Jews refuse to shop at ‘Hitler’ store in India

Fuinseog

recylingbin wrote: »

What an idiot. Now, none of the couple of tens of Jews in India will shop there.

or indeed the Irish who feel so passionate about the holocaust.
some of what the Jewish lobby crib about has to be taken with a pinch of salt. they tried to blacken Mary Robinsons name by labelling her an anti semite.

Fuinseog

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Yes 6 million died. But most of the people killed by the Nazi's and their Eastern European allies weren't Jewish.

The number of Polish civilians who died is also about 6 million.

13.7 million Soviet citizens , including Jews, died in Nazi occupied areas, including deaths from famine.

Jews did not have a monopoly on civilian suffering in Nazi occupied Europe.

And people need to be reminded of the extermination camps in Yugoslavia

http://www.gendercide.org/case_soviet.html


The Mongol depopulation of Northern China was probably the most genocidal episode in history.

according to Norman Finkelstein the Jews did not achieve an monopoly on suffering until after 1967. the shoah could from then on be used a smoke screen to give Israel a free hand creating Lebensraum and resettling the Arabs.


the shoah cheerleaders argue that we need to be constantly reminded so something like that will never happen again, but it has happened again and again since.

getz

Fuinseog wrote: »

or indeed the Irish who feel so passionate about the holocaust.
some of what the Jewish lobby crib about has to be taken with a pinch of salt. they tried to blacken Mary Robinsons name by labelling her an anti semite.

they may have a good point,victims.org/nazi.html on republican ireland,quote they gave their children a irrational hatred of jews and incited the local population against ;blood-sucking jewish money lenders.

Cú Giobach

Fuinseog wrote: »

according to Norman Finkelstein the Jews did not achieve an monopoly on suffering until after 1967. the shoah could from then on be used a smoke screen to give Israel a free hand creating Lebensraum and resettling the Arabs.


the shoah cheerleaders argue that we need to be constantly reminded so something like that will never happen again, but it has happened again and again since.

WTF is a Shoah cheerleader?

I love the monopoly on suffering comment, the same thing is often trotted out around here at the mere mention of An Gorta Mór, just commenting on it often elicits the response "the Irish don't have a monopoly on suffering you know", why does commenting on such events and saying how terrible they were somehow imply one is lessening the suffering of others?

positron

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just as most people here wouldn't know about the millions who died in the Bengal Famine in 1943.

Spot on. To be honest, I only recently read about the Bengal Famine of 1943 - despite being a A student all thru school years. I suppose the Bengal Famine is way down the list of British atrocities and disasters that fell upon India and Indians.

On a similar note though, I knew zilch about Irish famine until I moved to Ireland. :pac: But I knew something about the problems here as I had read and discussed The Sniper by Liam O'Flaherty at school.

Dyr

Fuinseog wrote: »

a fashionista ha to apologise when he said Rommel was one of the best dressed men of the Reich.

Not suprised, Adolph Galland was obviously the best dressed man in the reich, though Reinhard Heydrich was fairly dapper too.

Fuinseog

Cú Giobach wrote: »

WTF is a Shoah cheerleader?

I love the monopoly on suffering comment, the same thing is often trotted out around here at the mere mention of An Gorta Mór, just commenting on it often elicits the response "the Irish don't have a monopoly on suffering you know", why does commenting on such events and saying how terrible they were somehow imply one is lessening the suffering of others?

nobody cares about An Gorta Mór, apart from a few fifth generation Americans. I would say its time for the Jews to get over themselves and move on. it is however a multi million dollar industry so make hay while the sun shines.

Fuinseog

Bambi wrote: »

Not suprised, Adolph Galland was obviously the best dressed man in the reich, though Reinhard Heydrich was fairly dapper too.

they were definitely more fashion conscious than the scruffy allies.

marcsignal

Fuinseog wrote: »

nobody cares about An Gorta Mór, apart from a few fifth generation Americans. I would say its time for the Jews to get over themselves and move on. it is however a multi million dollar industry so make hay while the sun shines.

Have to agree Fuinseog. Although I have no problem with restitution, and certainly no problem with remembrance, the 'Industry' aspect of Holocaust has been an thorny issue, even among Jewish academics, for quite some time now.

This old Channel 4 Doc, broadcast on Britain's first Holocaust Memorial day, is certainly an eye opener.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXJfRc_1TAA

Cú Giobach

Fuinseog wrote: »

nobody cares about An Gorta Mór, apart from a few fifth generation Americans. I would say its time for the Jews to get over themselves and move on. it is however a multi million dollar industry so make hay while the sun shines.

Humans as individuals remember and grieve for losses relevant to them as individuals, this is transferred to a longer lasting "generational" grief and remembrance of things that happened to a race or group of people that takes longer to "get over", it is quite normal and natural for humans to have this, and whether you like it or not is really quite irrelevant to it being part of what makes us human.
Races, communities, ethnic groups etc all hold memories longer than the individual, and telling a group (such as the Jewish people) to "get over it" before they are ready, is akin to saying the same to an individual who has recently suffered a loss, and that kind of behaviour is (to put it mildly) considered bad fucking form, uncalled-for and quite frankly pathetic.

