Why keep responding to useless non-benificial, stagnant troll threads that arbitrarily state things like 'X aren't black' or unintelligently pre-suppose that "American use of one drop rule make them reckon Egypt was black"?
Their thoughtlessly stated concepts of blackness and strawman (<- distractionary & substance lacking) accusations only serve to distract from one very crucial thing:
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): Why I call this thread a 'troll thread':
It's actually closer to a dumb thread, but either way:
* The initial thesis relies on strawmen: pre-conceived notions of what African Americans are, and what they consider 'black'.
quote:Originally posted by What Box:
In this thread oblivious and simpletons communicate as if African Americans don't understand that black is a social label.
Most Afro Americans are actually highly aware of this fact.
In fact, my lighter brethren, just like lighter Africans from Somalia or Egypt, often express that they're "black, but not black" (their skin color is isn't like ... that of the ancient "Egyptian" forces posted above ).
Even [what we call] yellow skinned people have been teasingly called 'white' however it's not really significant who we jokingly or teasingly call white or black cuz even people who "act a certain way" that contradicts preconceived and likely racist notions of how "a black person should" act are called white, even the blackest. (rasol and Yonis whether white or black have been called white here).
Yet we also say "I'm lightskin but I'm still black" and will call white skinned African Americans .. "white".
^Now that you guys have me actually thinking about it, I thought about it .. but then given the fact that there are multiple genes that affect complection, and infinite shades, I think the above bolded makes the most sense.
Black people, are all, significantly melanated people.
Like the Greeks thought. The peoples they designated white may appear not to have significant pigment (but do have minimal melanin).
They [Greeks] considered themselves neither black nor white, which I agree with, because in general I'd say Southern Europeans aren't significantly melanated.
You may disagree, and decide to limit white/black at another spot, like somewhere in South Eastern Asia.
As a social label...it just all depends on where you choose to delimit black.
Scientifically --> white can't be delimited, and neither can black unless you limit in your definition of black, absolute black.
*************************************************
Now, back to ancient Kemet and its people...
Imhotep:
Make-up box:
Sports:
Sebek, god:
A peculiar painting, in that I haven't seen many done in a similar style (the particular way in which it pops out atcha!
^By the way, yes ... personally I consider the above young lady 'black'. Though IMHO she's close to the range where I wouldn't necissarily consider her 'black' or not.
At ANY RATE, will we please quit creating these simple threads, asking the SAME OLD questions that have been answered on this board a dozen times?
Either way, they were biologically tropically adapted Africans with lineages that find their origin in 'sub-saharan' Africa and ultimately get to 'Egypt' via the Sahara and South in general .. as if the Sahara in reality delimits Africa.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Alive-(What Box), thanks for the info . is the 'sports' picture actually karate? and can you direct me to the thread that discusses the modern day restoration of the AE reliefs etc that might have actually lighten their color. i remember reading it once but cant seem to find it again.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
There is actually a few threads that discuss African confrontations, and a few martial arts threads as well as an East Asian martial arts thread too.
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): Why keep responding to useless non-benificial, stagnant troll threads that arbitrarily state things like 'X aren't black' or unintelligently pre-suppose that "American use of one drop rule make them reckon Egypt was black"?
Evergreen Writes:
Typically people respond to these types of threads because they lack the technical knowledge of how to define the melanin levels indigenous to Africa.
There seems to be a range of melanin that is restricted to Africa and tropical Asia. Furthermore the melanin levels indigenous to tropical Asia seem to have been inheirited by immigrants during the original out-of-Africa migration and did not evolve insitu in tropical Asia.
Define this range and the non-sense ends.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
^ Agreed, but only if the people you are speaking of are intelligent enough to understand.
Currently on ES, this is often not the case.
I would also suggest that it is a mistake to try to reduce ethnic reference to color to any 'objectified' concept.
The way I end the nonsense of mongrel-centrist salassin is by demanding that he 'objectively/scientifically' define his concept of mixed: 'he doesn't have one'.
The way I destroy another another anti-Black poster who calls himself and 'afro-jew', is to demand that he objectively define jew. [does there exist 'pure jew' with 'no' gentile blood? if not, then what right does anyone have to use the term jew].
The way I destroy Amr1's Arabization brainwash babblings is by forcing him to objectively define Arab, and then explain why Arabs still refer to 'him' as Abeed, and what exactly does Abeed mean to him, and to other pseudo-Arabs like him?
I have noticed that these trolls always run away from me, and seek certain other posters whom they feel are weak, and can be baited.
