit excited here and lose touch with reality.
You don't see that the Zionist movement was not supported by 100 per cent
of jews,it is still not.<
True. But if even only 10% of all Jews in the world in 1922 (when the
League of Nations confirmed that the Jewish homeland was indeed in
Palestine) were zionists, it still represented nearly 1 million Jews
(out of ten million then) and still outnumbered the number of Arabs
lving in Palestine at the time, which was less than 700,000. The fact
that the majority of Jews were NOT zionists only confirms how deluded
most were believing that their begrudgingly achieved citizenship
somehow actually made them part of the nations in which they resided.
The simple fact is, that a nation is an ethnicity, whereas as a
nation-state may indeed incorporate many ethnicities. But a nation
should not be confused with a nation-STATE. For example, the State of
Israel is a nation-state which contains many Arabs and other non-Jewish
ethnic citizens. But the State of Israel is also the ancient HOMELAND
of the Jewish nation. This is true of many nation-states, particularly
in modern times. The German nation is the nations of the Germanic
tribes, but it also has Jews and other non-Germanic citizens as well.
So many minorities, especially Jews, are CONFUSED. You can be a loyal,
patriotic citizen of any nation-state that grants you citizenship, but
your genuine national identity is your ethnicity. And it always comes
out in the end anyway. As soon as the majority ethnicity becomes
demographically challenged by minorities, it suddenly "discovers" its
ethnic roots.
Plainly put, birds of a feather flock together.
Well, Germany like most other countries always had immigrants
coming in from other countries. The great philosopher, Immanuel
Kant, for instance, was of Scottish descent. But I never heard of anyone
in Germany claiming that Kant was not a true German on
that account. Regardless of his ancestry he had grown up
as an ethnic German, speaking that language, imbibing
that culture etc. The question before us, is why the
same didn't happen to German Jews, many of which
had been living in Germany for nearly two millenia,
and who were about as culturally German as one
could be. Indeed, to a large extant, in pre-1933
Germany, it was precisely the Jews who were the
chief bearers of German culture. They were the
ones who kept alive the traditions of Goethe,
Beethoven, Kant etc.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
So it was possible,and prior to the creation of Israel,essential , for
jews to be jews but also citizens of their own countries.
Prior to the nazis taking over in Germany in Jan 1933 there was little
cause for jews in western europe to leave europe for Palestine where
the arabs were revolting at British policy of letting some jews settle
there.<
They had begrudgingly made citizens of the countries they often had
inhabited for centuries, but in the end, in most cases, most of their
neighbors were more than ready to turn them over to the Nazi occupiers,
albeit not in all cases. There were notable and noble exceptions that
have been noted, but exceptions is what they were. But you are correct
that MOST Jews who went to Israel were PUSHED towards it, rather than
PULLED by it. In other words, the majority were not zionists and came
only due to having little or no acceptable recourse.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
It was the nazi policy towards the jews from 1933 but especially after
the intorduction of the Nuremberg anti jewish laws in 1935 that
increased the number of jews trying to get out of Germany,some of them
wanting to go to Israel and so support for zionism increased.
It was also German policy from 1933 on to deal only with Zionist
organizations
rather than with the traditional Jewish organizations which also helped
to spur the growth of Zionism within Germany.

As Hannah Arendt, who herself had been a Zionist
activist in the Germany of the 1930s put it in her
book, *Eichmann in Jerusalem*:

"But quite apart from all slogans and ideological quarrels, it
was in those years a fact of everyday life that only Zionists
had any chance of negotiating with the German authorities,
for the simple reason that their chief Jewish adversary,
the Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish
Faith, to which ninety-five percent of organized Jews in
Germany then belonged, specified in its bylaws that its
chief task was the "fight against anti-Semitism"; it had
suddenly become by definition an organization
"hostile to the State,"and would have been persecuted-
which it was not - if it had dared to do what it was
supposed to do. During its first few years, Hitler's rise
to power appeared to the Zionists chiefly as "the
decisive defeat of assimilationism." Hence, the Zionists
could, for a time, engage in a certain amount of
non-criminal cooperation with the Nazi authorities;
the Zionists too believed that "dissimilation" combined
with the emigration to Palestine of Jewish youngsters
and, they hoped, Jewish capitalists, would be a
"mutually fair solution." At the time, many German
officials held this opinion, and this kind of talk
seemed quite common up to the end. A letter
from a survivor of Theresienstadt, a German Jew,
relates that all the leading positions in the Nazi-
appointed Reichsvereinigung were held by
Zionists (whereas the authentically Jewish
Reichsvertretung had been composed of
both Zionists and non-Zionists), because
Zionists, according to the Nazis were "the
'decent' Jews since they too thought in
'national' terms." To be sure, no prominent
Nazi ever spoke publicly in this vein; from
beginning to end, Nazi propaganda was
fiercely, unequivocally, uncompromisingly
anti-Semitic, and eventually nothing counted
but what people who were still without
experience in the mysteries of totalitarian
government dismissed as "mere propaganda."
There existed in those early years a mutually
satisfactory agreement - a Ha'avarah, or
Transfer Agreement, which provided that an
emigrant to Palestine could transfer his
money there in German goods and exchange
them for pounds on arrival. It was soon the
only legal way for a Jew to take his money
with him (the alternative then being the
establishment of a blocked account,
which could be liquidated abroad only
at a loss between fifty and ninety-five
percent). The result was that in the
thirties, when American Jewry took
great pains to organize a boycott of
German merchandise, Palestine, of
all places was swamped with all kinds
of goods "made in Germany.""
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
The idea that somehow Britain would walk away from Palestine and the
arabs would be happy to let lots of jews settle there,and finally that
Israel would be a economic success and not need foreign aid is not
realistic.<
And even AFTER the Nuremberg laws, most German Jews clung on until the
bitter end, after Kristalnacht, after which there was no place to run
to.
As for the Arabs not being happy about seeing Palestine turn into a
majority Jewish country, and hence becoming a minority in a land they
believed to be their own, that is understandable. Who wants to become
a minority in their own country?
You should realize that this candid admission on your part
lends considerable weight to the anti-Zionist position
concerning the Palestinian Arabs.
Post by j***@netzero.com
The leftwing socialist Jewish zionists
deluded themselves into believing that if they build a small
classless, socialist economy therein, where ethnicity and class
distinctions, and religion and superstitions were mitigated, that the
Arabs would eventually come around and join in. Of course, this was
crazy, but many socialist zionists convinced themselves of it at the
time.
It's questionable as to how serious the socialist Zionists
were about this anyway. Did any of the kibbutzim
make serious efforts to recruit Arab members?
True, that would made the task of building up
the kibbutzim more difficult since they would
have had to spend a significant portion of
scare resources in integrating together two
peoples with different languages and cultures
but then if they were truly serious about doing
away with ethnic and religious distinctions then
they would have made the effort just the same.

Also, the trade union federation, the Histradrut
for many years pressured or coerced employers
against hiring Arab workers when there were
Jewish workers available to do the work.
That sort of thing could not have sit well
with Palestinian Arab workers, and certainly
would not helped to build solidarity between
Jewish and Arab workers. Not that this
sort of thing was unique to Palestine at
the time. After all in the US, many
labor unions, especially in the building
trades, helped to enforced discriminatory
practices against blacks and immigrants.
Post by j***@netzero.com
But the many fewer RIGHT wingers, led by Zev Jabotinsky, seeing the
violent opposition by the Arabs against Jewish rights, saw through such
delusions. After 1923, Jabotinsky prophetically wrote about the "iron
wall" that would have to be constructed against which the Arabs would
have to batter their heads against until the Jewish entity became so
entrenched and strong that its uprooting would never again be feasible.
He wasn't talking about a physical wall, as is being finished as we
speak, but about the WILL to resist Arab onslaughts no matter what.
Jabotinsky's essay is available online at:
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/ironwall/ironwall.htm

While I do not at all embrace Jabotinsky's political vision,
I do admire the candor and the realism with which
he expressed it, which is a breath of fresh air compared
to a lot of the Zionist propoganda that one sees all
too often.

In that essay, Jabotinsky tells us that he had virtually
0% hope that in fact the Arab's would ever accept Zionism. Why?

"..there has never been an indigenous inhabitant anywhere or at any
time who has ever accepted the settlement of others in his country."

"We can talk as much as we want about our good intentions;
but they understand as well as we what is not good for them.
They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true
fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked
upon his prairie. To think that the Arabs will voluntarily consent to
the realization of Zionism in return for the cultural and economic
benefits we can bestow on them is infantile. This childish fantasy
of our "Arabo-philes" comes from some kind of contempt for the
Arab people, of some kind of unfounded view of this race as a
rabble ready to be bribed in order to sell out their homeland
for a railroad network."

In other words, he admitted that the Zionist project would
necessarily be offensive to the national sentiments of
the Palestinian Arabs and he poured cold water
on the claims of Labor Zionists and others that it
would be possible to reconcile the Palestinian Arabs
to Zionism. As he put it:

"The [Arab] editor of the paper is even willing to believe
that the absorptive capacity of Eretz Israel is very great,
and that it is possible to settle many Jews without affecting
one Arab. [nevertheless he opposes Zionism.] 'Just that is
what the Zionists want, and what the Arabs do not want.
In this way the Jews will, little by little, become a majority
and, ipso facto, a Jewish state will be formed and the fate
of the Arab minority will depend on the goodwill of the Jews.
But was it not the Jews themselves who told us how 'pleasant'
being a minority was? No misunderstanding exists. Zionists
desire one thing - freedom of immigration - and it is Jewish
immigration that we do not want.'"

"The logic employed by this editor is so simple and clear that it
should be learned by heart and be an essential part of our notion
of the Arab question...Colonization itself has its own explanation,
integral and inescapable, and understood by every Arab and
every Jew with his wits about him. Colonization can have only
one goal. For the Palestinian Arabs this goal is inadmissible.
This is in the nature of things. To change that nature is impossible."


So how did Jabotinsky justify taking the Arab's
country in Palestine away from them?

