It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Holocaust is Overrated

page: 18
36
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by mazzroth
I find it very pertinent to ask you my freind are you of/from Israel ?


I'm afraid I don't find it to be pertinent, at all, Mazzroth - so I would respectfully ask you to mind your own beeswax!



Blind Freddy can see what is going on there and why the Palestinians broke down the Barricades imprisoning them to get food for their families and children. Who fenced them in ? why do they struggle to get aid ? It seems you are very reticent to believe that attrocities are committed on the Palestinian People by the Israeli forces.

Perhaps you are sympathetic to one kind of Holocaust from long ago but fail to see under your very nose one occurring here and now ?


I refute that utterly - read my post, and all the posts I have made in this thread. I said I hoped anyone responsible for war crimes in the middle east were brought to justice. I'm afraid that, as obvious as it may be to Blind Freddy, there are those of us who do not share your appraisal of Israel's actions. Beyond that, I would draw your attention to the persecutions in Africa and in Yugoslavia which in my view echo more obviously the actions of the Nazi party against the Jews during the second world war.



The complicit parties in the USA I referred to are none other than the very same parties that Lobby to keep the USA in the middle east my freind. I feel it would be a waste of your and my time if I had to name them as if you are unfamiliar with them then you have not done your homework.


Fair enough - but let's be clear, you suggested in your previous post that there were American parties that were complicit in supporting a genocide in Palestine. Offering no evidence for that claim on the basis of a supposed greater reservoir of knowledge than I have does very little to support that claim. I would venture to suggest that such sympathies amongst powers in the US are not widely known, and certainly not proven, and that many reading the above will feel your reticence is based on the fact that you don't know and can't prove it either.

But thanks for your post.

LW




posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by MacDonagh
 


By "proven right", I mean, proven right that one cannot even attempt to conjecture and question any aspect of the Holocaust without being labeled an anti-semite and lose all credibility.



I just find it disgusting that'd you'd attempt to downplay a terrible event by comparing it to other atrocities and claim that it's because of Jewish influence that the Asian atrocities are ignored. Prove it.


I did not say that it is because of Jewish influence. I am only pointing out that the Holocaust has come to refer to distinctly Jews, which, if you look to my post three posts before yours, will hopefully provide a clearer understanding of what I am talking about.



We're talking about free will now?


You missed my point here too. I am questioning as to how much of our decision-making is based upon deep-seated biases? Someone (I forget who) brought up a good point in that the European settlers had almost completely wiped out the Native Americans, destroyed their way of life, and stole their land. And yet, when you talk about that subject, few are morally outraged. In fact, in earlier days of school we used to learn about how the settlers were such good friends with the Native Americans!

I am talking about the creating of bias. For example, using patriotism to generate bias that is beneficial to the state, or, by giving the term "conspiracy" a negative connotation through it's use in the MSM (e.g. "conspiracy nut"), bias is generated against those who question authority. Or the fact that we always learned about how great the US was (up until probably late high school) that generates bias which prevents us from perceiving our country as a possible evil even though evidence toward such claims are not hidden (9/11 Commission Report anyone?) This is the bias that causes most people to reject the possibility a Reichstag type event. So is it not possible that bias toward the Holocaust be generated through the use of trauma ("I saw those horrible images, therefore it must be the worst atrocity ever.. those poor Jews who were killed.. and I will never ever question anything about it because only anti-semites do that.") I mean you have to admit, Anne Frank's Diary is pretty scary for an elementary audience and many parts of it will probably be forever embedded into your memory if you've read it. This is the same for the pictures. I think the first time I saw gruesome Holocaust pictures was either 5th or 6th grade, and had general knowledge of the event prior to that (general knowledge being 6 million Jews died and concentration camps).



Anyone who wants to learn about WWII will eventually come to other atrocities that happened in that period. If they want to learn about it, the material is there. Any real student who has studied the Holocaust would realise it's not only Jews that died in it.


Yes but I am talking about the mainstream population. Most people could care less about what happened in WWII, let alone go out and research it. What most people know about WWII they learned in high school, unless if they major in something that requires history classes (of 20th century topics). And in your logic, why should we ever teach the Holocaust in the first place then? Any real student of WWII will eventually come across it.