Black as and ethnic reference literally speaks for itself.
That is - *it is one of the single most commonly used ethnic references* referring to dark skinned peoples in the history of the world.
It is still relevant because of this.
It is hated and reviled by white supremacists, confused mongrels, and self hating Africans....because of this.
There is thread after thread devoted TO Black, and not TO *any other ethnic concept*..... because of this.
Therefore all the threads meant to 'deny' Blackness by whatever sophistry are ultimately self defeating.
Though the people who start such threads are typically quite stupid, and don't grasp this. [post]
Black -> always was, still is, and always will be. [long after the last brainwashed self hating Afro-Arab has destroyed themselves - in the name of Allah..... see current Sudan]
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
^ Which is why you will never see the following threads.
Mixed defined.
Arab defined.
AfroJew defined.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
KHARTOUM, Sudan May 9, 2008 Hundreds of rebels from war-ravaged Darfur clashed with Sudanese security forces on the doorstep of the capital Saturday in a dramatic widening of the five-year-old conflict.
It was the first foray into the seat of the Sudanese government by a rebel group once confined to the western region, which is deeply scarred by the struggle between the ethnic African rebels and the Arab-dominated central government.
The country's interior minister said government forces successfully "chased" away the rebels by nightfall, about three hours after the first outbreak of violence, and killed a rebel leader and his aide. State television showed footage of the fighters in handcuffs and soldiers driving confiscated jeeps through empty streets, saluting colleagues standing at attention.
But a rebel leader denied his fighters suffered heavy casualties and said some took up positions inside Khartoum, while others remained in its twin city, Omdurman.
"They will continue their mission," rebel spokesman Ahmed Hussain told The Associated Press. "They successfully destroyed a lot of tanks." -AP
Posted by Evergreen (Member # 12192) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol: I would also suggest that it is a mistake to try to reduce ethnic reference to color to any 'objectified' concept.
Evergreen Writes:
I agree with most of your statement. However, I can only partially agree with the specific comment above. In relation to indigenous Africans and tropical Asians there is a specific threshold as it relates to melanin level (excluding Albinos).
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol: KHARTOUM, Sudan May 9, 2008 Hundreds of rebels from war-ravaged Darfur clashed with Sudanese security forces on the doorstep of the capital Saturday in a dramatic widening of the five-year-old conflict.
It was the first foray into the seat of the Sudanese government by a rebel group once confined to the western region, which is deeply scarred by the struggle between the ethnic African rebels and the Arab-dominated central government.
The country's interior minister said government forces successfully "chased" away the rebels by nightfall, about three hours after the first outbreak of violence, and killed a rebel leader and his aide. State television showed footage of the fighters in handcuffs and soldiers driving confiscated jeeps through empty streets, saluting colleagues standing at attention.
But a rebel leader denied his fighters suffered heavy casualties and said some took up positions inside Khartoum, while others remained in its twin city, Omdurman.
"They will continue their mission," rebel spokesman Ahmed Hussain told The Associated Press. "They successfully destroyed a lot of tanks." -AP
Rasol, isn't that quote you highlighted indicative of the deliberate confusion between terms such "black" "African" and "Arab" in NA?
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Agreed, but only if the people you are speaking of are intelligent enough to understand.
Currently on ES, this is often not the case.
I, and I'm sure others on the site are very interested in this science.
I agree that "blackness" can be defined as a specific threshold and functional characteristics of melanin content.
Please be a teacher and enlighten us on your specific scientific understanding on the matter.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
^ This statement makes no sense.
You offer your opinion, then you tell *me* to enlighten you with regards to it.
Please rewrite and try to make sense. Passive aggressive trolling is cowardly and weak.
It 'gets no play' from me.
If you're scared to support your own claims, then just post a graphic of a frightened child, representing yourself, and spare us the boring words.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
quote:Originally posted by rasol: KHARTOUM, Sudan May 9, 2008 Hundreds of rebels from war-ravaged Darfur clashed with Sudanese security forces on the doorstep of the capital Saturday in a dramatic widening of the five-year-old conflict.
It was the first foray into the seat of the Sudanese government by a rebel group once confined to the western region, which is deeply scarred by the struggle between the ethnic African rebels and the Arab-dominated central government.
The country's interior minister said government forces successfully "chased" away the rebels by nightfall, about three hours after the first outbreak of violence, and killed a rebel leader and his aide. State television showed footage of the fighters in handcuffs and soldiers driving confiscated jeeps through empty streets, saluting colleagues standing at attention.