"...if anyone objects that this point of view is immoral,
I answer: It is not true; either Zionism is moral and just
or it is immoral and unjust. But that is a question that we
should have settled before we became Zionists.
Actually we have settled that question, and in the affirmative.
We hold that Zionism is moral and just. And since it is
moral and just, justice must be done, no matter whether
Joseph or Simon or Ivan or Achmet agree with it or not."

In other words, if Zionism is deemed to be a priori, moral,
then the ends will necessarily justify the means. Any
means that help to lead to the ends, deemed moral,
are automatically considered to be justified.

And Jabotinsky was quite frank about the Zionist
project being a colonialist project. For him
Zionism was colonialism and a good thing
too on that score:

"All this does not mean that any kind of agreement is
impossible, only a voluntary agreement is impossible.
As long as there is a spark of hope that they can get rid of us,
they will not sell these hopes, not for any kind of sweet words
or tasty morsels, because they are not a rabble but a nation,
perhaps somewhat tattered, but still living. A living people
makes such enormous concessions on such fateful questions
only when there is no hope left. Only when not a single breach
is visible in the iron wall, only then do extreme groups lose their sway,
and influence transfers to moderate groups. Only then would these
moderate groups come to us with proposals for mutual concessions.
And only then will moderates offer suggestions for compromise
on practical questions like a guarantee against expulsion,
or equality and national autonomy."

"I am optimistic that they will indeed be granted satisfactory
assurances and that both peoples, like good neighbors,
can then live in peace. But the only path to such an agreement
is the iron wall, that is to say the strengthening in Palestine of a
government without any kind of Arab influence, that is to say
one against which the Arabs will fight. In other words,
for us the only path to an agreement in the future is an absolute
refusal of any attempts at an agreement now."

And Jabotinsky was eqally frank that the 'iron wall'
that he was talking about would require an alliance
between the Zionists and one or more of the imperial
powers. He was emphatic that the realization of the
Zionist project would require that the Zionists
stand with the Western imperialists to oppose
the nationalist aspirations of not just the Palestinian
Arabs but the Arabs generally in the Middle East.

"We can offer only two things: either money or political assistance or
both. But we can offer neither. Concerning money, it is ludicrous to
think we could finance the development of Iraq or Saudi Arabia, when
we do not have enough for the Land of Israel. Ten times more
illusionary is political assistance for Arab political aspirations.
Arab nationalism sets itself the same aims as those set by Italian
nationalism before 1870 and Polish nationalism before 1918: unity and
independence. These aspirations mean the eradication of every trace of
British influence in Egypt and Iraq, the expulsion of the Italians
from Libya, the removal of French domination from Syria, Tunis,
Algiers and Morocco. For us to support such a movement would be
suicide and treachery. If we disregard the fact that the Balfour
Declaration was signed by Britain, we cannot forget that France and
Italy also signed it. We cannot intrigue about removing Britain from
the Suez Canal and the Persian Gulf and the elimination of French and
Italian colonial rule over Arab territory. Such a double game cannot
be considered on any account."


Jabotinsky did not mince words. He realized that the Zionist project
required imperialist support if it was going to succeed. And
indeed, he spent much of life attempting to cultivate such
support; sometimes cultivating the British, later the Italians
under Mussolini (indeed the Betar modeled themselves
after Mussolini's blackshirts), and later the British again.
Now a days of course Israel depends on the US for this
kind of support but Jabotinsky's point still stands. And
that is sufficient IMO to deflate the attempts of those
people who attempt to recast Zionism as some
sort of leftist "national liberation" movement. In
Jabotinsky's day there were plenty of Labor Zionists
who were attempting to do something similar but
Jabotinsky poured cold water on such maneuvers.
For that reason too, Jabotinsky must be commended
for his intellectual honesty, even if we cannot accept
his political vision.
Post by j***@netzero.com
But as for Israel becoming a success without foreign aid, it might be
intructive for you to learn that between 1929 and 1936, Jewish
Palestine was undergoing a great surge in prosperity while the US and
much of the world were mired in a great depression! Yes, a lot of it
had to do with input of capital from JEws around the world contributing
to the "cause," but there was a lot of employment at the time in
Palestine, and the new Jewish enterprises flourished.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
What do you mean by foreign aid?,lets be honest,whatever you think of it
it is a fact that the USA has been a sponsor of Israel since 1947.<
After WWII, the first country that brought up the idea of a Jewish
state in the United Nations was the USSR, when Andre Gromyko first
uttered the words that perhaps the JEws deserved a state of their own
after all that they had suffered. Once that utterance was out,
President Truman practically had no choice but to oppose his State
Department which almost to a man opposed the idea of a Jewish state in
Palestine. It had a lot to do with the US rushing to be first to
recognize the State of Israel after it declared its independence,
beating the Soviet Union by some 11 minutes. As Abba Eban remarked,
that once it was heard that the Soviet Union was prepared to accept a
JEwish state, he knew that the State of Israel was a shoo-in.
But Jack, don't forget that US domestic politics had more than
a little to do with this. In 1948, Harry Truman was facing
an uphill political race to get reelected as president. He
had both the Republican candidate, Thomas Dewey,
and the leftist third-party candidate, Henry Wallace,
blastin him for not rushing to recognize Israel.
To win, Truman needed to carry the big states,
including especially, New York, where the Jewish
voted could easily tip the balance. And in
the case of New York, without which no
Democratic presidential candidate had
been able to win without carrying it,
Truman was in serious trouble. It was not
enough that his Republican opponent was
the former governor of that state, but he also
had Henry Wallace threatening to siphon
away left leaning Jewish voters too.
So Truman's political survival depended
on his recognizing Israel, even if the
State Department was unhappy with that.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Of
course, Stalin was anticipating a pro-communist, anti-British Jewish
state to give the USSR a foothold in the Middle East. When that did not
happen, he turned viciously against the Jews in Russia whom he formerly
could not touch as a group due to their strong pro-communist support in
the formative years. Bt he probably would have wiped the JEws of Russia
out had he not died in 1953. Needless to say, the Soviets soon turned
anti-Israel and pro-Arab, but beforehand, in 1948, it was Russian arms
that saved the nascent Jewish state from obliteration. The US and most
of the West had a strong arms embargo which in the case of the US
lasted until the 1960s.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
Israel is a unique state because of its history.<
Yes.
f***@verizon.net
2005-09-12 20:16:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Who Cares.<
For once, we agree! Each to their own, I say! Jews funded the NAACP at
its start! Why?
For what? What did we get in return?
The knowledge that we were doing the right thing.
And we got to improve our country by making it fairer & thus stronger.

Susan
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-13 04:34:30 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:16:30 GMT, Suzy the foul-mouthed convert
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by j***@netzero.com
Who Cares.<
For once, we agree! Each to their own, I say! Jews funded the NAACP at
its start! Why?
For what? What did we get in return?
The knowledge that we were doing the right thing.
We? You're neither a jew nor were you involved, you thick Irish cunt.
Post by f***@verizon.net
And we got to improve our country by making it fairer & thus stronger.
So many schvartzes. Oy vey!
Post by f***@verizon.net
Suzy
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-13 12:50:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by j***@netzero.com
Who Cares.<
For once, we agree! Each to their own, I say! Jews funded the NAACP at
its start! Why?
For what? What did we get in return?
The knowledge that we were doing the right thing.
And we got to improve our country by making it fairer & thus stronger.
Susan<
Yeah, well I'll tell you what I got. I got years of fear, intimidation
and near trauma growing up the housing projects as the only white,
Jewish kid left there after 1956! I also got a few riots in the 1960s
and 1970s that nearly wiped out our tiny little business, which was
only spared by the grace of God. Okay, I don't blame the entire black
community for it, but only the antisocial criminal element that seemed
to rule in the black communities the way Hamas rules in Gaza! It also
diminished the worth of my Brooklyn College diploma, which was once
highly valued, down to virtually toilet paper thanks to "open
admissions." However, in the last few years, thanks to some positive
late changes, its star has begun to rise again. Decades too late for
many who found their degrees a laughingstock in the eyes of many who
only knew of Brooklyn College AFTER 1968. All liberals should be
SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least :)
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-13 22:12:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by j***@netzero.com
Who Cares.<
For once, we agree! Each to their own, I say! Jews funded the NAACP at
its start! Why?
For what? What did we get in return?
The knowledge that we were doing the right thing.
And we got to improve our country by making it fairer & thus stronger.
Susan<
Yeah, well I'll tell you what I got. I got years of fear, intimidation
and near trauma growing up the housing projects as the only white,
Jewish kid left there after 1956! I also got a few riots in the 1960s
and 1970s that nearly wiped out our tiny little business, which was
only spared by the grace of God. Okay, I don't blame the entire black
community for it, but only the antisocial criminal element that seemed
to rule in the black communities the way Hamas rules in Gaza! It also
diminished the worth of my Brooklyn College diploma, which was once
highly valued, down to virtually toilet paper thanks to "open
admissions." However, in the last few years, thanks to some positive
late changes, its star has begun to rise again. Decades too late for
many who found their degrees a laughingstock in the eyes of many who
only knew of Brooklyn College AFTER 1968. All liberals should be
SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least :)
Schvartzes you don't like already?
Jewcy
2005-09-14 07:54:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@netzero.com
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by j***@netzero.com
Who Cares.<
For once, we agree! Each to their own, I say! Jews funded the NAACP at
its start! Why?
For what? What did we get in return?
The knowledge that we were doing the right thing.
And we got to improve our country by making it fairer & thus stronger.
Susan<
Yeah, well I'll tell you what I got. I got years of fear, intimidation
and near trauma growing up the housing projects as the only white,
Jewish kid left there after 1956! I also got a few riots in the 1960s
and 1970s that nearly wiped out our tiny little business, which was
only spared by the grace of God. Okay, I don't blame the entire black
community for it,
How could you, the Black commities are as diverse as the Jewish communities.
Most of us, at least here in Colorado are very diverse.

but only the antisocial criminal element that seemed
Post by j***@netzero.com
to rule in the black communities the way Hamas rules in Gaza! It also
diminished the worth of my Brooklyn College diploma, which was once
highly valued, down to virtually toilet paper thanks to "open
admissions." However, in the last few years, thanks to some positive
late changes, its star has begun to rise again. Decades too late for
many who found their degrees a laughingstock in the eyes of many who
only knew of Brooklyn College AFTER 1968. All liberals should be
SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least :)
It has been a flipflop in our country, assuming you live in the U.S. over
the last few decades.