Fuinseog

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Humans as individuals remember and grieve for losses relevant to them as individuals, this is transferred to a longer lasting "generational" grief and remembrance of things that happened to a race or group of people that takes longer to "get over", it is quite normal and natural for humans to have this, and whether you like it or not is really quite irrelevant to it being part of what makes us human.
Races, communities, ethnic groups etc all hold memories longer than the individual, and telling a group (such as the Jewish people) to "get over it" before they are ready, is akin to saying the same to an individual who has recently suffered a loss, and that kind of behaviour is (to put it mildly) considered bad fucking form, uncalled-for and quite frankly pathetic.

very dramatic speech there. maith an buachaill. If you read 'the Holocaust Industry' written by Finkestein (only a jew would be allowed to write such a booK) the author is highly critical of how grief has been exploited. Finkelsteins own parents were in the camps and after the war they wanted to get on with their lives and abhorred the hulabaloo and exploitation of their misery.

Cú Giobach

Fuinseog wrote: »

very dramatic speech there. maith an buachaill. If you read 'the Holocaust Industry' written by Finkestein (only a jew would be allowed to write such a booK) the author is highly critical of how grief has been exploited. Finkelsteins own parents were in the camps and after the war they wanted to get on with their lives and abhorred the hulabaloo and exploitation of their misery.

Well if people are having their misery exploited they must have misery, and hence my previous post regarding you telling them to "get over it" still stands.

By the way, I have a very pro-Palestinian stance regarding the current situation in the middle East and abhor how they have been treated, but I am not so blind or naive as to let my views on one horror colour my views on, or how people can (or should) react in the long term to, another.

Capt'n Midnight

Cú Giobach wrote: »

People seem to be forgetting one of the main reasons The Shoah has been so ingrained into the minds of people, yes there were other genocides, mass killings and uncomprehendable numbers of deaths all through history but the sheer mechanisation and cold efficiency of Die Endlösung der Judenfrage gave what happened a level of horror that has given it a "flavour" that most people cannot fathom.

how about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_Genocide
single minded wiping out of a tribe by denying them access to water. Very efficient. I can't find a link for this but two Germans operating a machine gun killed 5,000 Herero at one well.


The death rates for some groups in Cambodia was far worse than for European Jews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Fields
Out of 60,000 Buddist monks perhaps as many as 1,000 survived
Out of 20,000 Cham Muslims 4 survived :eek:
Out of 270 doctors who hadn't fled 40 survived (40 doctors in a country of 6 million survivors)

In Cambodia if you couldn't pretend to be a peasant farmer or labourer you were dead. I don't think the level of killing against their own people has any modern equal.
http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia1.html

http://www.mekong.net/cambodia/banyan3.htm

Under the pretense that the Americans were going to bomb the city, the Khmer Rouge forced the bewildered population out into the streets. In many cases entire families were given only ten minutes to prepare for what they were told would be a three-day journey. The same scenario was played out in nearly all of the country's major cities and towns. No one was exempted; even hospitals were emptied. Patients staggered into the streets, their wounds untreated; families pushed along their loved ones, still strapped in their beds, bottles of blood and plasma held aloft in a desperate bid to fight off death. Doctors performing surgery were ordered at gunpoint to abandon their patients. Stragglers and those who refused to obey were often executed on the spot.
...
Military officers -- generally all those above the rank of lieutenant -- were also executed. In many cases their families were killed as well.
...
Publicly speaking a language other than Khmer was punishable by death.
...
Records from the prison indicate that at least 14,000 persons had been imprisoned there by January 1979.

Of those 14,000, there were seven known survivors.
...
One refugee recalled that, in order to kill the sparrows who ate the rice at harvest time, his work group was ordered to cut down the trees where the birds nested. "While people were dying of hunger a mile away, we were out chopping down fruit trees."

Cú Giobach

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

how about this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_Genocide
single minded wiping out of a tribe by denying them access to water. Very efficient. I can't find a link for this but two Germans operating a machine gun killed 5,000 Herero at one well.


The death rates for some groups in Cambodia was far worse than for European Jews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Fields
Out of 60,000 Buddist monks perhaps as many as 1,000 survived
Out of 20,000 Cham Muslims 4 survived :eek:
Out of 270 doctors who hadn't fled 40 survived (40 doctors in a country of 6 million survivors)

In Cambodia if you couldn't pretend to be a peasant farmer or labourer you were dead. I don't think the level of killing against their own people has any modern equal.
http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_cambodia1.html

http://www.mekong.net/cambodia/banyan3.htm

This one horror v's another horror business, is too pathetic to even comment on.

Dyr

Cú Giobach wrote: »

umans as individuals remember and grieve for losses relevant to them as individuals, this is transferred to a longer lasting "generational" grief and remembrance of things that happened to a race or group of people that takes longer to "get over", it is quite normal and natural for humans to have this, and whether you like it or not is really quite irrelevant to it being part of what makes us human.
Races, communities, ethnic groups etc all hold memories longer than the individual, and telling a group (such as the Jewish people) to "get over it" before they are ready, is akin to saying the same to an individual who has recently suffered a loss, and that kind of behaviour is (to put it mildly) considered bad ****ing form, uncalled-for and quite frankly pathetic.

the reason we remember the holocaust is because it happened to a prosperous western european culture with a massive amount of swing in western societies, as opposed to some poor f**ker's in lion cloth's or from a nation in the arse end of the soviet empire that we don't even know existed.

Fuinseog

Cú Giobach wrote: »

This one horror v's another horror business, is too pathetic to even comment on.

many Jews regard anyone who is pro Palestinian as anti semitic.

many Jews such as Elie wiesl condemn the entire the entire German language as the language o the devil, yet conveniently overlook the fact that German was the main language of European Jewry in the 30s.

the difference between one holocaust and another is the money the has been made out of one. any book written on the subject is an automatic success. I think there should be more attention focused on the ethnic cleansing of the nineties than the events of more than 67 years ago.