But a rebel leader denied his fighters suffered heavy casualties and said some took up positions inside Khartoum, while others remained in its twin city, Omdurman.
"They will continue their mission," rebel spokesman Ahmed Hussain told The Associated Press. "They successfully destroyed a lot of tanks." -AP
Rasol, isn't that quote you highlighted indicative of the deliberate confusion between terms such "black" "African" and "Arab" in NA?
^ translation: I can't deal with the reality of what is happening in Sudan.
I want to pretend there is no racism among "Arabs".
So I will try to deflect the conversation back to North America. Abeed has no meaning in North America, I asked you what it means in Arabic, and why Black pseudo-Arabs are referred to as such throughout Arabia.
Did you answer the question?
Why didn't you answer?
Another phony coward.
Another weak 'reply'.
Keep running.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ This statement makes no sense.
You offer your opinion, then you tell *me* to enlighten you with regards to it.
Please rewrite and try to make sense. Passive aggressive trolling is cowardly and weak.
It 'gets no play' from me.
If you're scared to support your own claims, then just post a graphic of a frightened child, representing yourself, and spare us the boring words.
Sure it makes perfect sense.
From the material I've reviewed, I'm inclined to believe that melanin content makes all the difference as far physical evidence is concerned.
By no means am I a Biologist or a student of Biorganic Chemistry. Nor do I pretend to be one. Still, like others I am very interested in the many examples of melanin and it's function in the human system (eyes, ears, skin, hair, brain, nervous system, reproduction, etc.) and how it contributes to life in varying concentrations and forms.
You implied you possess additional "advanced" knowledge in this area, and I simply asked that you share it so that others might learn or even contribute to it.
I'm very interested in the occurance an connection of leprosy, Melanoma and low fertility rates associated with low melanin concentrations. Many billions of dollars annually are being invested in developing melanin enhancements to counteract these symptoms.
Would you know when the first encounters with leprosy were recorded in Africa? Was the balm or oitment Jesus used on the lepers a form of sun screen to ease symptoms of sun burn? Were there simuliar large scale outbreaks recorded in Ancient Egyptian or African record?
The earliest Egyptian record I've found was not too far back and only dates back to approximately 1600 B.C. where supposedly The Edwin Smith Papyrus, describes 8 cases of tumors or ulcers of the breast that were treated by cauterization, with a tool called "the fire drill." The writing says about the disease, "There is no treatment", but it does not say who the patients were and who wrote the diagnoses.
Next record is from the Greek physician Hippocrates (460-370 B.C.), where Hippocrates used the terms carcinos to describe skin cancer tumors and refers to the condition as, carcinoma or crab,
Are you aware of any additional sources from earlier periods prior to rome?
I can post some pictures of molecular structures and distribution sites if you wish.
Some Melanin information can be found on these leading African researchers in Melanin, including Dr. Leonard Jeffries, Dr. Rosalind Jeffries, Dr. Richard King, Dr Ann Brown, Bro Carol Barnes, Dr. Kweku Andoh, Runoko Rashidi, Dr. Edward Bynum, Bro. Phillip Kelan Cohran, Prof. James Small, Bro. Phil Valentine, Bro. Bobby Hemmitt, Bro. Anthony Browder, Dr. K. Kia, Bunseki Fukiau.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:
Sure it makes perfect sense.
From the material I've reviewed, I'm inclined to believe that melanin content makes all the difference as far physical evidence is concerned.
Actually this makes no sense, as you are asking me to elaborate on 'your inclinations'.
You clearly intend to waste my time.
won't happen, next...
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Evergreen wrote: There seems to be a range of melanin that is restricted to Africa and tropical Asia. Furthermore the melanin levels indigenous to tropical Asia seem to have been inheirited by immigrants during the original out-of-Africa migration and did not evolve insitu in tropical Asia.
Define this range and the non-sense ends.
Rasol responded: ^ Agreed, but only if the people you are speaking of are intelligent enough to understand.
Currently on ES, this is often not the case.
As if you possess some superior knowledge of melanin research that others here cannot comprehend.
I guess I read far too much in your statement hoping you had some knowledge in the area. Instead, I only accomplished wasting my time. It shall not happen again. Peace Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
quote:Originally posted by rasol: KHARTOUM, Sudan May 9, 2008 Hundreds of rebels from war-ravaged Darfur clashed with Sudanese security forces on the doorstep of the capital Saturday in a dramatic widening of the five-year-old conflict.