Jewcy
f***@verizon.net
2005-09-14 13:22:09 UTC
Permalink
[snip most of whining]
All liberals should be
Post by j***@netzero.com
SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least :)
It has been a flipflop in our country, assuming you live in the U.S. over
the last few decades.
As usual, he's wrong.
I live in a very mixed neighborhood - for 12 years now.
No problem whatsoever.

Susan
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-14 14:32:06 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 13:22:09 GMT, Suzy the foul-mouthed convert
Post by j***@netzero.com
[snip most of whining]
All liberals should be
Post by j***@netzero.com
SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least :)
It has been a flipflop in our country, assuming you live in the U.S. over
the last few decades.
As usual, he's wrong.
I live in a very mixed neighborhood - for 12 years now.
No problem whatsoever.
You contribute to the diversity by being an Irish shitske in a mixed
race marriage with hubby Cohen.
Post by j***@netzero.com
Suzy
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-14 15:38:09 UTC
Permalink
I live in Savannah where 66% of the population is black. On the block I
live on certainly at least 2/3 of my neighbours are black. There are
also two churches. There is no problem here, no more than in any other
city of this size, in a society that promotes violence and guns.



<***@verizon.net> wrote in message news:5uVVe.3442$***@trnddc05...
:
: On 14-Sep-2005, "Jewcy" <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
:
: > <***@netzero.com> wrote in message
: > news:***@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
: > >
: > [snip most of whining]
:
: All liberals should be
: > > SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least
:)
: >
: > It has been a flipflop in our country, assuming you live in the U.S.
over
: > the last few decades.
:
: As usual, he's wrong.
: I live in a very mixed neighborhood - for 12 years now.
: No problem whatsoever.
:
: Susan
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-14 20:47:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
I live in Savannah where 66% of the population is black. On the block I
live on certainly at least 2/3 of my neighbours are black. There are
also two churches. There is no problem here, no more than in any other
city of this size, in a society that promotes violence and guns.<
Oh, NOW, things are generally different, for the most part. I too live
in what is a majority black area, formerly Irish and Jewish, but since
Rudi Giuliani took this city in hand a decade ago, and the "million man
march" as well, things have improved immensely. But I'll never forget
the '50s, '60s, '70s, all the way until Rudi saved this city. Still,
the natives get palpably restless when the economy dips :) I can always
tell the state of the inner city economy from the sounds I hear in the
jungle :) When the economy isn't too bad, things are fairly quiet. I
guess things in New York still aren't too bad based on the relative
quiet at the moment. I always pray it lasts. I guess I'm like a city
Park Ranger:)
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
: > >
: > [snip most of whining]
: All liberals should be
: > > SENTENCED to live in black neighborhoods for a few years at least
:)
: >
: > It has been a flipflop in our country, assuming you live in the U.S.
over
: > the last few decades.
: As usual, he's wrong.
: I live in a very mixed neighborhood - for 12 years now.
: No problem whatsoever.
: Susan
Chris Larson
2005-09-13 13:28:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kurt Knoll
Who Cares.
kk
Said the Great Knoll, who after 8 years of trolling out lies and
bizarre claims, finally comes to the conclusion that the majority of
the world has about revisionism: "Who cares"?

Congratulations Kurt!

P.S. When are you going to send me my plane ticket so I can come back
and visit Kitimat?
Kurt Knoll
2005-09-13 15:41:53 UTC
Permalink
Wrong here again Chris I do post what you holohoaxers claim why is this a
lie. The Jews claim it only took 15 minutes to cremate a body. The Jews also
claim there was no need to refuel the ovens because the Jews gave up so much
fat there was no need for it.

Kurt Knoll.
Post by Chris Larson
Post by Kurt Knoll
Who Cares.
kk
Said the Great Knoll, who after 8 years of trolling out lies and
bizarre claims, finally comes to the conclusion that the majority of
the world has about revisionism: "Who cares"?
Congratulations Kurt!
P.S. When are you going to send me my plane ticket so I can come back
and visit Kitimat?
Chris Larson
2005-09-13 20:01:07 UTC
Permalink
Kurt:
NO ONE cares about revisionsm- you said it yourself. Get over it.
Geeez!
Kurt Knoll
2005-09-13 20:54:03 UTC
Permalink
My remarks were about you posting most people do not care about you
holocaust especially when they see how the Palestinians were handled by your
people.

Kurt Knoll.
Post by Chris Larson
NO ONE cares about revisionsm- you said it yourself. Get over it.
Geeez!
Chris Larson
2005-09-13 22:12:18 UTC
Permalink
Like YOU said Kurt, "Who Cares"?
Chris Larson
2005-09-13 22:12:21 UTC
Permalink
Like YOU said Kurt, "Who Cares"?
Kurt Knoll
2005-09-16 15:25:54 UTC
Permalink
You sound more like a twisted snake and it shows. Butting things out of
contact is certainly one of your specialties. My remark did address your
holocaust meaning no on cares what you guys are saying.

Kurt Knoll.
Post by Chris Larson
NO ONE cares about revisionsm- you said it yourself. Get over it.
Geeez!
Moishy
2005-09-11 22:30:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
And you do not understand what the Holocaust Memorial Day is!
It memorialises ALL people (civilians) that were systematically murdered
by the NAZIS, not just Jews.
It should be an International Holocaust Day commemorating ALL people from
all times who have been the victims of genocide.
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
It is not a claim, but HISTORICAL FACT that the majority of Muslims and
nearly all ARABS supported NAZISM and the extermination of Jews.
Thye may have been allies like the Japanese and Italians but this does not
mean they supported everything the Nazis did.
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
It is a historical fact that Muslim nations kicked out nearly all of
their Jews after 1948, creating 900,000 Jewish refugees, 33% more than
Palestinian refugees
That's true but they were provoked by the formation of the Stae of Israel
and the influx of millions of Europeans who called themselves jews. I guess
they figured that if the jews have their own country, why not send the jews
there.



-- over 600,000 of those Jewish refugees were
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
absorbed immediately by the State of Israel -- not one Jewish refugee
exists today, except of course for the thousands of Jews displaced by
Hurricane Katrina.
It depends what you mean by displaced. If their home was destroyed and they
had to go to another place it is entirely different than having no place to
go to. The real displaced people were poor Negroes not jews who will collect
insurance money for their destroyed property and can move elsewhere.
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
So why are there so many Arab refugees still today, 57 years later?
: you do not understand irony do you,take it you are an American(sorry
: that is a racist generalization).
: I am a atheist Brit social democrat,not a liberal Jewish yank.
: My point was that the holocaust was wrong,and would have been wrong if
: only red haired people or left handed people had been killed,it was of
: course mainly about jews,but what about Romany,gays,political
prisoners
: and so on.
: Genocide is wrong whoever the victims are,you don't agree and want to
: kill all arabs.
: You claim,like a lot of people,that the muslims supported Hitler
during
: world war 11.
: It is true that many muslim leaders on paper supported the nazis,but
as
: to what the majority of muslims felt,then as now who knows ,it is not
: a democratic religion,a but like the Roman Catholics.
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-12 16:01:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Moishy
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
And you do not understand what the Holocaust Memorial Day is!
It memorialises ALL people (civilians) that were systematically murdered
by the NAZIS, not just Jews.
It should be an International Holocaust Day commemorating ALL people from
all times who have been the victims of genocide.
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
It is not a claim, but HISTORICAL FACT that the majority of Muslims and
nearly all ARABS supported NAZISM and the extermination of Jews.
Thye may have been allies like the Japanese and Italians but this does not
mean they supported everything the Nazis did.
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
It is a historical fact that Muslim nations kicked out nearly all of
their Jews after 1948, creating 900,000 Jewish refugees, 33% more than
Palestinian refugees
That's true but they were provoked by the formation of the Stae of Israel
and the influx of millions of Europeans who called themselves jews.<
"Called themselves Jew?" Why would anyone want to go live and work
their asses off
to build up that shithole in the Middle East unless (a) they have a
deeply ingrained belief that
it is their historic homeland, and (b) even if they didn't actually
believe "a" nevertheless everyone
AROUND them called them "Jew" thereby giving them no alternative. Most
German Jews
had believed themselves to be Germans of "the Mosaic persuasion." :)
But those Jews, some of whom
were descendents of Jews who had been on the Rhine since Roman times,
apparently didn't
convince anyone else of it.
Post by Moishy
I guess
they figured that if the jews have their own country, why not send the jews
there.<
So you are saying that a population exchange occured, as between Indian
and Pakistan in 1948!?
I agree. Jews left behind homes and properties, and so did
Palestinians. So why weren't
the Palestinians settled in the Arab countries in homes taken from the
Jews?
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-12 16:05:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Moishy
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
And you do not understand what the Holocaust Memorial Day is!
It memorialises ALL people (civilians) that were systematically murdered
by the NAZIS, not just Jews.
It should be an International Holocaust Day commemorating ALL people from
all times who have been the victims of genocide.<
Fine, call it Genocide Day, not HOlocaust Day. I agree with that.
Holocaust Day should be soley
an Israeli day of mourning only in Israel.
i***@blueyonder.co.uk
2005-09-12 00:27:53 UTC
Permalink
did you read my original post?,that is my point,holocaust memorial day
is not just about looking back at what was done to the jews and others
1939-1945,it has to be about all massmurder and genocide.
The pro Israeli fanatic made my point by not seeing that killing all
arabs would be as bad as trying to kill all the jews.
I am a history graduate,I study history every day,so I KNOW that the
leaders of the muslims(which is not the same thing as the leaders of
the arabs) supported the anti jewish measures of the nazis,and indeed
anybody else.
But they could not support the holocaust at the time it was happening
because they would not have known about it.
It is evil of people to support the idea of the holocaust in words in
the present day,but they did not support it in deeds at the time since
very few of them were in axis uniform.
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-12 01:44:17 UTC
Permalink
Guess you forgot about the Mufti of Jerusalem (Uncle of Arafat) and his
extended stay in NAZI Germany with Hitler himself.