Fuinseog

Bambi wrote: »

the reason we remember the holocaust is because it happened to a prosperous western european culture with a massive amount of swing in western societies, as opposed to some poor f**ker's in lion cloth's or from a nation in the arse end of the soviet empire that we don't even know existed.

prosperous is an important word there.
The Balkans was is not a million miles away and you still have problems between ethnic groups.

there is also the element of guilt. Irish people felt they could have done more. The French and the Brits would not let Jewish refugees in and sent them back.

Capt'n Midnight

Cú Giobach wrote: »

This one horror v's another horror business, is too pathetic to even comment on.

The point is that we must never forget.
And we must never forget that it can happen to anyone (and in the case of Cambodia everyone)


When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.




What happened to the Jews had already happened to the Herero.

The Armenian genocide was well known in Germany in the 1920's.



Remember the bombing of civilians in Guernica during the Spanish Civil War ? It wasn't the first. http://www.algonet.se/~sven-l/books/eng01a9.html

Everyone knows about Guernica in Chechaouen. In Guernica no one has ever heard of Chechaouen. And yet they are sister cities. Two small cities, clinging to mountainsides, a few miles from the northern coast of Spain and Morocco, respectively. Both of them are very old-Guernica was founded in 1366, and Chechaouen in 1471. Both are holy places-Guernica has the sacred oak of the Basque people, and Chechaouen has Moulay Abdessalam Ben Mchich's sacred grave. Both are capitals-Guernica for the Basques, and Chechaouen for the Jibala people. Both had populations of about 6,000 when they were bombed, Guernica in 1937 and Chechaouen 1925. Both were bombed by legionnaires-Guernica by Germans serving under Franco, and Chechaouen by Americans under French command, serving the interests of the Spanish colonial power.

Capt'n Midnight

Has Micheal O'Leary played the Godwin card at any stage ?

He'll do anything for free publicity.




Has anyone seen the Japanese weddings where the groom dresses up as a German officer ?



This from Stephen Fry on QI

And it’s an example a friend told me, who works at the Foreign Office, that, er, that, er, dear Robin Cook, when he . . . When the Labour Party came to power, and they were going, “We’re going to be all ethical and we’re going to be all good” . . . They took down some picture in the Foreign Office of a Nepalese prince, ‘cause they thought it was all Imperialist, which deeply offended the Nepalese government, and they put up, er, this big portrait of Cromwell, you know, Republican, you know, sort of Lefty figure—and the first meeting they had was with the Irish government, who took one look . . . ! And it was . . . It was like showing Eichmann to the . . . to the Israeli ambassador!

getz

Fuinseog wrote: »

prosperous is an important word there.
The Balkans was is not a million miles away and you still have problems between ethnic groups.

there is also the element of guilt. Irish people felt they could have done more. The French and the Brits would not let Jewish refugees in and sent them back.

there does not seem to be that much love for jewish people in the ireland of to-day,according to a book by father micheal mac greil [a jesuit priest] the anti-jewish sentiment is strongest in the 18 to 25 age group, one in five irish people would bar israelis becoming naturalised irish citizens, but 11% would stop all jews taking up irish citizenship, 46% of the population claiming that they would not be willing to except a jewish person in their family,the results are based on a servey carried out by the economic and social research institute,

marcsignal

Cú Giobach wrote: »

This one horror v's another horror business, is too pathetic to even comment on.

Ah but you see, this is the standard response you get from people who use the Holocaust as the touch stone, which is dangerous imo. If you surrender yourself to that mindset, compared to the Holocaust, even the most bestial crimes committed against innocent groups of people, before or since, seem ‘not so bad’.

For what it’s worth, as far as I’m concerned, even if only 6’000 Jews were singled out because of their religion or race, and deliberately killed during the Nazi period, it would still be a heinous crime against humanity, and worthy of remembrance.

Listen to Abraham Foxman from the ADL, browbeating a Ukrainian delegation @ 36:40 here regarding the apparent ‘dangers’ of comparing the Holocaust to other Genocides.

I’ll be honest here and say straight out, that I detest the man with a passion. He is a charlatan that spreads fear amongst his own people, and makes a damn good living from doing so.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

That piece has been rewritten so many times, to fit into so many different agendas, you wouldn’t believe. Listen to what respected Jewish academic “Peter Novick” has to say about exactly that @ 38:30 here

Cú Giobach

Fuinseog wrote: »

the difference between one holocaust and another is the money the has been made out of one. any book written on the subject is an automatic success. I think there should be more attention focused on the ethnic cleansing of the nineties than the events of more than 67 years ago.

I'll ignore your other two points because they obviously aren't directed at me.

The only differences in one holocaust and another are (sometimes) the methods used, who was involved and usually where it was.
I couldn't give a fuck about who made or didn't make money out of such happenings when considering the actual events, or how survivors and their descendants choose to remember it.
How attention is focused depends on who you are, where you live, any connections with the events, even what interests you etc....Telling someone they should be more concerned with one or another is quite impossible.
A Cambodian will be a hell of a lot more concerned with what happened in Tuol Sleng in the 70's than Srebrenica in the 90's.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The point is that we must never forget.
And we must never forget that it can happen to anyone

Exactly, and mentioning one is not trying to lessen another.
If we had to mention every single genocide, massacre, or mass killing every time one particular one was brought up, any discussion would consist entirely of list after list of events and places going on for fucking years.

marcsignal wrote: »

Ah but you see, this is the standard response you get from people who use the Holocaust as the touch stone, which is dangerous imo. If you surrender yourself to that mindset, compared to the Holocaust, even the most bestial crimes committed against innocent groups of people, before or since, seem ‘not so bad’.