It was the first foray into the seat of the Sudanese government by a rebel group once confined to the western region, which is deeply scarred by the struggle between the ethnic African rebels and the Arab-dominated central government.
The country's interior minister said government forces successfully "chased" away the rebels by nightfall, about three hours after the first outbreak of violence, and killed a rebel leader and his aide. State television showed footage of the fighters in handcuffs and soldiers driving confiscated jeeps through empty streets, saluting colleagues standing at attention.
But a rebel leader denied his fighters suffered heavy casualties and said some took up positions inside Khartoum, while others remained in its twin city, Omdurman.
"They will continue their mission," rebel spokesman Ahmed Hussain told The Associated Press. "They successfully destroyed a lot of tanks." -AP
Rasol, isn't that quote you highlighted indicative of the deliberate confusion between terms such "black" "African" and "Arab" in NA?
^ translation: I can't deal with the reality of what is happening in Sudan.
I want to pretend there is no racism among "Arabs".
So I will try to deflect the conversation back to North America. Abeed has no meaning in North America, I asked you what it means in Arabic, and why Black pseudo-Arabs are referred to as such throughout Arabia.
Did you answer the question?
Why didn't you answer?
Another phony coward.
Another weak 'reply'.
Keep running.
LOL Clearly you are under a lot of stress, for whatever reasons. You are imputing motives on my part that are simply not true. I just asked a simple question. Maybe you should calm down, screaming and misinterpreting posters like a little child only shows how insecure you are.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
^^Well I wouldn't exactly put it like that, unless I were in your shoes, but I definitely agree that rasol perhaps read too far into it.
Can you expound further as to what you meant?
The Sudanse civil war is sick because the government would do such a thing, but one of the driving factors is the demented Arabization of Northern Sudaneze.
The victims range from Muslim to christian, and all are black. Rape victims are not only female, but male as well.
Not all Northern Sudanese have this ****ed up view at all, many (younger at least) do not.
It is definitely one ofthose things I've been paying more and more attention to, and thinking more and more about.
Though, I believe alTakruri has pointed out that ethnic strife of this level (only purhaps lesser because of less guns) has been going on since the time the native Nile Valley cultures were still at play.
Most ethnic 'Arabs' are just Arab so they can claim descent from the Profit.
Just thought about something: for many Arabized Africans (Not all North/East ones, and all not North/East ones), Kemet can't be black, leave for some Nubians, yet they [including 'Nubians'] can be of Arab descent.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
I meant to say that the article is typical of the misleading western press releases in regards to the conflict. By separating "black", "Arab" and "African" it is giving the impression that the conflict is racial and it is not.
As for my personal views on the conflict, I don't think it is mainly the result of the Arab chauvinism by the government. I remember watching a C-Span coverage of the Sudanese Ambassador to the US, last year I think, where he sited land and water resources as the main reasons for the recent conflict. It would be good if someone could look for it and post it here. I cant seem to find it anywhere.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
Alive-(What Box) wrote:
quote: ^^Well I wouldn't exactly put it like that, unless I were in your shoes, but I definitely agree that rasol perhaps read too far into it.
Can you expound further as to what you meant?
The Sudanse civil war is sick because the government would do such a thing, but one of the driving factors is the demented Arabization of Northern Sudaneze.
The victims range from Muslim to christian, and all are black. Rape victims are not only female, but male as well.
Not all Northern Sudanese have this ****ed up view at all, many (younger at least) do not.
It is definitely one ofthose things I've been paying more and more attention to, and thinking more and more about.
Though, I believe alTakruri has pointed out that ethnic strife of this level (only purhaps lesser because of less guns) has been going on since the time the native Nile Valley cultures were still at play.
Most ethnic 'Arabs' are just Arab so they can claim descent from the Profit.
Just thought about something: for many Arabized Africans (Not all North/East ones, and all not North/East ones), Kemet can't be black, leave for some Nubians, yet they [including 'Nubians'] can be of Arab descent.
I don't have the time to dole out the beatdown your butler ass deserves. But I'll just make this quick statement:
What do you know about what's going on in Sudan? Your spooky tooth ass lives in 'Yompton' in the middle of the projects. The only time your dumb ass leaves 'Yompton' is when its time to go see your parole officer.
Word of advice Jeeves, TeeVee ain't real. I know that you don't understand because of your current social status in America. And rasol is just a bitter widdle biddy social misfit that doesn't have anything else going for him except:
Ejupt is black, Ejupt is black, Ejupt is black
Which is why he gets pissed off when someone says they don't go by that title. Which is funny, because until the Boer's came and made his sorry ass go by that title, most South Africans did not go by the moniker of "black".
