Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Zionists and the holocaust

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Zionists and the holocaust
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

laogaiguk

Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:24 am Post subject:

fiveeagles wrote:

laogaiguk wrote:

fiveeagles wrote:

America and Iran are two different countries. I don't see many Iranians on the street protesting what the President has said. In America the opposite is true.

That's because in America they don't shoot you in the head for protesting what the President had said (yet)! I highly doubt you would be out protesting knowing you would be tortured and killed for it. Actually, not highly doubt, I know.

I understand what you are saying, but you have to speak out against such evil.

Some of the greatest men were those who spoke out in truth when it meant they might die for saying what they did.

However, there are some who are speaking out. The Iranian church is growing rapidly and they are in disagreement with the President. So there is a segment of Iranian society that is against the government.

I disagree. The greatest people are the ones who lived their entire lives working against oppression or hate. They usually had horrible (or atlest not normal lives) but kept on fighting. Ones who are ready to die usually aren't really that brave. They obviously have come to peace with death and it's not really a punishment. Torture is bad, but most people you are talking about were religious, and I never saw bravery in dying when you are sure you are going to heaven for doing it (even with the torture). This isn't an attack on religion, just the truth. There is a difference between someone who gives freely every month and someone who gives one big lump sum once a year for a tax break.

On the other hand

Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 2:59 am Post subject:

Quote:

Say, wasn't EICHMANN himself Jewish?

I've never heard that.

Quote:

Hilter was likely 1/4 Jewish.

The most credible-sounding thing I've read about that is that Hitler WORRIED that he had Jewish blood, but that there isn't much evidence to support the idea.

igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 3:31 am Post subject:

On the other hand wrote:

Quote:

Say, wasn't EICHMANN himself Jewish?

I've never heard that.

Patrick said (June 27, 2005):

The enforced poverty of large numbers of Americans needs to be rooted out so as to no longer provide the criminal elite with cannon fodder. This is one of the reasons for impoverishment, it makes human exploitation easier.

After he was arrested and taken to Israel, Adolph Eichmann revealed to his Israeli captors, that his father was Jewish. His Israeli interrogators then asked him, "How could you the son of a Jew, go to work for the Nazis" Whereupon Eichmann replied, " I needed a job, and they were the only ones hiring."

Now you have.

I'm assuming as well you've never heard of Jews serving in the SS or otherwise.

Quote:

Hilter was likely 1/4 Jewish.

On the other hand wrote:

The most credible-sounding thing I've read about that is that Hitler WORRIED that he had Jewish blood,
but that there isn't much evidence to support the idea.

His father's mother ( paternal grandmother ) was a woman named "Maria Shickelgruber". She worked as a house servant with someone named ... ROTHSCHILD ... in Vienna, until she became pregnant with ALOIS ( Adolf's father ).

It's further believed that, upon invading Austria, he then actively sought to destroy all historical records which would allow the truth to come to light.

Ironic as well wouldn't you say? A black haired chap with dark eyes promoting the blonde haired-blue eyed "master" race?

Friday, 8 February, 2002, 06:16 GMT
Britain Forged Hitler passport

The passport was among wartime "subversion plans"

A passport for Adolf Hitler made by British intelligence officers is among secret UK government documents made public for the first time.

"Politics making for strange bedfellows"

"Truth being stranger than fiction"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1808286.stm

fiveeagles

Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:10 am Post subject:

laogaiguk wrote:

fiveeagles wrote:

laogaiguk wrote:

fiveeagles wrote:

America and Iran are two different countries. I don't see many Iranians on the street protesting what the President has said. In America the opposite is true.

Give some examples: like who?

laogaiguk

Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:34 am Post subject:

fiveeagles wrote:

laogaiguk wrote:

fiveeagles wrote:

laogaiguk wrote:

fiveeagles wrote:

America and Iran are two different countries. I don't see many Iranians on the street protesting what the President has said. In America the opposite is true.

Give some examples: like who?

It's hypothetical. Someone who dies knowing they will go to heaven or get 99 virgins or reincarnate as a perfect being isn't brave. They know what's coming and it's paradise. If I actually believed in Christianity, and died in God's name, why would I be scared??? If there is torture involved, they are more brave, but still not as someone who goes to jail for decades for their views instead of blowing themselves up or dying in a blaze of glory.
The kid who shares his candy with another who doesn't have any is a better person than somone who did it because they think the teacher or parent will praise them.
These people aren't recorded because they didn't die in a blaze of glory.

On the other hand

Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:03 am Post subject:

Quote:

Who the hell is Patrick, and why should I take him as an authority on the subject of Eichmann's allegedly being Jewish?

And what does your first paragraph there have to do with the second?

On the other hand

Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:05 am Post subject:

Quote:

Ironic as well wouldn't you say? A black haired chap with dark eyes promoting the blonde haired-blue eyed "master" race?