For what it’s worth, as far as I’m concerned, even if only 6’000 Jews were singled out because of their religion or race, and deliberately killed during the Nazi period, it would still be a heinous crime against humanity, and worthy of remembrance.

Listen to Abraham Foxman from the ADL, browbeating a Ukrainian delegation @ 36:40 here regarding the apparent ‘dangers’ of comparing the Holocaust to other Genocides.

I’ll be honest here and say straight out, that I detest the man with a passion. He is a charlatan that spreads fear amongst his own people, and makes a damn good living from doing so.



That piece has been rewritten so many times, to fit into so many different agendas, you wouldn’t believe. Listen to what respected Jewish academic “Peter Novick” has to say about exactly that @ 38:30 here

Your reply should be directed to people who are trying to judge this horror v's another, not someone who is saying such comparisons are pathetic because you can't compare such things, genocide, mass murder etc is genocide mass murder etc..., please keep up.

I am not going any further with this disgusting conversation with people "point scoring" with one horror v's another, and others who haven't got the slightest idea of what it feels like to have such events perpetrated on them or their parents and grandparents having the sheer mind-blowing audacity to tell those involved and their descendants to get over such things, in what has become one of the most pathetic threads I have ever seen in this forum.

Good fucking bye.

Wibbs

marcsignal wrote: »

Appreciate what you're saying Bambi, but the reality of the situation is, people have negative feelings about the Nazis, we are constantly reminded about them every day on TV, in Books, Newspapers etc.

Yes, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc did bad things too, but in the mindset of the general populous, Hitler and the Nazis are in a league of their own.

Very much so. It's one of the west's sacred cows.

randylonghorn wrote: »

Yes, Ireland, comparatively speaking has a pretty good history in this respect. To what extent though is this a factor of the relatively small Jewish population? Or of the fact that we had someone else to blame for our woes?

Maybe. No group of people are immune from the fear/hate of the "other". It's endemic in human nature. I strongly suspect it's an evolutionary thing to boot. An inbuilt concern about genetic "invasion". It can even be gender based. Black women OK, black men, oh bejesus. So the point about the size of the population certainly would hold. A few are a novelty, a lot are a threat is the general run of things in history. Doesn't matter who the threatened or the threat are.

Interestingly, the first references to Jews in Ireland were in the Annals of Inisfallen in 1079: "Five Jews came from over sea with gifts to Toirdelbach, and they were sent back again over sea". Sent back, eh? Interesting choice of words!

I strongly suspect "sent back" in the context of the old Irish didn't have the same overtone.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Yes 6 million died. But most of the people killed by the Nazi's and their Eastern European allies weren't Jewish.

The number of Polish civilians who died is also about 6 million.

13.7 million Soviet citizens , including Jews, died in Nazi occupied areas, including deaths from famine.

Jews did not have a monopoly on civilian suffering in Nazi occupied Europe.

And people need to be reminded of the extermination camps in Yugoslavia

http://www.gendercide.org/case_soviet.html


The Mongol depopulation of Northern China was probably the most genocidal episode in history.

Oh yes indeed(though I'd have issue with the "monopoly of suffering" bit), but like I say the Shoah is a western cultural sacred cow a cultural icon and rightly so most of the time, but because of it's cultural position it tends to squeeze out other voices and atrocities, lest we somehow diminish the main icon.

Worse for me is it can stifle debate. I'm not talking about right wing gobshíte holocaust deniers, but even questioning some aspects of received wisdom can get hackles up all over the place. The perceptions of the time and the holocaust itself are often inaccurate in the public mind and often these inaccuracies become "facts". EG Bergen Belsen wasn't an extermination camp. Didn't have gas chambers etc. Most when hearing the name will tell you it did and it was.

It's one reason I have deep misgivings about the German law banning "holocaust denial". An understandable and laudable notion but a dangerous one too. On the general subject of censorship on another thread on another forum unrelated to this subject I summed up my feelings this way;

a) they might be right about something and we end up suppressing something valid.
b)They're likely completely wrong, but in the too and fro of debate we expand for those watching the debate precisely why they're wrong.(Muy importante IMHO. Otherwise you give credence to the neo nazi's that they're being censored because they speak the truth. Truth survives the light of information, lies get burnt by it)
c) Tolerance of an opposing opinion(so long as it's polite discourse) even if you feel it to be beyond the pale, means that overall tolerance goes up.
d) There's no such thing as 100% correct or incorrect. There is always a grey area, usually many of them and when you strip away the emotive stuff that(naturally) comes in on such subjects we all stand a better chance of seeing those shades of grey.

Bambi wrote:

the reason we remember the holocaust is because it happened to a prosperous western european culture with a massive amount of swing in western societies, as opposed to some poor f**ker's in lion cloth's or from a nation in the arse end of the soviet empire that we don't even know existed.

I suspect the reason we remember it is because it was "civilised" white people killing other "civilised" white people using all the tools of white civilisation. We expect it of the "fuzzy wuzzys" but find it hard to equate with ourselves.

marcsignal

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Your reply should be directed to people who are trying to judge this horror v's another, not someone who is saying such comparisons are pathetic because you can't compare such things, genocide, mass murder etc is genocide mass murder etc..., please keep up.

It was directed at you, for a good reason. It seems, by all accounts, my point went right over your head.

You won't watch that Defamation video, will you ? No, didn't think so.

It's very distressing stuff for someone stuck in your frame of mind.