Somebody needs to tell Oprah to come and get the motherfucker because he's playing hooky from one of her schools.
Now go back to serving those h'orderves Jeeves.
Posted by Wolofi (Member # 14892) on :
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: Alive-(What Box) wrote:
quote: ^^Well I wouldn't exactly put it like that, unless I were in your shoes, but I definitely agree that rasol perhaps read too far into it.
Can you expound further as to what you meant?
The Sudanse civil war is sick because the government would do such a thing, but one of the driving factors is the demented Arabization of Northern Sudaneze.
The victims range from Muslim to christian, and all are black. Rape victims are not only female, but male as well.
Not all Northern Sudanese have this ****ed up view at all, many (younger at least) do not.
It is definitely one ofthose things I've been paying more and more attention to, and thinking more and more about.
Though, I believe alTakruri has pointed out that ethnic strife of this level (only purhaps lesser because of less guns) has been going on since the time the native Nile Valley cultures were still at play.
Most ethnic 'Arabs' are just Arab so they can claim descent from the Profit.
Just thought about something: for many Arabized Africans (Not all North/East ones, and all not North/East ones), Kemet can't be black, leave for some Nubians, yet they [including 'Nubians'] can be of Arab descent.
I don't have the time to dole out the beatdown your butler ass deserves. But I'll just make this quick statement:
What do you know about what's going on in Sudan? Your spooky tooth ass lives in 'Yompton' in the middle of the projects. The only time your dumb ass leaves 'Yompton' is when its time to go see your parole officer.
Word of advice Jeeves, TeeVee ain't real. I know that you don't understand because of your current social status in America. And rasol is just a bitter widdle biddy social misfit that doesn't have anything else going for him except:
Ejupt is black, Ejupt is black, Ejupt is black
Which is why he gets pissed off when someone says they don't go by that title. Which is funny, because until the Boer's came and made his sorry ass go by that title, most South Africans did not go by the moniker of "black".
Somebody needs to tell Oprah to come and get the motherfucker because he's playing hooky from one of her schools.
Now go back to serving those h'orderves Jeeves.
^^^Brilliant analysis!!
quote:What do you know about what's going on in Sudan? Your spooky tooth ass lives in 'Yompton' in the middle of the projects. The only time your dumb ass leaves 'Yompton' is when its time to go see your parole officer
LOL!!! Just plain hilarious!! Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Well I think there is more to this war it's racial. I remember reading from some of the rape victims that the Soldiers would bring women along and they would say this is happening because you are Black and call them abeed. Also the soldiers would tear up the Africans Koran and burn down there mosques and ask them where is there God. This shows that the "ARab" soldiers did not feel that the Africans were the same as them and were not worshipping Allah like them. So they felt no shame to destroy there Koran and burn down there Mosques. So much for muslim unity.
Also it is quite sad that these same "Arabs" will go to other muslim countries and get mocked and called black and abeed. I guess they feeling inferior to these "Real" Arabs decide to take there anger out on the people who identify as Africans. So the slight difference they have with the Africans, is more then enough to have no consience and kill there own people and feel no shame, this is how they let off steam from not being accepted as "True" Arabs. They take there anger out on there own people.
Also I heard the the sudanese soldiers use to rape little boys in southern sudan but if they are doing the same thing in darfur then it is clearly a racial war. They are raping boys to disenfranchise them, to break there spirit. So they grow up ashamed and confused and feel they have nothing to offer there people. Rape tactics in war is meant to break the spirit of the people, they target women and children because women bring life into the world and children are the future, it's a form of corruption.
All this needs to stop hatred for a fellow human is disgusting, and targeting women and children in this war is evil. We need to show these people what unites them instead of what divides them. We are all *HUMAN* we need to change the mentallity of these people. Love is the most powerful weapon God gives us. We must spread love not war.
Peace
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
King aka Frosty aka Powder wrote:
quote:
Repeating the fantasies that he and his fellow frosties and powders have about Africa. You know they jump out of them wrinkly skins they have when they dream up these lies and baseless delusions.
You want to know what is racial Powder?
Your inch and a half wee wee is racial.
Your thick, baggy, ability to cover a second human being skin is racial.
Your chimpanzee like lips is racial.
Your 27 year old looking like they're in their 50s women is racial.