Yeah, it is ironic, but it doesn't prove anything about anyone being Jewish. Lots of Germans have darker features than that seen in the Aryan ideal.

ddeubel

Joined: 20 Jul 2005

Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:52 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Yeah, it is ironic, but it doesn't prove anything about anyone being Jewish. Lots of Germans have darker features than that seen in the Aryan ideal.

True, true. It does prove that so many in Germany/Prussia for hundreds of years were forced to become Christian for many disparate / local reasons........this is the dirty secret of the time. Fortunately now it doesn't matter as much and I am happy about how German society has reformed, if that is the proper word.

My own situation, history is full of family members becoming Christian and branching off.......It was very common. In fact, in general , only the very devout or the very poor Jews stayed Jewish officially. If you had money you could buy a good name , if poor you got a bastardized name like Streisand (meaning in German, the small hairs on a horse's ass) or greenspan (meaning, the poison left on a spoon which had been left in mayonnaise) or of course the very popular Jewish name Ostertag -- Easter Day......I have many more examples including my own last name. But if you had $$$ you could go for something upscale like Eichmann or Schroeder or Miller or Schmidt....

DD

PS> Thanks for bringing up the topic of Eichmann in Jerusalem. Lots of thought in that curt book. I hope to join the discussion....

igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 5:31 am Post subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moloch http://www.cremationofcare.com/illu_molech.htm

Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 6:04 am Post subject:

Next you're going to tell us how Jews need the blood of a Christian boy to make matzo...

cheeba

Joined: 25 Jan 2006

Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:01 pm Post subject:

You've got to realize that Israel's current actions have lead to the gum flapping of every anti-Semite who has had to keep their mouth shut for the last 60 years. They'll claim they're not anti-Semitic, but merely anti-Zionist and while I do acknowledge the difference, their obsession with the Protocols of Zion creeps out in their posts.

igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:23 am Post subject:

cheeba wrote:

You've got to realize that Israel's current actions have lead to the gum flapping of every anti-Semite who has had to keep their mouth shut for the last 60 years. They'll claim they're not anti-Semitic, but merely anti-Zionist and while I do acknowledge the difference, their obsession with the Protocols of Zion creeps out in their posts.

Cheeba ...

What EXACTLY is a semite? Could you clearly define this please.

Secondly, don't you realize how ISRAEL is presently committing some of the most horrific ANTI-"semitic" acts against LEBANESE semites one could possibly imagine.

Killing, imprisoning, humiliating & torturing other fellow Middle Easterners, ISRAEL has long been the greatest anti-semitic entity in the world. Rather ironic wouldn't you say?

Refresh my memory now. Who was it who said the "BIGGER the lie ... the better"?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:29 am Post subject:

The Arab people are semties but " anti semtism" refers to prejudice" against Jews . The word/ expression anti semitism was not made by Jews to describe persecution against them so they could get victim status (As it would seem that Igotthisguitar is trying to imply) The world / expression was made by someone who hated Jews as something to be proud of.

igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:08 am Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

The Arab people are semties but " anti semtism" refers to prejudice" against Jews.

Not only is it offensive to other fellow semites, it's a clear misnomer & so grossly convoluted it's absolutely meaningless.

If what one means is anti_"Jewish" OR Judeo-phobic ... then CLEARLY SAY IT !!! Why beat around the bush?

Quote:

The word/ expression anti semitism was not made by Jews to describe persecution against them
so they could get victim status

Oh really?

Quote:

The world / expression was made by someone who hated Jews as something to be proud of.

What then are the origins of the word ... Joo? Enlighten us.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:21 am Post subject:

John Pilger defines antisemitism

(could be called Igothisguitar defines antisemitism.)

The Guardian carries a letter from John Pilger depicting Egypt as a wronged party in the Yom Kippur War of 1973. There's a time and a place for everything, and Pilger's eccentric historical interpretations are not the subject of this post. But one of the statements within the letter makes a curious juxtaposition with a story elsewhere in the same edition of the paper. Pilger writes:

Quote:

According to [Jonathan] Freedland, the present Israeli regime is merely "a clumsy prizefighter driven to fury by a fly buzzing around its ears". His description of the entire Palestinian resistance as buzzing flies would be shocking if it did not accurately reflect Israeli racism, itself a virulent form of anti-semitism.

You read that last clause right: Pilger is making an accusation not only of Israeli racism - a standard trope of the extreme Left - but also of Israeli anti-semitism. It's not a misprint: it's a libel he fully intends.

The reasoning behind Pilger's bizarre accusation is pure sophistry. It is common on the extreme Left, and it runs like this. Israelis complain about the prejudiced character of parts of the popular culture of the Arab world (for example, a television drama assuming the truth of the notorious Tsarist forgery the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion; Palestinian textbooks retailing venerable anti-Jewish libels). They are, according to the anti-Israel campaigners, being disingenuous however in levelling accusations of anti-semitism, because the Arabs themselves are a semitic people. How then could it possibly be true to describe the Palestinian Authority and other Arab groups as guilty of anti-semitism, when they are themselves semites? (This is presented as a rhetorical question and conversation-stopper, but it's generally followed, as in Pilger's letter, by accusations of Israeli racism, colonialism and manifold other sins of commission and omission.)