Wibbs

getz wrote: »

there does not seem to be that much love for jewish people in the ireland of to-day,according to a book by father micheal mac greil [a jesuit priest] the anti-jewish sentiment is strongest in the 18 to 25 age group, one in five irish people would bar israelis becoming naturalised irish citizens, but 11% would stop all jews taking up irish citizenship, 46% of the population claiming that they would not be willing to except a jewish person in their family,the results are based on a servey carried out by the economic and social research institute,

I suspect, though could be wrong that this anti Jewish feeling is more an anti Israeli feeling and the two(worngly) get muddled in the public mind and in some this comes out in stats like the above. Goes back a good while too. I remember the 70's where people were very supportive of the PLO and the Palestinians. They were seen as a mirror of our own sorry history of plantation by a foreign agent with religious and political backing transplanted to warmer climes. The Israel/Palestinian narrative was a strong draw for Irish people with any hint of republican feeling for history. I suspect that hasn't really gone away. If all you knew of the history was by comparing a demographic map of the region in the 40's to one of today even an objective viewer from Mars would be thinking WTF?

Again it's very wrong to make the leap of Israeli nationalist = Jew. Jews are a very diverse peoples* and many Jews to some degree or other would share an element of that WTF too and many Jews actively campaign agin such things. Sadly we hear too few of their voices.




*your average person if thinking of the word imagine an image of a central European Jewish identity, but that's but a small part of their much wider culture and expression of that. You get the same with "Muslim" being equated with "Arab", but people forget the Muslims in Serbia etc who look like any other European, never mind Muslims in Malaysia. This cultural shorthand rarely informs.

Wibbs

Cú Giobach wrote: »

How attention is focused depends on who you are, where you live, any connections with the events, even what interests you etc....Telling someone they should be more concerned with one or another is quite impossible.
A Cambodian will be a hell of a lot more concerned with what happened in Tuol Sleng in the 70's than Srebrenica in the 90's.

Very true CG.

Cú Giobach

marcsignal wrote: »

It was directed at you, for a good reason. It seems, by all accounts, my point went right over your head.

You won't watch that Defamation video, will you ? No, didn't think so.

It's very distressing stuff for someone stuck in your frame of mind.

No I am not going to bother watching a video, if you want to say something say it yourself.
And what frame of mind is that you are on about, mine would be that you cannot compare one genocide to another because one is as bad as another whether it was 50 thousand or 5 thousand. The very thing you are saying yourself.

I would be saying the things I am saying here if someone was trying to lessen any genocide by saying "well look at what happened here or there", or if someone was telling anyone to "get over it" whether that was the Armenians after their treatment by the Turks, the Jews at the hands of the Nazis or the Bosnian Muslims at the hands of the Serbs........the who is irrelevant, the points I am making transcend who perpetuated what on whom.
1. You do not tell people to get over such things
2. You cannot compare or lessen one by mentioning another.

As I said, you should be directing your points at someone engaged in the dangerous activity of trying to lessen one particular genocide or telling people they should get over it.

marcsignal

Cú Giobach wrote: »

How attention is focused depends on who you are, where you live, any connections with the events, even what interests you etc....Telling someone they should be more concerned with one or another is quite impossible.
A Cambodian will be a hell of a lot more concerned with what happened in Tuol Sleng in the 70's than Srebrenica in the 90's.

This is a true and fair point. In principle, I actually fully agree with you. However, (I think) the point Capt Midnight was making, is that in this part of the world, there is a deliberate effort, made by the likes of Abe Foxman and his ilk, to pressure people into not comparing the Holocaust with any other genocide, and it's not for moral reasons.

Forgive me for saying so, but I think all genocide is wrong, and I certainly don't subscribe to creating 'Genocidal VIP areas' for one over the other. Particularly when it's done only to serve the agendas of people who go around the world, wrapping themselves in the mantle of victims, and make good a living out of it.

EDIT

Cú Giobach wrote: »

I would be saying the things I am saying here if someone was trying to lessen any genocide by saying "well look at what happened here or there", or if someone was telling anyone to "get over it" whether that was the Armenians after their treatment by the Turks, the Jews at the hands of the Nazis or the Bosnian Muslims at the hands of the Serbs........the who is irrelevant, the points I am making transcend who perpetuated what on whom.

Ah, now you're talking about 'obfuscation', another word that was invented specifically to prevent anyone bringing the Holocaust into some sort of realistic historical perspective.

If you're not interested in the Defamation Doc (directed by Joav Shamir, an Israeli Jew), at least browse through the 'Battle for the Holocaust' one. It's an eye opener to say the least, and guess what ? David Duke, David Irving, and David Ike don't appear in it at all. Instead it features a string of Jewish intellectuals and academics from all over the world (One of them the head of history at Yad Vashem) who have serious issues about how the Holocaust, and the suffering of the victims, is being exploited by the likes of Abe Foxman and his fellow travellers.

jmayo

stoneill wrote: »

A nice Mengele top with Himmler seams please.

Funny you mention the name Mengele.
For anyone of a farming background they may remember the Mengele brand, whose heir was none other that the famous Josef wo specialised in very weird and sadistic medical experiments.
Rumour has it that his nephews running the company were using some of the profits to keep him hiding out somewhere in South America.

Wibbs wrote: »

True enough. People drive beemers and volkswagens and mercs and audi's and they were all involved in wartime output. Shít the beemer logo is a stylised propellor*. Kodak and Volkswagen used slave labour like hugo boss.

One of the biggest dodgy areas of WW2 is the Austrian corporal couldn't have gotten off the ground and built his little regime without huge support from the German industrial complex(one of the biggest in the world at the time) and it's expertise and financing. They also were among the first to expel Jews from positions of power within the companies from shop floor supervisers up.

And also one of the biggest dodgys of the post war is the fact that the guy who organised a lot of this slave labour got to keep his life only getting some jail time, because he was an acceptable face of Nazism.
Speer should have his neck stretched like the others.
Even more so since the piece of sh** dumped all the blame on his no. 2 and got to write a book glossing over the real sh** he perpetrated.

Wibbs wrote: »

*hence many Jews will drive Saabs, Volvos and the like, avoiding the German stuff. Fair enough. Consumers choice an all.

I know some ex Japanese POWS who refused to buy any Japanese brands like toyota or sony.

Wibbs wrote: »

While I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding being uncomfortable about such a suggestion from F, I'd debate the "scoring of atrocity" all too common with this subject. The Shoah is uppermost in the western mind because it's been kept in the western mind. When was the last time you saw a documentary or movie about the Nanking Massacre? Exactamundo.

People this side of the world tend to forget what the Japanese did in occupied China around the same time. In China alone the numbers of estimated killings run to over 20 million Chinese. Never mind the mass rapes, cannibalism, torture, medical experiments testing of biological and chemical weapons. Christ they used Chinese men and women in live bayonet practice for troops. That's just in China and it was most certainly racially motivated. They looked upon the Chinese and others as subhuman apes. These pricks actualy set up rape houses in occupied towns were local women were tied to special rape chairs and raped to death. Niice.

Ehh the Germans also had rape camps in the East as supposedly the Serbs tried to do in the 90s in Bosnia.

Wibbs

jmayo wrote: »

And also one of the biggest dodgys of the post war is the fact that the guy who organised a lot of this slave labour got to keep his life only getting some jail time, because he was an acceptable face of Nazism.
Speer should have his neck stretched like the others.
Even more so since the piece of sh** dumped all the blame on his no. 2 and got to write a book glossing over the real sh** he perpetrated.

Speer was an odd cove alright. He seemed to be able to avoid too much of the taint of Hitler compared to lesser figures who did end up at the end of a rope and worse.

I know some ex Japanese POWS who refused to buy any Japanese brands like toyota or sony.

Understandable as the Japanese never made anything approaching an apology or reparations. I had elderly rellies involved in WW2 who were of a similar mind and they hadn't been POW's.

Ehh the Germans also had rape camps in the East as supposedly the Serbs tried to do in the 90s in Bosnia.

Oh sure they certainly used women inmates in quarters set up for the purpose in some of the extermination camps alright, but it was also a bit hush hush as the whole Nazi ideology would find ill with men "polluting themselves with subhumans". It was quite frowned upon. The Japanese had no such qualms and with official support set up these rape houses in a number of places and forcibly "recruited" tens of thousands of comfort women to fill them.

Cú Giobach

marcsignal wrote: »

This is a true and fair point. In principle, I actually fully agree with you. However, (I think) the point Capt Midnight was making, is that in this part of the world, there is a deliberate effort, made by the likes of Abe Foxman and his ilk, to pressure people into not comparing the Holocaust with any other genocide, and it's not for moral reasons.

Forgive me for saying so, but I think all genocide is wrong, and I certainly don't subscribe to creating 'Genocidal VIP areas' for one over the other. Particularly when it's done only to serve the agendas of people who go around the world, wrapping themselves in the mantle of victims, and make good a living out of it.

There are always people who abuse the victim mantle whatever the situation the scale of The Holocaust means there will be a correspondingly large number regarding that event, that is no reason for not viewing the event for what it was, (lots of adjectives out there but I'll stick with) pretty bad shit.

Ah, now you're talking about 'obfuscation', another word that was invented specifically to prevent anyone bringing the Holocaust into some sort of realistic historical perspective.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=obfuscation

If you're not interested in the Defamation Doc (directed by Joav Shamir, an Israeli Jew), at least browse through the 'Battle for the Holocaust' one. It's an eye opener to say the least, and guess what ? David Duke, David Irving, and David Ike don't appear in it at all. Instead it features a string of Jewish intellectuals and academics from all over the world (One of them the head of history at Yad Vashem) who have serious issues about how the Holocaust, and the suffering of the victims, is being exploited by the likes of Abe Foxman and his fellow travellers.

I'm not really interested in watching documentaries about things I already know (not everyone is blind to those things and need their "eyes opened"). Also the Holocaust isn't something I have a great interest in, except with respect to the actions of the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS on the Eastern Front.

marcsignal

Cú Giobach wrote: »

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=obfuscation

Thanks for posting that link, you just proved my point

From the first wiki link

Obfuscation (or beclouding) is the hiding of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, wilfully ambiguous, and harder to interpret.

Obfuscation may be used for many purposes. Doctors have been accused of using jargon to conceal unpleasant facts from a patient

See how these new fancy words are introduced, as new information about the event is released?
The narrative should also change accordingly, but it doesn't. Instead, new words are introduced in an effort to keep the old narrative afloat, and enables people like Abraham Foxman to continue to label people who question the said narrative, subtly, as Holocaust deniers and Jew haters.

Capt'n Midnight

Wibbs wrote: »

Understandable as the Japanese never made anything approaching an apology or reparations.

Imagine old soldiers in Nazi uniforms getting blessed by a priest in a German church today.

The equivalent of this still goes on in Japan.




From 2008 - imagine this happing in Germany
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7704729.stm

Japan's air force chief was sacked over an essay in which he appeared to question his country's accepted role as an aggressor in
...
the entry that won General Toshio Tamogami an essay competition described Japan as a victim.

Wibbs

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Imagine old soldiers in Nazi uniforms getting blessed by a priest in a German church today.

The equivalent of this still goes on in Japan.