To claim that people who don't think like you can't think for themselves reeks of sheer arrogance.


Where did I make that claim? I am making a point in that we always think we are in charge of our own decisions. The only way I believe that I am not biased right now is that I am not morally outraged and am looking at this subject from an objective point of view, at least to the best of my knowledge.


I just find it disgusting

Sounds like bias to me.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by italkyoulisten]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Oh and I also distinctly remember learning about the experimentation in middle school, and then to further drill it into us, we went to the DC Holocaust Museum my sophomore year in high school to look at all the pictures and videos.

All I am saying is that instead of teaching the Holocaust 10 separate times, it should just be taught once or twice in detail when the kids are old enough NOT to be influenced by its traumatic properties (bias generation?). And since it is taught less, there will be much time left over to cover other major atrocities/genocides. I used the Asian atrocities as an EXAMPLE just because it is of the same time period, part of the same conflict, but completely left out.



Bias? I can reel off the names of a couple of prominent historians who have written extensively on the Holocaust subject. Raul Hilberg, Lucy S Dawidowicz, Martin Gilbert, all suffering from bias? Hell, I have a couple of their books right now, and they are well researched, differing only in number of Jews dead. Of course, they might be Zionists further spreading disinformation as one would throw confetti at a wedding.


I'm not talking about bias of authors and whatnot. I am talking about biases of the masses. It's perfect in a "democratic" society because the majority of the peoples minds are easily influenced and those who are not do not matter as they only make up a small amount of the votes.). It's simple manipulation. All humans have some basic things in common such as curiosity, wanting to belong, arrogance, etc, and they know this and will/has been using it against us.

A good example of this manipulation is Ditech's new slogan "People are Smart", and their new rate is called the "Smart rate". This appeals to people arrogance.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
I am talking about the creating of bias. For example, using patriotism to generate bias that is beneficial to the state, or, by giving the term "conspiracy" a negative connotation through it's use in the MSM (e.g. "conspiracy nut"), bias is generated against those who question authority. Or the fact that we always learned about how great the US was (up until probably late high school) that generates bias which prevents us from perceiving our country as a possible evil even though evidence toward such claims are not hidden (9/11 Commission Report anyone?) This is the bias that causes most people to reject the possibility a Reichstag type event. So is it not possible that bias toward the Holocaust be generated through the use of trauma ("I saw those horrible images, therefore it must be the worst atrocity ever.. those poor Jews who were killed.. and I will never ever question anything about it because only anti-semites do that.") I mean you have to admit, Anne Frank's Diary is pretty scary for an elementary audience and many parts of it will probably be forever embedded into your memory if you've read it. This is the same for the pictures. I think the first time I saw gruesome Holocaust pictures was either 5th or 6th grade, and had general knowledge of the event prior to that (general knowledge being 6 million Jews died and concentration camps).


Sound like anchoring to me.

Anchoring is a neuro-linguistic programming term for the process by which memory recall, state change or other responses become associated with (anchored to) some stimulus, in such a way that perception of the stimulus (the anchor) leads by reflex to the anchored response occurring. The stimulus may be quite neutral or even out of conscious awareness, and the response may be either positive or negative. They are capable of being formed and reinforced by repeated stimuli, and thus are analogous to classical conditioning.

Basic anchoring involves in essence, the elicitation of a strong congruent experience of a desired state, whilst using some notable stimulus (touch, word, sight) at the time this is most fully realized. In many cases, repetition of the stimulus will reassociate and restore the experience of the state.

There are refinements offered by setting anchors this way, and subtleties involved in order to both set them with precision, and to avoid accidentally neutralizing them in the process of setting them up.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Just something I want to add in the mix here, because the whole subject interests me.

If we're talking about the law of diminishing returns as far as relevance within time and in comparison to other atrocities, then I wonder - does 9/11 pale into total insignificance?

Should that even be talked about at all?



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 06:55 PM
link   


I think we've covered this matter already, haven't we? If you look at a dictionary, the definition of holocaust is given as "sacrifice by fire". There is in all of the dictionary definitions we found online a "common useage" definition of "the Holocaust", usually written with a definite article and a capital H - to describe the specific event in the 1940s. It's not uncommon for temporary etymology like this to evolve, and there are any number of non-conspiratorial reasons why it does.


I didn't know that we've covered it, but fair enough with respect to the etymology of the "Holocaust". The point here remains as to the monopolizing of the term married to the Jewish persecution.



But to be honest I don't really see where this line of argument leads. We have multiple words for genocide - even if "holocaust" has been "claimed" by Jewish victims - what difference does that make to our wider understanding and knowledge of genocides across the world? It's true that I tend to hear the atrocities in Darfur referred to as "genocide" rather than as "holocaust" - but if anything the word itself has a more pertinently severe meaning - since it literally translates as the murder of a genus - a whole race of people - whereas "holocaust" could technically refer to an individual.


Of course it matters, and I am not sure why you are ignoring the most pertinet point of this thread all together here, when the notion of "overrated" is only in comparison to other genocides. What wider understanding are you talking about, when the point of the limited awareness of Asian atrocities have been made aplenty, and therfore the original post..

If the objective is to prevent genocides of all shapes and forms, and not just the jewsish holocaust, would the good folks mind dedicating at least say 10 % of the ubuquitous holocaust museums to be dedicated to the American Native Indian holocaust ? How about just one of them dedicated to the cause of expanding awareness of the Armenian holocaust, which not many are aware..

Perhaps we can call it "Crimes Against Humanity Museum", as this would have wider implications then just the jewish persecution experience implied by the above mentioned definition of "The Holocaust". Again, the overplaying of one ethnic goups experience takes away from others, not augment it, and why would anyone be compelled to think otherwise, aside from blatant ethnocentric bias. And so far I see that you do not see the "oversaturation" aspect(points well covered here), when it is before our very eyes and ears(Finkelstein, Chomsky, et el, as these wise folks can see beyond their ethnic origin).

If we pretend to care for humanity, it is rational to think that we could rectify this apparent disparity.

The fact of the matter is that the very concept of genocides do not and should not revolve around the jewish persecution, as it happens in all cultures if we study history. Pretension of otherwise born out of saturated bias influence(or sheeple "Group Think" as earlier mentioned), nor the "anti-semite" gunslinging cowboys, most definitely do not help in preventing other ethnocentric crimes against humanity.

However, I would say that the horror of jewish holocaust recurring is zero, given all of the attention to the matter, job well done, and now let us move on to educating and preventing other genocides, using some of this disproportionate energy, front and center, prime time, because it is about time.

Here is a developing story of ethnic cleansing developing in Kenya as we discuss:
afp.google.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   



Fair enough - but let's be clear, you suggested in your previous post that there were American parties that were complicit in supporting a genocide in Palestine. Offering no evidence for that claim on the basis of a supposed greater reservoir of knowledge than I have does very little to support that claim. I would venture to suggest that such sympathies amongst powers in the US are not widely known, and certainly not proven, and that many reading the above will feel your reticence is based on the fact that you don't know and can't prove it either.

But thanks for your post.

LW


Here are some of the evidence, i.e., resolutions against Israel and US veto:
www.actionforunrenew.ndo.co.uk...
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
If we're talking about the law of diminishing returns as far as relevance within time and in comparison to other atrocities, then I wonder - does 9/11 pale into total insignificance?
Should that even be talked about at all?


The Law of Recency helps make it important, but over time it will not be as big as it is for us that witness it in real time. It would be kind of hard to rate it as so many atricities that have happened, but the shear distruction of the buildings has given it extra power.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by Xtrozero]



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneWeasel
 


I can't talk to you my freind, its obvious you have a vested interest in keeping one "Holocaust" story alive whilst on the other hand denying it can happen to another race. Come back and talk to me when you are unbiased and can see outside of the tunnel you have made for your vision and have removed your blinkers!.



posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NeedToNo
 

To whoever is moderating this thread:

My apologies with regard to one line response, as I am relatively new to ATC.

Why was this warning not given earlier when I replied to skyfloating, so that I would have prevented this sooner ?