I'm no fan of Pilger's, but I think this calumny is the most egregious remark I've come across even from that source. What's wrong with it is that it reduces the suffering of the Jewish people - most obviously the attempt in the last century to kill every Jew in Europe, but a Judaeophobia that has lasted literally millennia - by means of semantic trickery. It is a historical accident that the term 'anti-semitism' exists at all, let alone is the common term for anti-Jewish prejudice. The term was coined only in the second half of the nineteenth century by a German anti-Jewish polemicist, Wilhelm Marr. Marr argued that western civilisation had been infiltrated by a pernicious Jewish influence, and he established his own Anti-Semitic League in 1871 to further his anti-Jewish demagoguery.

Ironically Marr, an extremist Jew-baiter, thereby invented a term that became standard as a label for anti-Jewish prejudice. Yet it's an intellectually idle and vacuous word as well as a euphemism. There is, after all, no such phenomenon as 'Semitism' to which one can be opposed. The destructive effect of the very term anti-Semitism can be discerned in Pilger's casual insults. If 'anti-semitism' doesn't mean prejudice specifically against Jews, then we have no immediately recognised term for that particular prejudice. Because the language we use about politics is crucial to the clarity of our thinking about a subject (I don't entirely endorse Orwell's views on language and politics, but I do this one), this softening of the specificity of anti-Jewish prejudice serves to anaesthetise our moral defences. It's a process that marked the history of the so-called German Democratic Republic, a prison-state that not only refused to accept any historical guilt for the Holocaust but was also a relentless source of anti-Jewish propaganda and anti-Israel agitation.

We are stuck with the term 'anti-semitism', but it is as well to note its historical lineage and the ease with which it can be manipulated to harm the Jews further. It was for that reason that the philosopher and rabbi Emil Fackenheim, who having escaped Nazi Germany in 1940 studied under Leo Strauss and served many years as Professor of Philosophy at Toronto University, urged that the word 'anti-semitism' be written, without a hyphen, as 'antisemitism'. It may seem a small point, but I hope the example of John Pilger's letter will indicate that Fackenheim's pratice is in fact a means of defence against political obscurantism. I consequently always spell the word as 'antisemitism', and I recommend adopting this practice: it simply makes it marginally more difficult for those who wish deliberately to misapply the term. (An alternative practice is worth noting: the Irish statesman, historian and polymath Conor Cruise O'Brien has suggested, on similar grounds, adopting the term 'anti-Jewism'. Its merit is that no one could possibly fail to miss what it means, and its ugliness is appropriate to the phenomenon it describes.)

I referred to an ironic juxtaposition within The Guardian. It so happens that Pilger's letter appears on the same day as Fackenheim's obituary (three weeks after the death of one of the most important Jewish thinkers of the modern world). The Guardian's treatment of this outstanding intellect is, I'm afraid, snide and knowing. The obituarist states:

In

Quote:

the mid-1960s, Fackenheim coined a 614th commandment, not listed in the Hebrew Bible - "not to despair of God and not to despair of man"; as a corollary, he argued that Jewish survival "denied Hitler a posthumous victory". And only a strong Israel, he continued, could prevent Jews vanishing from history.
Such views attracted plaudits from nationalists, accusations of chauvinism from liberals, disquiet from Jews who feared Holocaust memory alone would displace Judaic values, and disappointment from former students lamenting Fackenheim's apparent retreat from intellectual subtlety.

Indeed, what possible explanation could there be for wishing for a strong and secure Israel other than an absence of intellectual subtlety? For those willing to be thought unsubtle by The Guardian, I would recommend Fackenheim's moving and highly readable exposition of his thinking, To Mend the World: Foundations of Post-Holocaust Jewish Thought. Among the most important parts of the book is his address specifically to Christians on the nature and imperative of Jewish nationalism:

Quote:

For Christians, the first priority may be theological self-understanding. For Jews it is, and after Auschwitz must be, simple safety for their children. In pursuit of this goal, Jews seek - are morally required to seek - independence of other people's charity. They therefore seek safety - are morally required to seek it - through the existence of a Jewish state. Except among the theologically or humanly perverse, Zionism - the commitment to the safety and genuine sovereignty of the State of Israel - is not negotiable.

Even if I held views on theological responsibilities and believed confidently there were such things, I wouldn't have the competence to express them and this blog wouldn't be the place for them. But I do hold that there is a political and human responsibility to support the safety and genuine sovereignty of the State of Israel, on the compelling grounds that what happened in the middle of the last century must not happen again. There are many fronts on which those who attempt to deny Israel's legitimacy mount their campaign; the linguistic is not the least important of them.
October 11, 2003 | Permalink

http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2003/10/john_pilger_def.html

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 2 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe