attempt number 2. the holocaust what exactly happened.

digme

jews are racists

K-9

digme wrote: »

jews are racists

LOL, so much irony in such a small sentence!

Brown Bomber

Like any group some are and some aren't. Some of the leading voices for equality are Jewish
but they don't do themselves any favours by voting in racists like Lieberman in Israel and the Nazi loyalty oath they've just brought in

Non Racist
http://www.thejc.com/news/world-news/39462/rabbis-replace-korans-damaged-west-bank

Racist





From their facebook page: http://en-gb.facebook.com/EDL.Jewish.Division

If you click on the above link you'll see skeptic favourite and Islamaphobe Richard Dawkins is the 2nd link from the top. Why am I not surprised?

digme

k9 do you have a doggy world with an oath for dogs only,or perhaps bitches?

Brown Bomber

King Mob wrote: »

Honestly I've never noticed.
But if these sites are as blatantly racist as a site that has a list of people who are Jewish because they are Jewish, and believes in the same sort of racist garbage as this site, then yea I'll condemn it.

Fair enough. I'll take your word for it. It's just an observation. Definite pattern across the board that people are ultra-sensitive to Jewish issues and indifferent to racism against other groups. It doesn't make any sense to me.

King Mob wrote: »

But you do realise that Jewwatch is a very racist site right?

Well I've never actually visited it before, but the name itself is all you need ?to be put off I reckon. Just had a quick look now and it's a wall of linked text + what you've quoted earlier is enough for me, not going to bother with that to be honest.

But this is part of the problem. The Holocaust™ has been pushed to the fringes because open and unbiased discourse by unbiased parties is forbidden. If people want to verify history for themselves they have no options to go to politically/hate motivated to learn what is (silently) forbidden in schools, newspapers etc.

Added to this is the abuse of the holocaust and it's victims by international zionist interests. The "never again" crowd who justify illegal and secret nuclear weapons programmes, and various war crimes and humanitarian crimes against innocent people who had nothing at all to do with the Holocaust through the holocaust.

King Mob wrote: »

Or is it only some of the neo-nazis you dislike?

I hate them all - as much as they'd hate me as an immigrant and the husband to a brown woman from a different continent

K-9

digme wrote: »

k9 do you have a doggy world with an oath for dogs only,or perhaps bitches?

It's a reference to Dr. Who actually. The Doctor is his master! Not master race now.

gizmo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If you click on the above link you'll see skeptic favourite and Islamaphobe Richard Dawkins is the 2nd link from the top. Why am I not surprised?

Calling Dawkins an Islamaphobe is completely unfair BB. He rarely, if ever, targets a specific religion when he speaks regarding atheism. Off the top of my head I can remember only two incidents where he specifically mentioned Muslims, his revulsion of the Burkha and his comments regarding Muslim parents attempting to import creationism into schools.

The latter point is probably the most controversial however it was made in the context of his TV show where he had recently gone into schools and saw that the children of devout Muslims were following their parents creationist beliefs. On this issue I'd wholeheartedly agree, I don't care what religion you are, creationism has no place in the school system.

As for the link itself, as much as I didn't want to even look at that FB page, it seems to be for "The Muslim Debate Initiative" who are hosting a debate in a prominent Muslim mosque in London. They'd hardly invite a known Islamaphobe to such a high profile event, would they?

King Mob

Brown Bomber wrote: »

But this is part of the problem. The Holocaust™ has been pushed to the fringes because open and unbiased discourse by unbiased parties is forbidden. If people want to verify history for themselves they have no options to go to politically/hate motivated to learn what is (silently) forbidden in schools, newspapers etc.

Except that the fact that's total bull****.
Real historians do actual work on the subject all the time.

You just get people claiming to be suppressed to cover the fact they haven't done proper research and have an often racist agenda to push.
Then you've got chaps like yourself who fall for that because of whatever boogeyman they believe in can be blamed.

Brown Bomber

King Mob wrote: »

Except that the fact that's total bull****.
Real historians do actual work on the subject all the time.

You just get people claiming to be suppressed to cover the fact they haven't done proper research and have an often racist agenda to push.
Then you've got chaps like yourself who fall for that because of whatever boogeyman they believe in can be blamed.

See? You can't even talk about without being insulting :rolleyes:

Polish Professor Fired for Dissident History Book
Mark Weber

A Polish history professor has been fired by his university and banned from teaching elsewhere for publishing a book suggesting that wartime Germany did not have an overall plan or policy to exterminate Europe's Jews. The state-run University of Opole announced in early April 2000 that Dariusz Ratajczak, 37, had violated ethical standards and would be banned from teaching at other universities for three years.

Ratajczak, who is popular with students, was suspended in April 1999 from his teaching post with the university's Historical Institute after state prosecutors opened an investigation into the publication of his book Tematy niebezpieczne ("Dangerous Themes"). With a child to support, his financial situation is precarious. (See: "Polish Professor Under Fire for 'Holocaust Denial'," May-June 1999 Journal, p. 31.)

In December 1999 a court in Opole (Silesia) found Ratajczak guilty of spreading revisionist views on the Holocaust, but the court did not punish him, saying that the book's limited distribution was not damaging enough to warrant punishment under a Polish law that makes it a crime to publicly deny German wartime or Communist-era crimes. The court also noted that Ratajczak had distanced himself from revisionist views in a preface to the second edition of the book. (See "No Punishment for Polish 'Holocaust Denier'," in the Sept.-Dec. 1999 Journal, p. 47.)

Ratajczak argued that he had merely summarized opinions of historians who hold dissident views on the Holocaust issue, and that his own views are not in line with all the opinions in his book. "I was only presenting various views on the Holocaust to students," he said.

In a five-page section of his book entitled "Holocaust Revisionism," Ratajczak matter-of-factly cited the work of such revisionists as Paul Rassinier, Robert Faurisson, David Irving and Ernst Zündel, who contend that there was no German plan or program to exterminate Europe's Jews. He also cited the forensic investigations carried out at Auschwitz and Birkenau by Fred Leuchter and Germar Rudolf, and their conclusions that, for technical reasons, well-known claims of killing millions of Jews in gas chambers are impossible.

While Ratajczak did not explicitly endorse these views, he did call Holocaust "eyewitness" testimony "useless," and described establishment Holocaust writers as "followers of a religion of the Holocaust" who impose on others "a false image of the past." He also argued that three million Jews died in "the Holocaust," not the often-claimed six million.

Ratajczak published 320 copies of the book in March 1999 at his own expense. Only a few were sold at the university bookstore or directly to students, or were given away to friends, before police seized the remaining copies. In September 1999 he financed a second edition of 30,000 copies, which were offered in kiosks and by mail order across Poland. The publisher, a small firm in Warsaw, reportedly censored the most "extreme" statements, placing them in notes at the book's end. A few thousand copies have been sold, Ratajczak reports.

"Holocaust denial" is a crime in several European states, including Germany, France, and Austria.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p25_Weber.html

Ratajczak:
“What hurts me most is that I found myself in a group of historians who have been muzzled. After all, please see: from 45 years to now the number of Jews murdered in Auschwitz-Birkenau has dropped from six million to less than one million. It’s official data. Indeed, even if they had killed one man, that would be a tragedy. But how is it that some historians may legitimately question the numbers of the Holocaust, and others can not? How is it that some people can reduce the six million to less than a million and nothing bad is happening to them? How is it that some people are not allowed to examine this subject and even be wrong, while other historians are allowed all this?”
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/07/30/the-tragic-death-of-a-night-porter-a-holocaust-story-of-poland/

Cork24

noxqs wrote: »

Historical facts are historical facts.

Who Writes History ? The Victor writes the book did the Germans write about what they did to the Jews? not one German came out and Spoke about what went on,

Come on if you were Hitler why kill them when you could have used them to your power? use them as Saves making Tanks guns etc.

use them on the front lines the prawns taking the full force of it all.
Some people would say "Yea what if they dont fight" STF up.. if you were being Fired at no matter how you got their you still wanna kill the guy trying to kill you..

As for History, the history book is always Changing.. and Facts as you may see then are not always the Truth. historical facts are based on peoples understanding at what went on or think what went on in the AD & BC and dont give me S**T that the bible is a History BOOK!!!

Brown Bomber

gizmo wrote: »

Calling Dawkins an Islamaphobe is completely unfair BB. He rarely, if ever, targets a specific religion when he speaks regarding atheism. Off the top of my head I can remember only two incidents where he specifically mentioned Muslims, his revulsion of the Burkha and his comments regarding Muslim parents attempting to import creationism into schools.

The latter point is probably the most controversial however it was made in the context of his TV show where he had recently gone into schools and saw that the children of devout Muslims were following their parents creationist beliefs. On this issue I'd wholeheartedly agree, I don't care what religion you are, creationism has no place in the school system.

As for the link itself, as much as I didn't want to even look at that FB page, it seems to be for "The Muslim Debate Initiative" who are hosting a debate in a prominent Muslim mosque in London. They'd hardly invite a known Islamaphobe to such a high profile event, would they?

Fair enough, but anyone who publically compares the burka to a bin-liner and then defends the statement is an Islamaphobe for me.

meglome

Cork24 wrote: »

Who Writes History ? The Victor writes the book did the Germans write about what they did to the Jews? not one German came out and Spoke about what went on,

Come on if you were Hitler why kill them when you could have used them to your power? use them as Saves making Tanks guns etc.

use them on the front lines the prawns taking the full force of it all.
Some people would say "Yea what if they dont fight" STF up.. if you were being Fired at no matter how you got their you still wanna kill the guy trying to kill you..

As for History, the history book is always Changing.. and Facts as you may see then are not always the Truth. historical facts are based on peoples understanding at what went on or think what went on in the AD & BC and dont give me S**T that the bible is a History BOOK!!!

You should read Mein Kampf, he outlines it himself.

Brown Bomber

Cork24 wrote: »

Who Writes History ? The Victor writes the book did the Germans write about what they did to the Jews? not one German came out and Spoke about what went on,

Come on if you were Hitler why kill them when you could have used them to your power? use them as Saves making Tanks guns etc.

use them on the front lines the prawns taking the full force of it all.
Some people would say "Yea what if they dont fight" STF up.. if you were being Fired at no matter how you got their you still wanna kill the guy trying to kill you..

As for History, the history book is always Changing.. and Facts as you may see then are not always the Truth. historical facts are based on peoples understanding at what went on or think what went on in the AD & BC and dont give me S**T that the bible is a History BOOK!!!

I agree with the point you made about history is written by the victors. If your Turkish there was no Armenian massacre, if your Serbian there was no genocide in Srebrenica, if your Jewish (or right-wing) there was no Nakba (even according to the ADL) , if you are from anywhere in the world (including Ireland) the famine here wasn't genocide for some reason, the Holdomor genocide of the 30's never happened at all in the Ukraine according to so called Soviet "experts" until the 80's. What all this says to me is the so called experts can't be trusted without independent verification.

gizmo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Fair enough, but anyone who publically compares the burka to a bin-liner and then defends the statement is an Islamaphobe for me.

On one hand, historically speaking the burqa was worn before the time of Islam, hence it shouldn't really be deemed a religious item of clothing. In that sense, speaking out against it would not make him Islamaphobic.

There is evidence that this type of dress was worn by some Arab and Persian women long before Islam. For example, the Roman African Christian Tertullian, writing in Chapter 17 of The Veiling of Virgins around 200 AD, praises the modesty of those "pagan women of Arabia" who "not only cover their head, but their whole face...preferring to enjoy half the light with one eye rather than prostituting their whole face."

As for the comment, while I find the bin liner comment in itself rather crude, so too do I find the notion that women should have to cover themselves in such a manner equally crude. Given his own "visceral revulsion" to the burqa however, I can only assume he used such a term to convey said disgust at an item which he sees as "a symbol of the oppression of women".

Brown Bomber

gizmo wrote: »

On one hand, historically speaking the burqa was worn before the time of Islam, hence it shouldn't really be deemed a religious item of clothing. In that sense, speaking out against it would not make him Islamaphobic.


As for the comment, while I find the bin liner comment in itself rather crude, so too do I find the notion that women should have to cover themselves in such a manner equally crude. Given his own "visceral revulsion" to the burqa however, I can only assume he used such a term to convey said disgust at an item which he sees as "a symbol of the oppression of women".

To be fair these women don't have to anything against their will and while that text you quoted was interesting it doesn't really matter what it represented 2000 years ago, it was a slur against a faith of 1.5 billion people. Dangerous and misguided these days when Muslims are being attacked on a daily basis just being Muslim, or even looking "muslim".

enfant terrible

sligopark wrote: »

Here is one to throw the cat amongst the pigeons - would it have been better if it were 12 million or more - would it have removed the whole threat to world peace that the creation of the zionist (not jew) state and its nuclear hold over the middle east region has brought about today?

No, would be great though if we could replace you with any of the Jewish people killed.

gizmo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

To be fair these women don't have to anything against their will and while that text you quoted was interesting it doesn't really matter what it represented 2000 years ago, it was a slur against a faith of 1.5 billion people. Dangerous and misguided these days when Muslims are being attacked on a daily basis just being Muslim, or even looking "muslim".

Indeed, I'm aware that it is optional, I did toy with the wording somewhat before posting, however, given the specific reference to the item in the Qur'an it is clear that while the wearing of it is optional, its purpose is quite clear hence "should have to" being in this particular context.

As for the slur, well would you consider the claim that the Catholic Church helps the spread of AIDS in Africa by continuing to denounce contraception as anti-catholicism? Or that the act of genital mutilation of infants being abhorrent is anti-semitic?

These are all examples of actions with primarily religious associations which are used by noted atheists in order to show how wrong they are. This is why I balk at the idea of considering Dawkins Islamaphobic, he's not specifically targeting any religion in particular, he's merely using these kinds of examples to tackle religion as a whole.

enfant terrible

sligopark wrote: »

Here is one to throw the cat amongst the pigeons - would it have been better if it were 12 million or more - would it have removed the whole threat to world peace that the creation of the zionist (not jew) state and its nuclear hold over the middle east region has brought about today?

Here is one to throw the cat amongst the pigeons would it have been better if Israel rounded up all the Palestinians and exterminated them after forming - would the middle east region be a better place today without the Palestinian nuisance?

King Mob

Brown Bomber wrote: »

See? You can't even talk about without being insulting :rolleyes:


http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p25_Weber.html

Ratajczak:
“What hurts me most is that I found myself in a group of historians who have been muzzled. After all, please see: from 45 years to now the number of Jews murdered in Auschwitz-Birkenau has dropped from six million to less than one million. It’s official data. Indeed, even if they had killed one man, that would be a tragedy. But how is it that some historians may legitimately question the numbers of the Holocaust, and others can not? How is it that some people can reduce the six million to less than a million and nothing bad is happening to them? How is it that some people are not allowed to examine this subject and even be wrong, while other historians are allowed all this?”
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/07/30/the-tragic-death-of-a-night-porter-a-holocaust-story-of-poland/

So if people aren't allowed to question the Holocaust why does this number drop at all?

Also writing a book for the public is not the same as publishing a proper historical paper.
And it's not surprising that he was fired. It would be the same as an astronomy teacher claiming that the Sun goes round the earth.
All those claims he mention are mainstay bull**** of deniers with absolutly no basis is history or reality.

But rather than actually do proper research, he finds it much easier to cry conspiracy and pretend to be suppressed.

Cork24

History books are saying Christmas time is in the Right Month and Day but in Fact no one would Travel +miles in the Winter you die with drop of temp.

so in my mind Christmas should be in around the Summer time not the Winter time. as History States.

Jewish people think that they own the land in which they live in now and have always lived in and their "History" book says so. on the Other side you have the Palestinians stating that their land was taken off them but the jewish and the English.. in fact the Jewish State was founded after World War 2 no one wanted them so they push the Palestinians out of the land and gave it to the Jews, if it wasn't for America the Jews would be wiped off this world from the 3 day war in which America kindly help them win, for gains of a Base in the Middle East..

as for Poland.. Russia Claims that it did not exterminate the Polish Government and their family.. and Germany claims it did along with some Polish claiming this as well. and some people claim that America and English troops just turned a blind eye.. to the Same Reason that they Called War on Nazi German..?

Brown Bomber

enfant terrible wrote: »

Here is one to throw the cat amongst the pigeons would it have been better if Israel rounded up all the Palestinians and exterminated them after forming - would the middle east region be a better place today without the Palestinian nuisance?

The only group that'd be better off if the Palestinians got wiped out would be the Palestinians. If there was no Palestine Israel would be fighting for the lebensraum of greater Israel in Egypt or whoever else is unfortunate enough to border the lunatic state. US paid for bulldozers would be running over US citizens before they bulldozed the pyramids and started moving in Russian immigrants illegaly. They'd still be committing mass-murder of civilians on a boat who tried to break the illegal blockade of Cairo etc etc

Cork24

Nice map; just love to see it now in 2010..

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/06/2010628132553801841.html

their not really helping them self's with this POW thing that's on going..

jam_mac_jam

If interested there is an extensive list of all German War crimes, details and documentation. for those who might wish not to get thier history from Jew watch.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=52292

jam_mac_jam

Here is also an interesting documentary about how the holocaust has been misused.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5o13vkbqDA
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/B/battle/page2.html

Just because it is used by Israel for its own ends doesnt mean it didnt happen

Cork24

Ok, the Nazi Holocaust we blame the Germans we blame the Russians like Remember, Its the Russians that found the Camp in Poland!! for all we know it could have being the Russians that build it or use it for their own use and then coming to the end of the War they point the finger at the Loser German, Saying hey those people were jews, Maybe their were Polish fighting Against Russia, maybe they were Muslims living in Serbia.. who knows not that you could ask a dead person what Race he was..

Point is What about the English when they Burned 100+ Jews in a Church, What about the Church Killing and Burning 1000+ on the valentine's day? what about the Germans getting their Idea of using the Star of David to tell people hes a Jew !*CAME FROM THE ENGLISH*!! in which they use on Jews when they were Slaves.. what about the Spanish inquisition or evening the Portuguese inquisition. come to think about it who's going to Speak out against the church back then>> IT Scares me how much power the Church had over Europe and its people back those days!! and look at the way they Treated people.. did any one Blame the church for getting Germans that killed jews out of the Country and place them under hiding?

Brown Bomber

Cork24 wrote: »

Ok, the Nazi Holocaust we blame the Germans we blame the Russians like Remember, Its the Russians that found the Camp in Poland!! for all we know it could have being the Russians that build it or use it for their own use and then coming to the end of the War they point the finger at the Loser German, Saying hey those people were jews, Maybe their were Polish fighting Against Russia, maybe they were Muslims living in Serbia.. who knows not that you could ask a dead person what Race he was..

Point is What about the English when they Burned 100+ Jews in a Church, What about the Church Killing and Burning 1000+ on the valentine's day? what about the Germans getting their Idea of using the Star of David to tell people hes a Jew !*CAME FROM THE ENGLISH*!! in which they use on Jews when they were Slaves.. what about the Spanish inquisition or evening the Portuguese inquisition. come to think about it who's going to Speak out against the church back then>> IT Scares me how much power the Church had over Europe and its people back those days!! and look at the way they Treated people.. did any one Blame the church for getting Germans that killed jews out of the Country and place them under hiding?

Catholic nuns actually helped save some Jews
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0040.html

And Pope Pius XII was staunchly anti-facist, from before the war even.
http://www.catholic.com/library/HOW_Pius_XII_PROTECTED_JEWS.asp

Cork24

you didnt see the RTE show Irelands Nazis?

but u what about the rest of the Comment Church back in the 1700s killing them do we talk about that ? or even blame them?