Am I to suspect you are cherry-picking ?
[edit on 31-1-2008 by NeedToNo]

[edit on 31-1-2008 by NeedToNo]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 03:57 AM
link   
NeedToNo- If you are unsure of why you where one lined warned ect then please use the suggestions/complaints..you will find this feature in the member center,

Not lets keep to the topic at hand,

Thank you,

Asala.



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by NeedToNo
Of course it matters, and I am not sure why you are ignoring the most pertinet point of this thread all together here, when the notion of "overrated" is only in comparison to other genocides. What wider understanding are you talking about, when the point of the limited awareness of Asian atrocities have been made aplenty, and therfore the original post..
If the objective is to prevent genocides of all shapes and forms, and not just the jewsish holocaust, would the good folks mind dedicating at least say 10 % of the ubuquitous holocaust museums to be dedicated to the American Native Indian holocaust ? How about just one of them dedicated to the cause of expanding awareness of the Armenian holocaust, which not many are aware..



I'm not ignoring it at all - perhaps I was unclear - my point was entirely linguistic. It's my feeling that this debate has at times got too bogged down with why we don't use the actual term "holocaust" to describe events other than the Jewish persecution of the 1940s, when of course it doesn't really matter what we call it - so long as we act to stop it happening. That's all - hope that clears things up.

As to your point about "ubiquitous holocaust museums". I understand what you're saying, and I am inclined to agree to some extent. But I don't necessarily think that the likes of the USHMM should be criticised for the lack of awareness of the Armenian holocaust, or any other. The fact is it was an institution chartered by Congress nearly 30 years ago to memorialise the 1940s holocaust in Europe. Since then, it has evolved its mission to encompass a broader campaign against genocide, as can be seen from its "Conscience" section on the website. I don't agree that it should be viewed as a symptom of the problem you describe, rather I think it should be applauded for the efforts it is making. Bluntly, those efforts are far more likely to contribute to preventing future atrocities than a debate on these boards about their relative scale or importance.

In short, I take your point about a greater proportion of museums being dedicated to other horrors - but actually I think it should be in addition to (and encouraged by) places like the USHMM, not instead of.



However, I would say that the horror of jewish holocaust recurring is zero, given all of the attention to the matter, job well done, and now let us move on to educating and preventing other genocides, using some of this disproportionate energy, front and center, prime time, because it is about time.
Here is a developing story of ethnic cleansing developing in Kenya as we discuss:
afp.google.com...


Thanks for the link, which I think everyone reading this thread should make a point of reading, lest in argument we lose sight of what we're arguing about.

I suppose this debate boils down to whether you believe holocaust memory aids or suffocates education and prevention of other genocides. To some extent that must come down to personal approach, rather than institutional influence - in other words, if you feel yourself your appreciation at school of the "bigger picture" was spoiled by being remorselessly bombarded by holocaust material, fair enough. I'm sure there's a world of difference between the US and the UK on this matter, too. But that wasn't my experience, and I'm confident that it wasn't the experience of any of my peers, either.


NeedtoNo - thanks also for the two other links in response to the specific question of genocide supporters in the US. They are very interesting and unquestionably a fairly damning indictment of Israel's conduct with the UN. However, they are not in themselves evidence of the initial claim, which was that there are supporters of Israeli genocide in the US who everyone but me knows about.

Why, I wonder, is "Israel" in inverted commas on the page featured in the first link? Is the suggestion that Israel is a fictional country? How absurd, I have a map here, I can see it quite clearly...I wonder what would inspire someone to present Israel in that way?


Originally posted by Mazzroth

Mazzroth, I'm sorry you feel that you can't discuss this with me. I'm disappointed to have given you the impression that I am biased. I'd rather not tell you my origins because I don't see that it matters - and I'm not sure it's within the spirit of these boards to feel pressured into doing so. I'm pretty confident most people here would agree with me, whichever side of the argument they are on.

All I can say is I have no interest in this specific debate beyond my own convictions, which I hope I have expressed in a reasonable way. If you disagree with me, fine - I expect I shall sleep tonight, all the same.

Thanks

LW

Edit - got my antagonists mixed up...