<***@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:***@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
: did you read my original post?,that is my point,holocaust memorial day
: is not just about looking back at what was done to the jews and others
: 1939-1945,it has to be about all massmurder and genocide.
: The pro Israeli fanatic made my point by not seeing that killing all
: arabs would be as bad as trying to kill all the jews.
: I am a history graduate,I study history every day,so I KNOW that the
: leaders of the muslims(which is not the same thing as the leaders of
: the arabs) supported the anti jewish measures of the nazis,and indeed
: anybody else.
: But they could not support the holocaust at the time it was happening
: because they would not have known about it.
: It is evil of people to support the idea of the holocaust in words in
: the present day,but they did not support it in deeds at the time since
: very few of them were in axis uniform.
:
i***@blueyonder.co.uk
2005-09-12 16:41:19 UTC
Permalink
In practical terms,what was the value to the Nazi war effort of the
Grand Mufti ?,about as much as the words of Irish nationalists
broadcasting from Berlin.
What about the millions of muslims in the British empire,did they all
revolt?
I know that arab and muslim leaders came out in print and broadcasts
for the nazis and their anti jewish measures such as the Nuremburgh
laws,but you can't say they supported the holocaust during the war
because they did not know about it.
I am not defending the arabs/muslims in their attitude to the jews,I
hate anti semitism and urge everyone to learn about the holocaust.
Elliot Rosewater
2005-09-13 01:31:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
did you read my original post?,that is my point,holocaust memorial day
is not just about looking back at what was done to the jews and others
1939-1945,it has to be about all massmurder and genocide.
The pro Israeli fanatic made my point by not seeing that killing all
arabs would be as bad as trying to kill all the jews.
I am a history graduate,I study history every day,so I KNOW that the
leaders of the muslims(which is not the same thing as the leaders of
the arabs) supported the anti jewish measures of the nazis,and indeed
anybody else.
But they could not support the holocaust at the time it was happening
because they would not have known about it.
It is evil of people to support the idea of the holocaust in words in
the present day,but they did not support it in deeds at the time since
very few of them were in axis uniform.
It is also kinda dumb since it didnt happen Bubie. Just simple things.
They dont add up. After the Ploesti bombing there were thousands of
aerial pics of the area taken(which incl Auschwitz)This at the time of
so called Hungarian deportations. The pics show nada. Millions of Jews
should show up....burning Jews make smoke. How come the the so called
gas chamber has lower concentrations of cyanide on the walls than the
delousing rooms, which live inmates walked THROUGH!!WHY? Why would the
Germans use single burn crematoriae when they had huge incnerators?WHose
sensibilities were they concerned with?If yer just gonna mix the ashes
up and use them to fill potholes, what dif does it make if Issacs ashes
get mixed with Mendels??ANSWER PLEASE? YOU CANT. It doesnt make sense.
It is a fairy tale told by Zionists and guilty Generals like Ike and
Harris to try to make excuses for Hamburg, Dresden, and a million other
burgs, villes, and hamlets that they poached, and fried from Rotterdam
to Pilsen. The Allies were the monsters. Everything that goes around
comes around. I belive in this, and karma etc. This explains our current
situation.9-11, New Orleans, George Bush...and on the other hand look at
the New Europe. They dont have half our problems. (They dont have as
many racial problems, wonder why?) We are paying for our smugness and
lack of humility. Korea, VietNam, the hippies, drugs, racial tensions,
and dont tell me to love it or leave it. My famnily came here in the
1600s. I have squatters rights. Im no Ellis Island newcomer.
Roger
2005-09-13 03:13:26 UTC
Permalink
In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
Post by Elliot Rosewater
It is also kinda dumb since it didnt happen Bubie. Just simple things.
They dont add up. After the Ploesti bombing there were thousands of
aerial pics of the area taken(which incl Auschwitz)
And how many of them actually *showed* Auschwitz, and how small a
percentage of time in terms of the total time the camp was engaged in
mass murder do they represent?
Post by Elliot Rosewater
This at the time of
so called Hungarian deportations. The pics show nada.
Wrong -- lines of prisoners are visible.
Post by Elliot Rosewater
Millions of Jews should show up....burning Jews make smoke.
... if they were being burned during the few moments represented by
those pictures.
Post by Elliot Rosewater
How come the the so called
gas chamber has lower concentrations of cyanide on the walls than the
delousing rooms, which live inmates walked THROUGH!!WHY?
Because it takes far higher concentrations of HCN maintained over a
significantly longer period of time.

Here's a better question: why were there traces in the gas chambers
at all, if not for the reason that all the documentary and testimonial
evidence shows?
Post by Elliot Rosewater
Why would the Germans use single burn crematoriae when they had huge incnerators?
Why do you make claims you cannot support?
Post by Elliot Rosewater
WHose
sensibilities were they concerned with?If yer just gonna mix the ashes
up and use them to fill potholes, what dif does it make if Issacs ashes
get mixed with Mendels??ANSWER PLEASE?
Answer: they *did* burn multiple bodies together.

Do learn something of the history you're trying to deny: it'll take
slightly longer to show you to be a mindless little hater that way.
Post by Elliot Rosewater
YOU CANT.
Demonstrably wrong.
Post by Elliot Rosewater
It doesnt make sense.
No, denying the historical facts of the matter doesn't. So why do
you?
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-13 04:55:22 UTC
Permalink
Fuck off you NAZI cunt.


"Elliot Rosewater" <***@verizon.net> wrote in message news:KZpVe.871$***@trnddc06...
: ***@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:

: It is a fairy tale told by Zionists and guilty Generals like Ike and
: Harris to try to make excuses for Hamburg, Dresden, and a million
other
: burgs, villes, and hamlets that they poached, and fried from Rotterdam
: to Pilsen. The Allies were the monsters.

My famnily came here in the
: 1600s. I have squatters rights. Im no Ellis Island newcomer.
i***@blueyonder.co.uk
2005-09-13 18:40:04 UTC
Permalink
Rotterdam was the Germans in 1940 I think you will find.
I do not believe that you really believe that the holocaust did not
happen.
How is your mate David (not a historian) Irving doing?
f***@verizon.net
2005-09-13 08:13:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Elliot Rosewater
It is also kinda dumb since it didnt happen Bubie.
Yeah, right, we can all believe a known liar who can't even tell the truth
about his own name.
jgarbuz
2005-09-11 18:53:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
you do not understand irony do you,take it you are an American(sorry
that is a racist generalization).<
Well, I was a big Monty Python fan back in the mid-70s, if that means
anything. I generally happen to like British wit.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
I am a atheist Brit social democrat,not a liberal Jewish yank.
My point was that the holocaust was wrong,and would have been wrong if only red haired people or left handed people had been killed,it was of course mainly about jews,but what about Romany,gays,political prisoners and so on.<
I agree, which is why I believe it is a matter between the Jewish
nation and the German nation, and I don't know why all of these
liberals always try to turn things into big umbrellas to cover
everyone. As I said, I strongly disapprove of "holocaust" theme parks
all over the world like McDonald or McDisney. There should be only two
Holocaust memorial museums, one in Jerusalem and one in Berlin.
Let the Cambodians and the Rwandans and the Roma and all the others
build their own memorials to their own tragedies. However, the liberal
Jews, most of whom neither experienced it (except some like Wiesel and
other wordy French Jews; everyone knows what the French are like just
watching their BORING pseudophilosophical movies) nor had any close
family liquidated there are always the ones who are playing the violin
for the masses. Nobody asked ME if I approved of a Holocaust Day or
some Holocaust museum. I knew right off hand, decades ago, that all
they would do is piss more people off than anything else.
Post by i***@blueyonder.co.uk
Genocide is wrong whoever the victims are,you don't agree and want to kill all arabs. You claim,like a lot of people,that the muslims supported Hitler during world war 11.
It is true that many muslim leaders on paper supported the nazis,but as to what the majority of muslims felt,then as now who knows ,it is not a democratic religion,a but like the Roman Catholics.<
Most Arabs were then under British and French colonial rule, and that,
plus the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, caused most to
support the Germans. Well, they are always on the wrong side, which is
why the Ottoman empire was taken apart after WWI in the first place,
because they had allied themselves with Germany before WWI. The Arabs
will invariably ally themselves with anyone who is antiwestern, because
they harbor a 500 year plus grudge for being eclipsed by the West, and
falling under it. Islam is supposed to RULE and not be ruled.
Tommy
2005-09-11 17:01:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by jgarbuz
Post by Tommy
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in
the ass. Oy Vey!!
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing
to scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
offensive to Muslims.
They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass
murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of
other faiths.<
I WISH there had been a Palestinian GEnocide, but unfortunately, no
such thing ever happened. I would have loved to have been a
concentration camp guard in Gaza exterminating a million terrorist Arab
babies the same way a million innocent Jewish babies, including my half
brother were murdered for nothing, but again, unfortunately, no such
holocaust occurred.
And you wonder why people call you ZioNazi's.
Post by jgarbuz
All that happened in "Palestine" was that 3/4s of a
million Arabs thought the Arab armies were going to kill another
600,000 Jews in Palestine, but unexpectedly instead the Jews won the
war.
Oh, well..... Why should Gentiles care if Semites, want to wipe eachother
out? Semites are burden on our people.
Post by jgarbuz
But did the Jews murder 3/4s of a million Arabs in revenge?
Revenge for what? Israel started the freaking war.
Post by jgarbuz
And these same Arabs were rooting for Hitler all through WWII.
I guess they can 'root' for anyone they want.
Post by jgarbuz
THeir
leader, Haj Amin El Husseini was in Berlin throughout WWII urging
Hitler not to dare let any Jews escape to Palestine,and planning a
concentration camp to be set up in Nablus for Jews as soon as Rommel
broke through to Egypt and then Palestine.
Those people don't want you on their land.
Most people don't believe God was a realestate agent who went around giving
out property. If God was a realestate agent, than why doesn't God pay for
Israel?
Post by jgarbuz
Post by Tommy
The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by Blair
to tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the
Jewish community.<
I agree that there should be no "Holocaust Day" because it is only a
mockery to the memory of my family, to ask gentiles who were at heart
sympathetic to the aims of the Nazis to shed crocodile tears every year
for Jews they had always wanted either dead of out of their lives
either way.
I agree. How many Jews shed crocodile tears for the 40-million Gentiles that
died under the hands of Jew-Bolsheviks during the Russian revolution?