From 2008 - imagine this happing in Germany
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7704729.stm

Jesus. How some of those gob****es can keep a straight face and describe Japan as a victim is beyond me. :mad::eek: Unreal. Germany could have some leeway in claiming the Nazi rise had a helluva lot to do with how the Great War was wrapped up by the allies in the aftermath humiliating Germany, the Japanese have no such "excuse".

karma_

Wibbs wrote: »

Jesus. How some of those gob****es can keep a straight face and describe Japan as a victim is beyond me. :mad::eek: Unreal. Germany could have some leeway in claiming the Nazi rise had a helluva lot to do with how the Great War was wrapped up by the allies in the aftermath humiliating Germany, the Japanese have no such "excuse".

You are right, I wouldn't call them a victim (aside from the atomic bombs) but there is an argument to be made they were infact goaded into the War by the US.

Capt'n Midnight

karma_ wrote: »

You are right, I wouldn't call them a victim (aside from the atomic bombs) but there is an argument to be made they were infact goaded into the War by the US.

The Sino-Japanese war started on July 7 1937. In December / Janurary - 4 years before Pearl Harbour - ~300,000 civilians were killled during the Rape of Nanking.

By comparison 318,000 is the total number of US Army and Air Force deaths worldwide during all of World War II ( Marines and Navy deaths were another 100,000)



In 1939 the Russians gave the Japanese a bloody nose. This proved to be vital for Russia later on in the war. Had they lost it's possible the Japanese would not have ventured south and not only might there not have been a pacific war, things might have been very different in Moscow in '41.



As for the Japanese being goaded into war yes the Hawks in the US and confusion in translation over US asking Japanese troop to leave China. The US originally meant them to go back into Manchukoko ie. preserve the earlier status quo, the Japanese though it meant a giving up earlier gains.

karma_

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The Sino-Japanese war started on July 7 1937. In December / Janurary - 4 years before Pearl Harbour - ~300,000 civilians were killled during the Rape of Nanking.

By comparison 318,000 is the total number of US Army and Air Force deaths worldwide during all of World War II ( Marines and Navy deaths were another 100,000)



In 1939 the Russians gave the Japanese a bloody nose. This proved to be vital for Russia later on in the war. Had they lost it's possible the Japanese would not have ventured south and not only might there not have been a pacific war, things might have been very different in Moscow in '41.



As for the Japanese being goaded into war yes the Hawks in the US and confusion in translation over US asking Japanese troop to leave China. The US originally meant them to go back into Manchukoko ie. preserve the earlier status quo, the Japanese though it meant a giving up earlier gains.

Yes, sorry your absolutely correct, Japan were already in the war, I did mean goaded into attacking Pearl Harbour. Like I said though, I agree totally with Wibbs there, it would be an extreme stretch to classify them in anyway as victims, their war record is horrific.

Cú Giobach

marcsignal wrote: »

Thanks for posting that link, you just proved my point

From the first wiki link



See how these new fancy words are introduced, as new information about the event is released?
The narrative should also change accordingly, but it doesn't. Instead, new words are introduced in an effort to keep the old narrative afloat, and enables people like Abraham Foxman to continue to label people who question the said narrative, subtly, as Holocaust deniers and Jew haters.

What are you on about? the link I gave was because you stated,
"Ah, now you're talking about 'obfuscation', another word that was invented specifically to prevent anyone bringing the Holocaust into some sort of realistic historical perspective."
What you said was bollocks, how does me pointing that out, prove your point?

And using the term "fancy new words" is a bit odd for a word as old as Obfuscation, don't you mean "new to you", that term has elements of "I don't git with that book learning I don't", that word has been familiar to me for decades with nothing new or fancy about it.

As for why you are going on about this specifically directed at me is also odd, you seem to be under the impression that you actually know what knowledge I have about The Holocaust or you are teaching me something, very strange.

marcsignal

Ok, i'll try this once more...

Cú Giobach wrote: »

What are you on about? the link I gave was because you stated,
"Ah, now you're talking about 'obfuscation', another word that was invented specifically to prevent anyone bringing the Holocaust into some sort of realistic historical perspective."
What you said was bollocks, how does me pointing that out, prove your point?

I mentioned 'Obfuscation', you posetd this..

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=obfuscation

Which came across to me as "What does the darkening of sores (ie:a medical term.) have to do with the Holocaust?"

Cú Giobach wrote: »

And using the term "fancy new words" is a bit odd for a word as old as Obfuscation, don't you mean "new to you", that term has elements of "I don't git with that book learning I don't", that word has been familiar to me for decades with nothing new or fancy about it.

I meant 'fancy new words' in terms of the context of the Holocaust.

If you used the term 'Holocaust Obfuscation' in the mainstream 10 years ago, people would stare at you like a deer in the headlights. The reason it has been introduced lately (only in the last 2 years or so) is that the word 'Denier' is no longer the 'one size fits all' slur it used to be.

'Obfuscation'* is used today, in the context of the Holocaust narrative, to describe the practice of comparing the Holocaust to other genocides. ie: 'What about the Bengali Famine' etc.

My money's on it not being long, before you start hearing the word 'Obfuscator' (a word only used in the IT field at the moment) to describe people who, believe the Holocaust happened, but maybe question very specific aspects of it. Or indeed, believe, that in the context of other genocides, it doesn't deserve the 'sacred cow' status it enjoys at this point in time. Because the word 'Denier' won't quite fit the bill there either.

*Fyi, I've been familiar with the word for quite a while, thanks very much

Cú Giobach wrote: »

As for why you are going on about this specifically directed at me is also odd, you seem to be under the impression that you actually know what knowledge I have about The Holocaust or you are teaching me something, very strange.

I've no idea what you know, or don't know about the Holocaust. How could I ? I can't imagine however, it would ever cross your mind though, to question the narrative, and that doing so, is somehow, immoral
(Sacred cow, can't be touched, just ring you hands and cluck your tongue).

You trotted out the mantra to Capt Midnight (and I'm paraphrasing you here) that the Holocaust was 'unique' and that you 'weren't going to get into the comparison game'. You described it as 'Pathetic'.

...and then if I recall you said: "Good fucking bye"

which came across as "I'm not going to lie down with dogs for fear of getting fleas"

..but guess what ? You're still here.

.

positron

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The Sino-Japanese war started on July 7 1937. In December / Janurary - 4 years before Pearl Harbour - ~300,000 civilians were killled during the Rape of Nanking.

I hadn't heard of the 'Rape of Nanking'. Just read about it in wikipedia, and I regret I ever read about it.

Holy f*ck, what the f*ck is wrong with us humans? No, blaming it on 'Japanese' is escapism as far as I am concerned. It's like saying Hitler killed 6 million jews. Hitler didn't - his soldiers did. Hilter was merely the instigator and designer. The work was done by the soldiers who obeyed orders that must have been clearly against their best judgement and values, by the neighbors who pointed out jewish families, and may be even some blame on the Jews for failing to organize and protest? Same way, Rape of Nanking was done by Japanese - but they were humans, just like us. Just like the Germans under Hilter.

Seriously - I mean seriously seriously - us humans have issues, to say the least.

marcsignal

positron wrote: »

I hadn't heard of the 'Rape of Nanking'. Just read about it in wikipedia, and I regret I ever read about it.

Holy f*ck, what the f*ck is wrong with us humans? No, blaming it on 'Japanese' is escapism as far as I am concerned. It's like saying Hitler killed 6 million jews. Hitler didn't - his soldiers did. Hilter was merely the instigator and designer. The work was done by the soldiers who obeyed orders that must have been clearly against their best judgement and values, by the neighbors who pointed out jewish families, and may be even some blame on the Jews for failing to organize and protest? Same way, Rape of Nanking was done by Japanese - but they were humans, just like us. Just like the Germans under Hilter.

Seriously - I mean seriously seriously - us humans have issues, to say the least.

+1 positron

It seems we have learned little, sadly.

Cú Giobach

marcsignal wrote: »

Ok, i'll try this once more...



I mentioned 'Obfuscation', you posetd this..



Which came across to me as "What does the darkening of sores (ie:a medical term.) have to do with the Holocaust?"



I meant 'fancy new words' in terms of the context of the Holocaust.

If you used the term 'Holocaust Obfuscation' in the mainstream 10 years ago, people would stare at you like a deer in the headlights. The reason it has been introduced lately (only in the last 2 years or so) is that the word 'Denier' is no longer the 'one size fits all' slur it used to be.

'Obfuscation'* is used today, in the context of the Holocaust narrative, to describe the practice of comparing the Holocaust to other genocides. ie: 'What about the Bengali Famine' etc.

My money's on it not being long, before you start hearing the word 'Obfuscator' (a word only used in the IT field at the moment) to describe people who, believe the Holocaust happened, but maybe question very specific aspects of it. Or indeed, believe, that in the context of other genocides, it doesn't deserve the 'sacred cow' status it enjoys at this point in time. Because the word 'Denier' won't quite fit the bill there either.

*Fyi, I've been familiar with the word for quite a while, thanks very much



I've no idea what you know, or don't know about the Holocaust. How could I ? I can't imagine however, it would ever cross your mind though, to question the narrative, and that doing so, is somehow, immoral
(Sacred cow, can't be touched, just ring you hands and cluck your tongue).

You trotted out the mantra to Capt Midnight (and I'm paraphrasing you here) that the Holocaust was 'unique' and that you 'weren't going to get into the comparison game'. You described it as 'Pathetic'.

...and then if I recall you said: "Good fucking bye"

which came across as "I'm not going to lie down with dogs for fear of getting fleas"

..but guess what ? You're still here.

.

What a load of crap.
You have totally lost the plot. I won't even waste my time pointing out what is wrong with this post, because it clearly shows you would be unable to understand what I would write if I did, and you would just make stuff up (like you do above) to continue arguing on and on.
Unbelievable.

By the way if you claim once more I am saying the holocaust "cannot be touched" or is a "sacred cow" I will report you for lying and trolling.

GastroBoy

""Jews refuse to shop at ‘Hitler’ store in India""

must be expensive......

OurLadyofKnock

NegativeCreep wrote: »

The Jews need to relax. It's a shop with an unfortunate name. Get over it like!

and the Dick Spring is a poltician with an...

OurLadyofKnock

Wibbs wrote: »

I didn't grow up feeling the need to design my own uniforms and ride around in open top mercs

Me neither. I dress up like Monty and drive across the desert instead.

Gyalist

Indian 'Hitler' clothes store owners back down

Two Indian businessmen who caused an international outcry after naming their clothes store 'Hitler' and using the Swastika as a logo have said their will now rename the shop.

Their climbdown followed days of intense political pressure and protests from Britain, the United States, Germany and Israel. Local Jewish groups had visited the shop in Ahmedabad, Gujarat last week to register their anger.

Rajesh Shah and his partner Manish Chandani had initially defended their choice of name and feigned ignorance about the Nazi dictator and his holocaust against the Jews. Mr Shah said they had picked 'Hitler’ because it was the nick-name of an uncle known for his strictness.

LINK