[edit on 1-2-2008 by LoneWeasel]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
"The Holocaust is accessible for a number of reasons

- The documented actions of the Nazi's prior to the outbreak of war that set the stage
- The physical evidence of the death camps
- The surviving witness testimony
- The records compiled by the Nazi's of their actions. "

- The documented actions of the Nazi's prior to the outbreak of war that set the stage

-that's why we are questioning just Jewish solution that is constantly going through media. You never heard Hitler talking about exterminating Slavs and Gypsies? There was not 6 million Jews in Europe all together. Can you explain how is possible to kill more people than actually exist?
Outside Auschwitz the memorial tablet in 1945 stated over 4 million mainly Jews killed. In '90s they've had to change it to a figure to around million.
Total number of Jewish people killed in a WWII is still unchanged at 6 million?!
Maths has changed since my time in School.

"The Soviet-Polish commission, which inspected Majdanek in August 1944, 'calculated' a number of 1,380,000 victims for that camp, but in May of 1945, it was necessary that Auschwitz should horrify the world, and for this a number of victims was needed that would exceed the one claimed for Majdanek - four million to be exact!"
Taken from this source but there is many others.

www.vho.org...


-- The physical evidence of the death camps

So why even more vicious and deadly camps run by Croatian Ustasha is not reported and taught in the Schools?
When German officers who worked in Dachau an Auschwitz came to Jasenovac concentration camp in a visit they were sick and vomited on the sight of level of barbarity inflicted upon the Serbs and Gypsies mainly.
That is heavily documented as well as few others in Croatia but did you learn about that in the School?
Almost million Serbs perished within few years courtesy of pro Nazi Croatian government. No movies were ever made by Jewish run Media and Hollywood.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
How about Japanese atrocities over Millions of Chinese?

-- The surviving witness testimony

My grandfather as well as grandfather of my Ex were in Auschwitz and the other in Jasenovac.
Needles to say none of the ones serving in Jasenovac returned but others I've meet during my years home were in Auschwitz and few other camps and returned safely.
Heavily underweight by 40+ kg but alive nevertheless.
They all spoke in unison of fear of Jasenovac but were "lucky" to end up somewhere else and live to tell.

Not one of them who returned was Jewish but of Serbian origin.
They mentioned lots of Slavs in the camp (Russians, Serbs, Czechs), Gypsies
and Jews among others. So majority were in fact Slavs. Hitler saw them as non-humans. Not worth living.
Jewish falsified documents and multiplied numbers to serve their own agenda.
Shameful to use your own blood to justify rip of and gain anything by it.
I spit on those animals.

- The records compiled by the Nazi's of their actions.

Nazi were very punctual at paper filing so it was one of their self inflicting wound.
In Nirenberg process of 100+ Lawyers majority was of Jewish origin and they falsified many statements kicking the # out of German officers, crushing their balls just to make them sign their version of the story. That is documented too.
That was a sham just like Hague court established to to put the blame of Yugoslav tragedy on Yugoslav commanders alone no western Generals ever charged with slaughter of millions upon millions of death while fighting in FOREIGN land.
Nirenberg should be carefully scrutinized and looked from other angle too. Jews were through suffering of their own looking for way to push Europe and US to support their own terrorist activities in middle east in establishing Israel. Btw, terrorism was invented in modern times by Israel and their "legally elected" first premier. History is not what it seems as we learned about many other thing.
Politicians look after them selfs only!!!



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Sorry, run out of 4000 letters so had to continue here!
One more peculiarity to point out is the fact that spell checker works well when I misspelled Auschwitz and was very helpful correcting it but keeps underlining Jasenovac which means that most terrifying place in the modern history is not even mentioned in the vocabulary anywhere where Auschwitz and similar words are well covered.
Isn't that strange to the extreme? If you enter Jasenovac in Google you will find plethora of material to read and see on many languages. This one is in French but photos are very graphic. Only if you have a stomach for it then proceed. Images are gruesome.

slobodnasrpska.org...

So why this kind of atrocities and extermination is not a genocide except if they involved a Jew?
Anyone care to explain or am I being a paranoid and hurt for no reason?
I am not anti-Semite just wish that everyone gets same treatment for good or bad.
I am looking forward to your further comments.

Best regards!