The Nazi's burned books, Jew-Bolsheviks burned Christian churches.
Post by jgarbuz
The only "Holocaust Day" should be in a strong, united and nuclear
armed Israel that will make certain that any nation that wants to try a
repeat of it will be burned to the ground before it has the chance
again.
You people can turn the whole mideast into on big glass ashtray for all I
care.
Post by jgarbuz
But naturally Muslims would be against a Holocaust Day for Jews because
they were full supporters of Hitler throughout WWII.Why doesn't
Britain have a Hitler Day instead dedicated to the Muslims and their
skinhead Nazi sympathizers instead?
Ask them. If you people despise Hitler, why do you continue to build
monuments to honour his work?
Post by jgarbuz
I'm sure there would be no protests
by Muslims or their neoNazi supporters against that.
Nazi's, Zionazi's - Whats the difference?
Post by jgarbuz
Post by Tommy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
j***@netzero.com
2005-09-11 19:32:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tommy
Post by jgarbuz
Post by Tommy
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in
the ass. Oy Vey!!
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing
to scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
offensive to Muslims.
They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass
murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of
other faiths.<
I WISH there had been a Palestinian GEnocide, but unfortunately, no
such thing ever happened. I would have loved to have been a
concentration camp guard in Gaza exterminating a million terrorist Arab
babies the same way a million innocent Jewish babies, including my half
brother were murdered for nothing, but again, unfortunately, no such
holocaust occurred.
And you wonder why people call you ZioNazi's.
Post by jgarbuz
All that happened in "Palestine" was that 3/4s of a
million Arabs thought the Arab armies were going to kill another
600,000 Jews in Palestine, but unexpectedly instead the Jews won the
war.
Oh, well..... Why should Gentiles care if Semites, want to wipe eachother
out? Semites are burden on our people. <
Hey, I agree. But the Romans from Europe should have thought about that
before occupying our land, destroying the center of Jewish
civilization, and taking thousands of Jewish slaves to build the
Colosseum in 70AD, so that they could murder each other publicly for
fun - and even some Christians later on. At least after the revolt of
Boedica, queen of the Brits was put down, most Celtic Brits remained in
Britain, or at least in the north called Scotland. But our Jewish
homeland was occupied by all kinds, and the Arabs of course.
Post by Tommy
Post by jgarbuz
But did the Jews murder 3/4s of a million Arabs in revenge?
Revenge for what? Israel started the freaking war.<
Muhammad ethnically cleansed the Jews of Medina out of the Hijaz. Jews
originally from Judea, or "Palestine" as the Romans called it in 132 AD
after the last JEwish revolt, settled in Arabia and for 500 years
created some of the best agriculture and a prosperous town called
Yathrib, later renamed Medina by the Muslims. As soon as he had the
power to do so, Muhammad beheaded, robbed, enslaved Jewish women and
children, and ethnically cleansed most out! So no matter how far you go
back, it was Arabs who spilled Jewish blood FIRST!
Post by Tommy
Post by jgarbuz
And these same Arabs were rooting for Hitler all through WWII.
I guess they can 'root' for anyone they want.<
Well, in 1939 fearing a cutoff of oil from Iraq as war loomed in
Europe, Britain issued the White Paper which reversed the Mandate and
the promise to the JEws to be able to settle and reconstitute their
homeland in Palestine. As a result, tens of thousands of Jews who might
have escaped to Palestine were cutoff and killed. But later on, Haj
Amin El Husseini helped organize Bosnian Muslim SS in the Balkans,
which is why you had a massacre in Sbrenica ten years ago.
The Serbs did not forget what the Muslim Nazis did to their parents and
grandparents during WWII. But most LIBERAL JEWS did forget, because
they never learned about the atrocities committed against both Serbs
and Jews in the Balkans during WWII. Some were so atrocious and
horrific that even German Nazis were appalled.
You don't think the SErbs did what they did a decade ago just for the
hell of it, do you? It was payback. But the Liberal Jews were the first
to condemn Milosevic. Serbs saved hundreds of American flyers during
WWII.
Post by Tommy
Post by jgarbuz
THeir
leader, Haj Amin El Husseini was in Berlin throughout WWII urging
Hitler not to dare let any Jews escape to Palestine,and planning a
concentration camp to be set up in Nablus for Jews as soon as Rommel
broke through to Egypt and then Palestine.
Those people don't want you on their land. <
Yeah, I can understand it when it is their land, as Arabia was when
Muhammad ethncially cleansed the JEws out. But the Land of ISrael is
NOT, I repeat NOT Arab land. Doesn't matter how many Arabs lived on it
or for how long. Just as it doesn't matter how long Jews lived in
Britain or Germany, not one inch of it is Jewish land. Private property
is another matter, and any Arab citizen of ISrael who has a problem and
a deed to prove it was his land back in Ottoman times, can get a Jewish
lawyer in Israel who will secure his rights in court. Or any other kind
of Lawyer, Arab, Armenian, Druze, Circassian, or any of the other
minorities who live in Israel and do not complain over their rights as
the Arab Muslims do.
Post by Tommy
Most people don't believe God was a realestate agent who went around giving out property. If God was a realestate agent, than why doesn't God pay for Israel?<
Are you implying that there are venues that provide better proof of
property rights and are more valid than God's word in the Bible? But if
you do not, then I'll refer you instead to the League of Nations, San
Remo conference of 1922 where the Mandate for Palestine as issued to
Britain for the purpose of reconsituting the Jewish homeland. The
League of Nations recognized the "historic connexion" between the Jews
and the soil of Palestine, and urged "close settlement" by Jews from
around the world on "wasteland, state lands" and any land purchased by
an "approved" zionist agency. If you want the full text of the League
of Nations' ruling, "google" it up using League of Nations San Remo as
key words. If not, I'll be happy to repost it for you. I have done so
on many such usenet forums dozens of times.
Post by Tommy
Post by jgarbuz
The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by Blair to tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
Post by Tommy
threat to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the
Jewish community.<
I agree that there should be no "Holocaust Day" because it is only a
mockery to the memory of my family, to ask gentiles who were at heart
sympathetic to the aims of the Nazis to shed crocodile tears every year
for Jews they had always wanted either dead of out of their lives
either way.
I agree. How many Jews shed crocodile tears for the 40-million Gentiles that
died under the hands of Jew-Bolsheviks during the Russian revolution?
The Nazi's burned books, Jew-Bolsheviks burned Christian churches.
Post by jgarbuz
The only "Holocaust Day" should be in a strong, united and nuclear
armed Israel that will make certain that any nation that wants to try a
repeat of it will be burned to the ground before it has the chance
again.
You people can turn the whole mideast into on big glass ashtray for all I
care.
Post by jgarbuz
But naturally Muslims would be against a Holocaust Day for Jews because
they were full supporters of Hitler throughout WWII.Why doesn't
Britain have a Hitler Day instead dedicated to the Muslims and their
skinhead Nazi sympathizers instead?
Ask them. If you people despise Hitler, why do you continue to build
monuments to honour his work?
Post by jgarbuz
I'm sure there would be no protests
by Muslims or their neoNazi supporters against that.
Nazi's, Zionazi's - Whats the difference?
Post by jgarbuz
Post by Tommy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
Way Back Jack
2005-09-11 22:29:08 UTC
Permalink
Is your name *really* "jigaboos"?
f***@verizon.net
2005-09-12 00:25:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Way Back Jack
Is your name *really* "jigaboos"?
Why do you hate yourself this much?
I mean, I know why *we* all hate you, & take pleasure in exposing
you as the lying loser you are - but why do *you* do it to *yourself*,
all the time, just like this?

Susan
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-12 04:08:01 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:25:58 GMT, Suzy the foul-mouthed convert
Post by f***@verizon.net
Post by Way Back Jack
Is your name *really* "jigaboos"?
Why do you hate yourself this much?
I mean, I know why *we* all hate you, & take pleasure in exposing
you as the lying loser you are - but why do *you* do it to *yourself*,
all the time, just like this?
Suzy
Why are you such a thick Irish cunt?
I mean, I know why *we* all think you are, & take pleasure in exposing
you as the lying shitske wannabe jew you are - but why do *you* make
it so obvious, just like this?
The Department of Defense
2005-09-12 05:38:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Way Back Jack
Is your name *really* "jigaboos"?
Is your name really racist asshole?
reneg''n.org (The Revd)
2005-09-12 08:18:34 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 05:38:03 GMT, "The Department of Defense"
Post by The Department of Defense
Post by Way Back Jack
Is your name *really* "jigaboos"?
Is your name really racist asshole?
Is your name really Doodoo, Doodoo?
Max Muir
2005-09-13 21:05:09 UTC
Permalink
***@netzero.com wrote:
= Britain issued the White Paper which reversed the Mandate and
= the promise to the JEws to be able to settle and reconstitute their
= homeland in Palestine. As a result, tens of thousands of Jews who
might
= have escaped to Palestine were cutoff and killed.

They were cut off by the war, not the McDonald paper.
Are you under the impression the captain of the Soviet
sub that sank the struma was enforcing the McDonald paper?

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/r/rubinstein-myth.html

Moreover, I remind you that the only thing that made
Palestine a refuge was the British Army, not the Soviet
Army, and not the US Army.
Roger
2005-09-11 14:49:17 UTC
Permalink
In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Tommy wrote
in message <***@FreeBSD>:

Running from duke's worthless "doctorate" already?

BTW, do you really think no one notices you running from your lies
about the substance and the "singing" group Prussian Blue?

And how long is going to take before you click the link to that
forgery?

BTW, do you really think no one notices you running from your lies
about the substance and the "singing" group Prussian Blue?

And why have you been mindlessly re re re posting it, when you knew it
was a forgery?

BTW, do you really think no one notices you running from your lies
about the substance and the "singing" group Prussian Blue?

And why do you now claim to ignorant of the fact of forgery, when in
message ***@FreeBSD you responded to a complete
demonstration of your and "joejack's" mendacity, and continued to
defend it in that thread and others?

Oh, and idiot child? Do you really think no one notices you running
from your lies about the substance and the "singing" group Prussian
Blue?
Crusader
2005-09-12 03:08:56 UTC
Permalink
Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous in
their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former by
taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the latter for
"Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world let
them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
Post by Tommy
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in the
ass. Oy Vey!!
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing to
scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as offensive
to Muslims.
They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass
murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of
other faiths.
The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by Blair to
tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the threat
to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
community.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
2005-09-12 05:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.




"Crusader" <***@white.com> wrote in message news:vT5Ve.1228$***@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
:
:
:
: "Tommy" <***@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
: news:***@FreeBSD...
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > Story continued at:
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
:
:
Crusader
2005-09-12 19:49:09 UTC
Permalink
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
P***@hotmail.com
2005-09-12 19:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
Crusader
2005-09-13 03:24:10 UTC
Permalink
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
Tommy
2005-09-13 02:57:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crusader
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
What holocaust????

NAZIS ESTIMATE 4.5 MILLION JEWS UNDER THEIR CONTROL

The Nazis themselves said that they only had 4.5 million Jews under their
direct control (see the analysis of the Wannsee Minutes) and they would
have, in 1941 at least, when that estimate was made, had no particular
reason to lie.

This figure is of particular interest when it is considered that as of 1988,
some 4.3 million claims for compensation had been filed against the West
German government by Holocaust survivors, according to the Federal German
government.

Despite this, estimates by non-Nazi sources of the numbers of victims of
Nazi concentration camps has varied wildly from six million to 11 million,
depending upon which source one cares to consult.

THE ORIGIN OF THE SIX MILLION FIGURE

The figure of six million was arrived at on the basis of two sources: first
on the evidence of a former SS officer, Wilhelm Hottl, who before the
Nuremberg War Crimes Trials stated that Adolf Eichmann, head of the Jewish
Division of the Gestapo, had told him that 4 million Jews had died in
concentration camps and 2 million had died "elsewhere". (Trial of the Major
War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg,
Germany, Vol. XXI, Doc, 2738-PS, p. 85).

The other source for this is a statement taken from the former commandant of
the Auschwitz camp, Rudolf Hoess, who in a written statement declared that
four million Jews had been killed at Auschwitz alone. Hoess was hanged at
Auschwitz by the Soviets immediately after making this statement.

This figure quoted by Hoess is however universally acknowledged as being too
high, especially as Hoess was relieved of his command of Auschwitz in 1943,
long before the camp was closed down, and as such would not have been able
to tell with any certainty how many Jews passed through its gates by August
1944.

JEWISH SCHOLARS DENY SOAP, LAMPSHADES HORROR STORIES

At the end of the war it was claimed that the Dachau and Bergen-Belsen camps
in Germany (from where the horrific pictures of scores of dead bodies
emanated) had operating gas chambers; and that in camps in Poland, Jews had
been killed in "steam chambers" or had been skinned to make lamp shades,
gloves and their body fat made into soap.

All of these horror stories have in the subsequent years been refuted by all
serious scholars, including the leading Jewish scholar on the issue, Raul
Hilberg (who in 1998 was a Professor of Political Science at the University
of Vermont, and author of the world famous book "The Destruction of the
European Jews").

JEWISH ESTIMATE SEES NUMBER OF HOLOCAUST DEAD DROP TO 2.8 MILLION

According to Hilberg, as quoted in an article written by himself in the 1998
Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia under the heading Holocaust, the six camps,
their means of killing and their total number of victims was as follows:

"Chelmno had gas vans, and its death toll was 150,000; Belzec had carbon
monoxide gas chambers in which 600,000 Jews were killed; Sobibor's gas
chambers accounted for 250,000 dead; Treblinka's for 700,000 to 800,000; At
Majdanek, some 50,000 were gassed or shot; and in Auschwitz, the Jewish
dead totaled more than 1 million."

- Raul Hilberg, "Holocaust," Microsoft "Encarta" 98 Encyclopedia. 1993-1997
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.)"

This only accounts for 2.8 million dead: (as the other camps did not have
gas chambers); if Hilberg's figures are correct, then the number of six
million dead drops, by Jewish estimates, by half to just over 3 million,
even if the verified Einsatzgruppen victims are included.

Hilberg offers no explanation for the fact that the Nuremberg trials (both
Hottl and Hoess) claimed figures twice as large (or in Auschwitz's case,
four times as large); more disturbingly, no attempt is ever made to correct
the still quoted figure of six million which is so popular with the media
to this day, and which has been repeated so often that it is an article of
faith for many.

Hilberg, who has spent 36 years studying the Holocaust and the subsequent
Nuremberg trials, has himself often changed his estimates: in 1985, he told
a Canadian court that that five million Jews were killed during the war -
substantially up on his 1998 estimate of 2.8 million. (Scientific evidence
of Holocaust missing, The Sault Star Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, January 18,
1985).

THE SHRINKING NUMBERS OF DEAD AT AUSCHWITZ

The best example of how the figures for the number of Jews killed varies can
be seen from this table: the left hand column is the number of dead as
alleged in the source, stated in the right hand column. From this overview
it can be seen that estimates of the number of people who died in Auschwitz
has varied over the years from 9 million to 73,000.
Roger
2005-09-13 03:02:32 UTC
Permalink
In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
Post by Tommy
Post by Crusader
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
What holocaust????
The Holocaust of close to 12 million people, roughly half of the
because they were determined to be Jewish.
Post by Tommy
NAZIS ESTIMATE 4.5 MILLION JEWS UNDER THEIR CONTROL
The Nazis themselves said that they only had 4.5 million Jews under their
direct control (see the analysis of the Wannsee Minutes) and they would
have, in 1941 at least, when that estimate was made, had no particular
reason to lie.
But the idiot child does, since the Wannsee Protocol listed 11
million:

http://www.ghwk.de/engl/protengl.htm

< quote >

In connection with this final solution of the Jewish question, roughly
eleven million Jews will have to be taken into consideration. They are
distributed over the individual countries as follows:

< /quote >

And is there a reason you don't tell us you're doing another steal and
paste from Stormfront?

Why don't you want to talk about your hero duke's felony conviction,
and what it says about irrational haters like yourself?

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/davidduke1.html

Or maybe we can talk about your lies about the substance and the
"singing" group Prussian Blue?
Tommy
2005-09-13 03:07:23 UTC
Permalink
Roger the jolly semite wrote:


The Wannsee Protocol Analysed

On 18 January 2002, German ?Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder vowed ?never again'
in a somber statement marking the 60th anniversary Sunday of the Nazi
Wannsee conference which adopted extermination as the final solution for
Europe's Jews,? - this according to a press report sent out by the
Deutsche Presse Agentur, and repeated faithfully throughout the world?s
press services.

The DPA article went on: ?Schroeder said the Wannsee Protocol from the 20
January 1942 meeting remained a crucial historic document because it showed
the Holocaust was not just due to the murderous will of Nazi leader Adolf
Hitler.?

??In order to make the murder of millions of Jewish men, women and children
state policy a broad organization was needed which went far beyond the SS
and included large parts of the state apparatus which willingly served the
dictator,?? said Schroeder.?

And so the story of the Wannsee Conference is repeated once again, and
millions are told that this conference marked the Nazis? plan to murder all
the Jews they could get their hands on.

Witness this description, so typical of the average, from the Simon
Wiesenthal Center:

?The Wannsee Conference was a meeting held at a Villa in Wannsee, Berlin, on
January 20, 1942, to discuss and coordinate the implementation of the Final
Solution. This conference is noteworthy because it was there that Adolf
Hitler's decision to solve the so-called Jewish question through systematic
mass murder was officially
sanctioned.? (http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/pages/t083/t08339.html)

THE REAL WANNSEE CONFERENCE - NO MASS MURDER PLANS

But what did really happen at the Wannsee Conference? This now infamous
suburb outside Berlin was indeed the venue for a gathering of top ranking
Nazi leaders, but a reading of the minutes of that meeting, which are
freely available for anyone to obtain, reveal a dramatically different
purpose!



Above: The first page of the Wannsee Minutes. A full English text of the
minutes can be found here, and a full set of scanned original German
minutes can be found here.

For in reality, the Wannsee conference only decided to put forward a plan
which entailed the evacuation of Jews to territory recently opened by the
German invasion of the Soviet Union, which had started the previous June.

Nowhere in the Wannsee conference, or the minutes of that meeting, was a
plan for the mass murder of all Jews discussed.

Incredibly, exactly the opposite was discussed: amongst other things, the
Wannsee meeting:

- took an interest in saving Jewish lives by warning of the ?dangers? of
emigrating during wartime;

- ordered that ALL Jews aged over 65, NOT be evacuated East;

- ordered that ALL German Jews who were decorated or wounded World War I
veterans NOT be evacuated East;

and

- ordered that ALL Jews working in critical munitions and other factories
NOT be evacuated East.

Only in one place do the minutes of the Wannsee meeting suggest (quote)
?appropriate action? for a small number of Jews - but, given the context of
the quote, the evidence is overwhelming that it was meant that these Jews
were to be sterilized so that they could not reproduce.