[edit on 1-2-2008 by Apolon]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apolon

So why this kind of atrocities and extermination is not a genocide except if they involved a Jew?
Anyone care to explain or am I being a paranoid and hurt for no reason?
I am not anti-Semite just wish that everyone gets same treatment for good or bad.
I am looking forward to your further comments.

Best regards!

[edit on 1-2-2008 by Apolon]


First of all I'm not sure who exactly you are aiming the first sentence I quote above at. Who is suggesting that the other atrocities you talk about are not genocides? Genocide means the mass extermination of a large group of people. Who is suggesting otherwise, and where?



Jewish falsified documents and multiplied numbers to serve their own agenda.
Shameful to use your own blood to justify rip of and gain anything by it.
I spit on those animals.


I understand you are angry about perceived injustices, but you offer no evidence for your allegations whatsoever, and consequently your language and tone here come across as at best ill-judged, and at worst extremely offensive.



In Nirenberg process of 100+ Lawyers majority was of Jewish origin and they falsified many statements kicking the # out of German officers, crushing their balls just to make them sign their version of the story. That is documented too.


There is evidence of Allied investigators using torture to extract confessions. This was wrong and self-defeating - of that there is no question. But again, I would ask you to be careful you don't go far in expressing your obvious disgust. How many and which statements were "falsified"? Where are your statistics for the majority of lawyers being of Jewish origin (I've really no idea, I'd just like to know your source). Where is the documentation you cite?

I don't think you are paranoid and hurt for no reason, but I do think it's possible you are paranoid and hurt. I understand that both sides of this argument evoke strong emotions, but the OP does not require opening up into a long, prejudiced diatribe against Jewish people - it is a simple question of emphasis on the Jewish holocaust in historical education.

No one here, I think, is questioning the fact that other atrocities have happened, including at Jasenovac, that do not get the attention they ought. But there are better ways of making that point than yelling at an entire race who, whatever your take on history, unquestionably suffered horrifically at the hands of the Nazis and whose members would be justifiably upset at the way you express your take on the way that history unfolded.

LW



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
"No one here, I think, is questioning the fact that other atrocities have happened, including at Jasenovac, that do not get the attention they ought. But there are better ways of making that point than yelling at an entire race who, whatever your take on history, unquestionably suffered horrifically at the hands of the Nazis and whose members would be justifiably upset at the way you express your take on the way that history unfolded".

I find it amazing the way you reply! You write a lot of pages but do not answer any of questions directly or at all!
Are you a politician in disguise? Insted of an answer you are starting to question my state of mind. We all now that works brilliantly for uneducated masses but luckily here we have people of IQ in 3 digits department and not like W. Bush.
Secondly I would like to get the answer finally on why there is no museums in USA of other MORE horrific atrocities when it comes to numbers and slaughter then Auschwitz if we go by rule of thumb then many others take a crown to put it that way.
If I am called anti-Semite because I dare to ask questions that screams at me to be heard then I am anti-Semite if you want to label me that way. Anything just to get to the truth.
Am I imaging Zionist conspiracy to cash in on Holocaust, why there was no reparations to Russia who lost 50 times more people then Jews? What about 7 million Poles, Serbs, Gypsies...
Are we non-human as stated by Hitler or is there much simpler answer to that like we don't hold 80% of most influential positions in White House, Senate, Congress?
If you need proof of that for the past 60 years USA was run by Zionists, I will paste the list with the names around every president in USA. Do you think that on 1% of population (just guessing, real number is small never the less) is possible to hold the entire White House and Congress?
Something smells fishy and it's not a contents of Baldric's Apple crumble as Blackadder stated in a famous comedy.
I don't need to go to the court to get decision on that. I can see it and judge it by myself thank you very much. As for me being judgmental about the WHOLE nation as you said, why do I recommend wholeheartedly in another topic this website:

www.jewsnotzionists.org...

Must read for everyone, written by true Jewish patriots. If Zionists didn't have a grip on a US politicians and Army, Israel would have been bombed back to stone age 60 years ago. Don't even start on every day crimes against Palestinians and the rest of us.
Simply put, if we had OUR Rockefeller's, Rothschild's, Kissinger's etc, none of our suffering would have happened.
If you have a power you can change, make, publish and run every book, statement, TV and radio stations and keep masses ignorant (enslaved).
Not me Mate!
If Iraqis had 100 seats in Congress do you think they would be bombed in '90 when they went into Kuwait?!
Of course not. Truth is self evident. We don't need corrupt Court to tell us what is happening but just good ears and bit of a brain.
Remember when Madeleine Albright was sent to mediate between Israel and Palestine's?! Might just as well spit directly in the Arab face! Sending Jew to mediate between two enemies where one side is (I think) Jewish?
I am humanist and pacifist but could kill those bastard who commit and starting those atrocities given half a chance.
I say this for a benefit of us all!
Things have to change quickly. People are unsatisfied and feel neglected and abused. Jewish problem and a way they dael with a foreign policy is not helping at all.



!

[edit on 1-2-2008 by Apolon]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apolon
I find it amazing the way you reply! You write a lot of pages but do not answer any of questions directly or at all!


Sorry, which questions did I miss?



Secondly I would like to get the answer finally on why there is no museums in USA of other MORE horrific atrocities when it comes to numbers and slaughter then Auschwitz if we go by rule of thumb then many others take a crown to put it that way.


Presumably because no one has built them. In the UK there is no Jewish holocaust museum either. Presumably because no one has built one. I find the idea that USHMM is the enemy because it exists and other museums don't to be completely absurd. No one is stopping anyone building one. If you want to campaign for greater recognition of other atrocities, I for one would wholeheartedly applaud your efforts. I suspect there are places you could more directly help bring about such a campaign than on ATS.



If I am called anti-Semite because I dare to ask questions that screams at me to be heard then I am anti-Semite if you want to label me that way. Anything just to get to the truth.


Who has called you an anti-semite? Not me. I don't think you're anti-semitic, because you said you weren't. I just think you're wrong.



Am I imaging Zionist conspiracy to cash in on Holocaust, why there was no reparations to Russia who lost 50 times more people then Jews? What about 7 million Poles, Serbs, Gypsies...


The politics of this matter are huge, but in answer to your question: yes, you are imagining the Zionist conspiracy. Cold War politics enveloped political relations with Russia after the armistice, but that had nothing to do with a Zionist conspiracy. Unquestionably the Russians suffered more than any other country in the second world war, but that has nothing to do with a Zionist conspiracy.



Are we non-human as stated by Hitler or is there much simpler answer to that like we don't hold 80% of most influential positions in White House, Senate, Congress?


Americans hold 100% of influential positions in America - that's where the agenda ends.



If you need proof of that for the past 60 years USA was run by Zionists, I will paste the list with the names around every president in USA.


Please do. And don't forget with your list to provide proof of "zionist" intent on the part of each name you give. You've demonstrated with your helpful link that not all jewish people are "zionists" - so clearly you need to illustrate that distinction with the lists you give me. A list of names will not in itself prove anything.

Thanks

LW



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
"Are we non-human as stated by Hitler or is there much simpler answer to that like we don't hold 80% of most influential positions in White House, Senate, Congress?"

Your answer to that was:

"Americans hold 100% of influential positions in America - that's where the agenda ends"

That is very wrong answer and it shows where you stand and who's side you are covering here.
I can't prove black in white with documents (none of us posses) but just look at the foreign and domestic policy and who is writing for that illiterate baboon is enough proof for me and others.
Reason there is 80+% of Jewish in most influential places in White House and
Washington in general is not a coincidence! It would be to much of coincidence realy on a population of what 1%?!
They were placed there but all powerful Jewish lobby to protect and serve their selfish agendas.
Look at the Israels record with breaking every single UN resolution since '47 onwards!
Is that not proof in it self? You want me to go to Cohen Albright or Kissinger to ask them to sign my letter where I state clearly they are responsible for Holocaust against Palestinians, Iraqis, Serbs, Koreans, Vietnamese?

You know what u r asking for is impossible but observation is everything.
I have nothing against nice honest peaceful Jewish people (dated Jewish girl and almost got married to her 14 years ago btw) but against Zionist, yes.
Again the above mentioned www.jewsnotzionists.org writen by Jewish intellectuals state very clearly that is not only our but your problem too.