WANNSEE CONFERENCE MINUTES REVEAL THE TRUTH: JEWISH EMIGRATION AND
EVACUATION TO THE EAST

The real purpose of the Wannsee conference is best gained by a simple
reading of the minutes of that meeting (all quotes are from the actual
Wannsee Minutes, a full copy of which can be found here).

In its own words, the purpose of the conference was to attend to the
?expulsion of the Jews from every sphere of life and living space of the
German people?.

This aim was to be achieved as follows: ?In carrying out these efforts, an
increased and planned acceleration of the emigration of the Jews from Reich
territory was started, as the only possible present solution.?

As a result of this enforced emigration, ?537,000 Jews were sent out of the
country between the takeover of power and the deadline of 31 October
1941.? (The ?country? in question was Germany).

This emigration was financed by the Jews themselves: ?The Jews themselves,
or their Jewish political organizations, financed the emigration. In order
to avoid impoverished Jews' remaining behind, the principle was followed
that wealthy Jews have to finance the emigration of poor Jews; this was
arranged by imposing a suitable tax, i.e., an emigration tax, which was
used for financial arrangements in connection with the emigration of poor
Jews and was imposed according to income.?

NAZI CONCERN FOR JEWISH SAFETY

The Wannsee minutes then show concern for Jewish safety: by placing a ban on
emigration during wartime:

?In the meantime the Reichsführer-SS and Chief of the German Police had
prohibited emigration of Jews due to the dangers of an emigration in
wartime and due to the possibilities of the East.?

Nowhere in the Wannsee Meeting or its minutes is the murder of Jews
discussed; only their emigration and evacuation - forced - to the eastern
territories opened up after the German invasion of the Soviet Union.

The Wannsee minutes state this aim quite openly:

?III. Another possible solution of the problem has now taken the place of
emigration, i.e. the evacuation of the Jews to the East, provided that the
Führer gives the appropriate approval in advance.?

It is alleged that the term ?evacuation? as used at Wannsee, meant
extermination. There is, simply put, no evidence to support this
supposition, and a wealth of evidence to indicate the opposite. For
example:

NO JEWS OVER 65 TO BE EVACUATED

The Wannsee conference minutes say:

?It is not intended to evacuate Jews over 65 years old, but to send them to
an old-age ghetto--Theresienstadt is being considered for this purpose.?

NO GERMAN JEWISH WORLD WAR ONE VETERANS TO BE EVACUATED

The Wannsee minutes then go on to make special mention of German World War
One Jewish veterans in this way:

?In addition to these age groups--of the approximately 280,000 Jews in
Germany proper and Austria on 31 October 1941, approximately 30% are over
65 years old--severely wounded veterans and Jews with war decorations (Iron
Cross I) will be accepted in the old-age ghettos. With this expedient
solution, in one fell swoop many interventions will be prevented.?

NO JEWS WORKING IN ?VITAL? INDUSTRIES TO BE EVACUATED

The Wannsee conference also noted that Jews working in industries vital to
the war effort are also not to be evacuated:

?With regard to the issue of the effect of the evacuation of Jews on the
economy, State Secretary Neumann stated that Jews who are working in
industries vital to the war effort, provided that no replacements are
available, cannot be evacuated.?

The Wannsee minutes then record that Reinhard Heydrich, often fingered as
the mastermind behind the conference, agreed and was recorded so in the
minutes:

?SS-Obergruppenführer Heydrich indicated that these Jews would not be
evacuated according to the rules he had approved for carrying out the
evacuations then underway.?

So, instead of a ?blueprint to murder all Jews,? the Wannsee meeting
actually took specific steps to protect certain groups of Jews from harm.

NUMBER OF JEWS UNDER GERMAN CONTROL IDENTIFIED

You can see these documents and the rest at:
http://www.stormfront.org/whitehistory/wannsee.htm
Roger
2005-09-13 03:20:34 UTC
Permalink
In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
Keep running, idiot child: maybe no one notices your inability to do
more than steal and paste to justify your irrational hatred.
P***@hotmail.com
2005-09-13 07:15:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crusader
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
So you've proven yourself to not only be a hatemonger but a liar as
well. I suppose you think it's better to hate like you do and lie like
you do. What is your land? I'm a citizen of Earth. I've shown you no
antagonism, even after you gave me reason; I just called your bluff. I
think you should fight your own antagonism before trying to instruct
others to do the same. You know, pluck out the beam from your own
eye...
Post by Crusader
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
Crusader
2005-09-14 05:10:33 UTC
Permalink
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
P***@hotmail.com
2005-09-14 07:05:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crusader
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
So, basically, then, you have nothing worth saying.
Post by Crusader
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
Crusader
2005-09-14 05:11:29 UTC
Permalink
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
P***@hotmail.com
2005-09-14 07:07:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crusader
No shit,my desire is, sir ,you take you fucking antagonism away from my land
and resolve your fucking differences as well as you seem fit,being by
chopping each other head of by reaching for the other`s hand,i don`t
care,just stay the fuck away.
How many times CAN you click the same button, or is it your pet chimp
that takes dictation?
Post by Crusader
Post by Crusader
Hate?
tell me faggot,what hate?
Simple, let you two fight it out,without using our money.
Where is the hate in that?
Quite obvious in that you expect/desire that one or both will wipe
the other out. This expression is tantamount to encouraging genocide.
I suppose you now expect me to "understand" that genocide, in your
opinion, is a demonstration of love. It's hate to the nth degree, and
you know it.
Post by Crusader
Post by øéòéï áøúåïý/Riain Barton
Only in your redneck stupid American hate-mongering weak mind.
: Jews and Moslems are cut from the same cloth.They are both dangerous
in
: their fanaticism and capacity to do harm to the "infidels",the former
by
: taking over their host countries and subvert them from within,the
latter for
: "Jihad".The World would be a better place if America and the world
let
: them to sort their problems out, by themselves.
: > Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite
jews in
: the
: > ass. Oy Vey!!
: >
: >
: > Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
: >
: > ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are
proposing
: to
: > scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as
: offensive
: > to Muslims.
: > They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the
mass
: > murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as
people of
: > other faiths.
: >
: > The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by
Blair to
: > tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the
threat
: > to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
: > community.
: >
: > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
: >
: >
Hic occultus occulto occisus est
2005-09-14 06:50:56 UTC
Permalink
Hopefully the rabs will get nukes and "mutually assure" each others
destruction. The Jewish, Muslim and christian religions all deserve to
be snuffed out.
h***@webmail.co.za
2005-09-12 16:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tommy
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in the
ass. Oy Vey!!
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
Why the hell would they have a Holocaust Day in Britain?!
Post by Tommy
ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing to
scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as offensive
to Muslims....
And it's not offensive to Germans, may be. Or for that sake offensive
to any person that can think independently.
Post by Tommy
They want to replace it with a Genocide Day that would recognise the mass
murder of Muslims in Palestine, Chechnya and Bosnia as well as people of
other faiths.
What about the innocent victims of the bombings of Dresden?!
Post by Tommy
The draft proposals have been prepared by committees appointed by Blair to
tackle extremism. He has promised to respond to the plans, but the threat
to the Holocaust Day has provoked a fierce backlash from the Jewish
community.
Well, they still can hold their "Holocaust Day", if they want to. But
they shouldn't force their religion down the throats of others.
Especially as it is not compliant with Christianity
Post by Tommy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1775068,00.html
o***@fastmail.co.uk
2005-09-14 03:22:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
What about the innocent victims of the bombings of Dresden?!
What innocent victims of Dresden?
kilgore trout
2005-09-16 02:52:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@fastmail.co.uk
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
What about the innocent victims of the bombings of Dresden?!
What innocent victims of Dresden?
Just what he said. Innocents. Not to mention Kurt Vonnegut and his
fellow prisoners of war were also potential victims. Bombs kill the
innocent and guilty alike.
Max Muir
2005-09-16 03:22:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by kilgore trout
Post by o***@fastmail.co.uk
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
What about the innocent victims of the bombings of Dresden?!
What innocent victims of Dresden?
Just what he said. Innocents.
Oh no, you must be thinking of Satander, Malaga, Rotterdam,
Katowice, Frampol, Guernica, or one of those other places
that were bombed at the behest of the Dresdeners.
Post by kilgore trout
Not to mention Kurt Vonnegut and his
fellow prisoners of war were also potential victims.
No, because they were held on the outskirts of town.
Post by kilgore trout
Bombs kill the
innocent and guilty alike.
Not in this case. Dresden was a Nazi stronghold,
and a centre of war-related industries, making
gunsights, field guns, and even poison gas.

Crucially it was also a communications hub, with
a very busy railway line taking Jews to Auschwitz,
and soldiers to the Eastern Front, with the second
largest railway marshalling yards in all Germany.

Further, Dresden's government buildings were being
used to transmit Nazi messages around to organise
a counter-attack against the Soviet salient.

No innocents in Dresden. Just Nazis, or people
supporting Nazis, protected by the Luftwaffe and
anti-aircraft guns.

The only one who might be considered an innocent
was Viktor Klemperer and he got away because of the
raid.

Max Muir
h***@webmail.co.za
2005-09-16 19:49:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Max Muir
Post by kilgore trout
Post by o***@fastmail.co.uk
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
What about the innocent victims of the bombings of Dresden?!
What innocent victims of Dresden?
Just what he said. Innocents.
Oh no, you must be thinking of Satander, Malaga, Rotterdam,
Katowice, Frampol, Guernica, or one of those other places
that were bombed at the behest of the Dresdeners.
All military targets, wouldn't you agree? They were also not carpet
bombed in order to achieve a firestorm.
...
Post by Max Muir
Post by kilgore trout
Bombs kill the
innocent and guilty alike.
Not in this case. Dresden was a Nazi stronghold,
So we can kill all the people, if we don't like the political
allegiance of some?! If the Holocaust was for real one could easily
justify "him" with your logic!
Post by Max Muir
and a centre of war-related industries, making
gunsights, field guns, and even poison gas.
Still in Feb. 1945 - I don't think so.
Post by Max Muir
Crucially it was also a communications hub, with
a very busy railway line taking Jews to Auschwitz,
and soldiers to the Eastern Front, with the second
largest railway marshalling yards in all Germany.
But they didn't target this. They carpet bomb the whole city in order
to achieve a fire storms. If it was about the military targets etc.
they could have targeted them.
Post by Max Muir
Further, Dresden's government buildings were being
used to transmit Nazi messages around to organise
a counter-attack against the Soviet salient.
That's of course a horrible crime, fighting of the advancing
communists.
Post by Max Muir
No innocents in Dresden. Just Nazis, or people
supporting Nazis, protected by the Luftwaffe and
anti-aircraft guns.
Here your Anti-Germanism shows. Nazis are frequently accused of racism.
You are a race hater your self.
Post by Max Muir
The only one who might be considered an innocent
was Viktor Klemperer and he got away because of the
raid.
Max Muir
Max Muir
2005-09-17 00:35:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
Post by kilgore trout
Post by o***@fastmail.co.uk
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
What about the innocent victims of the bombings of Dresden?!
What innocent victims of Dresden?
Just what he said. Innocents.
Oh no, you must be thinking of Satander, Malaga, Rotterdam,
Katowice, Frampol, Guernica, or one of those other places
that were bombed at the behest of the Dresdeners.
All military targets, wouldn't you agree?
Evidently the Nazis thought so.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
They were also not carpet
bombed in order to achieve a firestorm.
Why were they bombed then?

1st September 1939

"Poles [..] looked up to see squadron after squadron of bombers -
nearly
four thousand of them headed for Warsaw, where, by midafternoon, they
annihilated the Polish air force, such as it was, on the ground.
Poland's
one million reservists never reached their units; the Luftwaffe simply
blew up the railroad stations where they waited, or the trains they had

already boarded. Then it bombed radio stations, bridges, factories,
barracks, and public buildings. Before heading home to the Reich the
bombers sowed incendiary and high-explosive among the densest
concentrations of civilians, including children's playgrounds."

[ 'Winston Spencer Churchill: The Last Lion Alone', by William
Manchester
p 573 ].
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
...
Post by Max Muir
Post by kilgore trout
Bombs kill the
innocent and guilty alike.
Not in this case. Dresden was a Nazi stronghold,
So we can kill all the people,
That's generally what happens in total war.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
if we don't like the political
allegiance of some?!
That's it. The political allegiances of the Dresdeners
and their actions in the service of that ideology.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
If the Holocaust was for real
one could easily
justify "him" with your logic!
Thanks, but I generally make decisions without reference
to the wishes of non-British people.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
and a centre of war-related industries, making
gunsights, field guns, and even poison gas.
Still in Feb. 1945 - I don't think so.
I'm sure you don't but what does that signify?

The Nazis (i.e., Dresdeners) were still able to kick
the US's butt in Dec 1944, and trashed us all in
Operation Baseplate in Jan 1945. They also had
a really effective jet fighter, the Voelksjaeger,
far better than the Me 626, Gloster Meteor, and
Shooting Star, coming on line, that would have
cut our bombers from the sky.

They were also still combative enough to drag
haggard starving Jews along the freezing roads
of Eastern Europe to their new homes in Ravensbruck
and Belsen.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
Crucially it was also a communications hub, with
a very busy railway line taking Jews to Auschwitz,
and soldiers to the Eastern Front, with the second
largest railway marshalling yards in all Germany.
But they didn't target this.
Yes, they did.

Loading Image...

This shows the marshalling yards, three of the bridges
over the River Elbe, the main railway station, and
a central section of the railway line lie in the
black area, i.e., the zone of total destruction.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
They carpet bomb the whole city in order
to achieve a fire storms.
Yes. That's it. Guess where we got the idea.

The Blitz, as planned by the Nazis in 1940
(Speer, 'Inside the Third Reich' Chapter 20,
'Bombs', page 284). In a frenzied speech
in the Chancellery, Hitler said

"Have you ever looked at a map of London? It
is so closely built up that one source of fire
alone would suffice to destroy the whole city, as
happened once before, two hundred years ago.
Goering wants to use the innumerable incendiary
bombs of an altogether new type to create sources
of fire in all parts of London. Fire everywhere.
Thousands of them. Then they'll unite in one
gigantic area of conflagration. Goering has the
right idea. Explosive bombs don't work, but it
can be done with incendiary bombs- total destruction
of London. What use will their fire department be
once that really starts!"

==
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
If it was about the military targets etc.
they could have targeted them.
It wasn't about the military targets; it was about
Dresden's role as a communications hub in the later
stages of the war.

From a letter to the Sunday Telegraph from Churchill's interpreter:
As a correspondent pointed out, Dresden was bombed because it was a
military target. (Letters Feb 20). The city's destiny was sealed at
the Yalta conference (on Feb 4 1945) and, as Winston Churchill's
interpreter, I heard and watched Stalin with his deputy Chief of
Staff, General Antonov, urgently ask us to bomb roads and railways to
stop
Hitler transferring divisions from the West. Antonov stressed the
importance of Dresden as a vital rail junction, saying there was a
"uzel svyazi" - literally, "communications knot".

That's what I meant by "crucially".
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
Further, Dresden's government buildings were being
used to transmit Nazi messages around to organise
a counter-attack against the Soviet salient.
That's of course a horrible crime,
fighting off the advancing
communists.
Probably more Dresdeners would have died in house to house.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
No innocents in Dresden. Just Nazis, or people
supporting Nazis, protected by the Luftwaffe and
anti-aircraft guns.
Here your Anti-Germanism shows.
I must have missed all the anti-Nazi protests in
Dresden in the thirties. Do tell.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Nazis are frequently accused of racism.
And you think that is unjust?
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
You are a race hater your self.
Yes, if Naziism is a race.
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
The only one who might be considered an innocent
was Viktor Klemperer and he got away because of the
raid.
Max Muir
Max Muir
Schorsch
2005-09-17 10:50:04 UTC
Permalink
...

Well, I liked the Churchill quotes. But as you do not give any
scientific sources elsewhere I'll only focus on one issue.
Post by Max Muir
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
Post by Max Muir
largest railway marshalling yards in all Germany.
But they didn't target this.
Yes, they did.
Because it happened to be in the same area.
Post by Max Muir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dresden1945-3.jpg
This shows the marshalling yards, three of the bridges
over the River Elbe, the main railway station, and
a central section of the railway line lie in the
black area, i.e., the zone of total destruction.
I wonder what buildings of strategic importance where in the zones of
destruction caused by the nukes in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Did the
Americans try to take out the railway stations?
Post by Max Muir
Post by h***@webmail.co.za
They carpet bomb the whole city in order
to achieve a fire storms.
...
d***@hotmail.com
2005-09-14 21:09:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tommy
Ya got a love it when 'political correctness' comes back to bite jews in the
ass. Oy Vey!!
Ditch Holocaust day, advisers urge Blair [ Post 293958460 ]
ADVISERS appointed by Tony Blair after the London bombings are proposing to
scrap the Jewish Holocaust Memorial Day because it is regarded as offensive
to Muslims.
How're you lovin it, bozo brain?

Blair's office: No plans to change British Holocaust Day
By Haaretz Service and AP
- 19:30 12/09/2005

British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office said Monday it had no plans
to rename Britain's Holocaust Day, despite calls from Muslim groups to
make the annual memorial more inclusive.

The proposal by a committee of Muslim leaders advising the government
as it seeks to combat Islamic extremism want to replace Holocaust
Memorial Day with a Genocide Day that would include recognition of
Muslim deaths in the West Bank and Gaza, Chechnya and Bosnia, according
to the British paper the Sunday Times.

A Home Office spokesman said that it would consider the proposals but
said it regarded the Holocaust as a "defining tragedy in European
history," according to the Times.

"There are 500 Palestinian towns and villages that have been wiped out
over the years," Ibrahim Hewitt, chairman of the charity Interpal, told
the Times. "That's pretty genocidal to me."

[NB, so it's up to 500 now? Arafat said it was 300.]

Mike Whine, a director of Britain's Jewish Board of Deputies, said the
group would fight the proposal.

"Of course we will oppose this move," he told the Times. "The whole
point is to remember the darkest day of modern history."

"These Muslim groups should stop trying to evade the enormity of the
Holocaust," said Louise Ellman, Labor MP for Liverpool Riverside and a
Holocaust Memorial trustee.

Britain's Holocaust Memorial Day was first held in January 2001, and
has been held on January 27 every year since then.

- http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/623982.html

Victims of the Holocaust get a memorial day. Victims of other
atrocities do not. Isn't it time we dropped the whole idea?

Marcel Berlins
Wednesday September 14, 2005
The Guardian

I can understand why Muslims might find Holocaust Memorial Day - which
for the past four years has had official status and the backing of Tony
Blair and the Queen - exclusionary. Why, the Muslim committees advising
the prime minister have asked, are atrocities committed against Jews
favoured in this way? There is an answer to that: the Holocaust, in its
planned and systematic nature and in the vast numbers who perished, was
a far greater evil than any other perpetrated in recent times, and
deserves the pre-eminent attention devoted to it.

That is a not an answer that satisfies the Muslim community. They too
have been the victims of great atrocities (as have many other ethnic
and racial groups, and religious followers), without having a special
day to commemorate their suffering. But the solution is not, as has
been suggested, to incorporate the Holocaust into a national Genocide
Memorial Day. Genocide - a word invented in 1943 by Raphael Lemkin,
uniting the Greek genos (race or tribe) with the Latin occidere (to
kill) - has many nuanced definitions, but what is essential is an
intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial
or religious group, coupled with action which achieves that end.
Earlier this week the chief of a charity giving aid to Palestinians was
quoted as referring to the genocide of Palestinians by Israel. That
demonstrates the problem. However brutally Israel has behaved, it is
nonsense to suggest that it has been carrying out a plan to wipe out
the Palestinian people.
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1569305,00.html

Deborah
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...