"Contrary to common perception, Jewish anti-Zionism is not restricted exclusively to the well know Jewish anti-Zionist movements such as Satmar and Neturei Karta.

There are in fact many Jewish movements, groups and organizations whose ideology regarding Zionism and the so-called "State of Israel" is that of the unadulterated Torah position that any form of Zionism is heresy and that the existence of the so-called "State of Israel" is illegitimate.

No one has had to create any antagonism between our Torah and Zionism because such antagonism exists by virtue of the essence of Judaism itself, which can never tolerate the heresy of Zionism."

Etc.. Good read for everyone. I do not imagine things. They are staring me in the face. Prove it to me that such disproportionate number of Jewish oppose to others in a White House and percentage in a Congress and Senate is not a Zionist plan for a NWO but well deserved place.
If you go by politically correct wisdom you should have roughly same number of representatives everywhere. I am sure you can find good, literate and educated black adviser, vice president, foreign secretary... Where is a single Chinese, Mexican, Black, Russian-American in a powerful and influential position next to a president?
Nowhere! They are not American-end of a story as you said, but Jewish-American. Big difference!

Regards!



[edit on 1-2-2008 by Apolon]



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apolon
"Are we non-human as stated by Hitler or is there much simpler answer to that like we don't hold 80% of most influential positions in White House, Senate, Congress?"
Your answer to that was:
"Americans hold 100% of influential positions in America - that's where the agenda ends"

That is very wrong answer and it shows where you stand and who's side you are covering here.
I can't prove black in white with documents (none of us posses) but just look at the foreign and domestic policy and who is writing for that illiterate baboon is enough proof for me and others.


You said in your previous post that you could provide such proof - that's why I asked. But I don't expect you to prove it to me. I understand your perspective, I just don't happen to agree with it.




Etc.. Good read for everyone. I do not imagine things. They are staring me in the face. Prove it to me that such disproportionate number of Jewish oppose to others in a White House and percentage in a Congress and Senate is not a Zionist plan for a NWO but well deserved place.
If you go by politically correct wisdom you should have roughly same number of representatives everywhere. I am sure you can find good, literate and educated black adviser, vice president, foreign secretary... Where is a single Chinese, Mexican, Black, Russian-American in a powerful and influential position next to a president?
Nowhere! They are not American-end of a story as you said, but Jewish-American. Big difference!


There's no question that there is still inequality in the US, as there is in most countries around the globe. I just don't agree that with the idea that a zionist conpsiracy lies behind that inequality. By way of example, it's common knowledge that Obama, who incidentally could well be the first black president you're looking for - is hampered by the fact that many Americans won't vote for him because they believe him to be a Muslim. Is that a zionist conspiracy, or just pig ignorance?

You ask me to prove that it ISN'T a zionist conspiracy - the burden of proof in conspiracy discussion is not with the person who doesn't believe the conspiracy theory but the person promoting it. I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy any more than I can prove the moon isn't made of cheese. But I don't, personally, give much credence to the idea that there is, and you haven't convinced me otherwise. Nor does the website you link to. I agree that Israel has flaunted UN resolutions. I agree that it has committed brutal acts against its neighbours. I don't agree that a "zionist conspiracy" is behind either its actions or support for its actions in the United States.

LW



posted on Feb, 1 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   
We seem to agree on issues of a human suffering but not much else regarding corruption in governments or their "blind"support for Israel.
Personally, reaction of US ambassadors in UN and their veto against any action or sanctions against Israel is more then iron clad proof of strength of Jewish lobby.
Nothing else can explain plain ignorance towards suffering of Palestinians and others yet protecting Israel as if they are twin brothers!
They have no connections historical (since Israel didn't existed before '47) or otherwise, so what else is there to look for apart from strong unbelievable strong Jewish lobby?
Look again who runs TV and radio stations. If it didn't happened on TV it didn't happened at all as they say in US of A.
If they were run by Arab-Americans don't you think that situation and US foreign policy would be different?
One side is always demonised where the other is always right. Isn't that just the way Universe works?!
I will conclude by saying that there is NO international LAW (for some)and that money speaks and not humanity.
Unfortunately we are not all equal as they would like us to believe.

Regards!



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join