Have a good nights rest Powder. : )
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: Well I think there is more to this war it's racial. I remember reading from some of the rape victims that the Soldiers would bring women along and they would say this is happening because you are Black and call them abeed. Also the soldiers would tear up the Africans Koran and burn down there mosques and ask them where is there God. This shows that the "ARab" soldiers did not feel that the Africans were the same as them and were not worshipping Allah like them. So they felt no shame to destroy there Koran and burn down there Mosques. So much for muslim unity.
Also it is quite sad that these same "Arabs" will go to other muslim countries and get mocked and called black and abeed. I guess they feeling inferior to these "Real" Arabs decide to take there anger out on the people who identify as Africans. So the slight difference they have with the Africans, is more then enough to have no consience and kill there own people and feel no shame, this is how they let off steam from not being accepted as "True" Arabs. They take there anger out on there own people.
Also I heard the the sudanese soldiers use to rape little boys in southern sudan but if they are doing the same thing in darfur then it is clearly a racial war. They are raping boys to disenfranchise them, to break there spirit. So they grow up ashamed and confused and feel they have nothing to offer there people. Rape tactics in war is meant to break the spirit of the people, they target women and children because women bring life into the world and children are the future, it's a form of corruption.
All this needs to stop hatred for a fellow human is disgusting, and targeting women and children in this war is evil. We need to show these people what unites them instead of what divides them. We are all *HUMAN* we need to change the mentallity of these people. Love is the most powerful weapon God gives us. We must spread love not war.
Peace
The scenario you painted does not support your assertion that it is racial. From your alleged story it is clear one set of blacks feel inferior to white Arabs so they take out their anger on another group of blacks. That is not racial. In war first casualty is truth, stories of alleged brutality are not restricted to the Government side, so any discussion of the conflict that focuses solely on the government and the Janjaweed is just propaganda as far as I am concerned.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
^I think what he meant was that the incident was sparked by racism. Basically, the effects of the racism on the "wannabe" arabs minds lead them to kill their own brothers.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
that agile is a funny bastard.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by HORUS^*^: ^I think what he meant was that the incident was sparked by racism. Basically, the effects of the racism on the "wannabe" arabs minds lead them to kill their own brothers.
if one group of self hating blacks feel the need to attack another group of blacks it is not racism no matter how you put it. mind you all this is of course assuming the story he presented is true.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
akoben08
Please tell me the other side of the conflict.
If you think raping of women and children is just propaganda please tell me what have you read that the Ethnic Africans have done to the women and children of the janjaweed and Government.
Understand that I realize both sides are Black but it still is racism I think because the difference is that the Government views itself as "Arabs" and the stories of the women being raped and called racist names is known. The rape of males is news to me because you heard stories of the same thing happened in the south of sudan where they were raping little boys. Do you deny that this kind of rape is used to demoralise and corrupt the future(Children) and make them not reach there full potential. Rape tactics are used to break the spirit of the people being attacked when they target the children you know the main reason is to corrupt the future of these people so the children don't grow up to be leaders of their community, it's called get them young. Corrupt them young so they cannot make a difference.
I will be interested in your reply.
Peace
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
KING wrote:
quote: Please tell me the other side of the conflict.
If you think raping of women and children is just propaganda please tell me what have you read that the Ethnic Africans have done to the women and children of the janjaweed and Government.
Understand that I realize both sides are Black but it still is racism I think because the difference is that the Government views itself as "Arabs" and the stories of the women being raped and called racist names is known. The rape of males is news to me because you heard stories of the same thing happened in the south of sudan where they were raping little boys. Do you deny that this kind of rape is used to demoralise and corrupt the future(Children) and make them not reach there full potential. Rape tactics are used to break the spirit of the people being attacked when they target the children you know the main reason is to corrupt the future of these people so the children don't grow up to be leaders of their community, it's called get them young. Corrupt them young so they cannot make a difference.
I will be interested in your reply.
Peace
You pink pillowy pasty sucker what do you know about the conflict outside of white news media?
You damn yettis are always sitting on your dead asses fantasizing about Africans and these supposedly non Africans that only exist in your deranged fantasies fighting. Notice they never tell you that it is a civil war, they never tell you that there is a power struggle within the government that is one if not the main reason of the conflict. They never tell you what the rebel groups are doing to their own people. They never tell you that these groups from the south, west, and east are also members of the Sudanese government.
Its always these fantasy poor old helpless Africans with these faceless dreamland non-Africans that they hardly ever show. As if you can't go and find out what these people look like. They've been claiming genocide for the past 5-10-15+ years. These so called poor old helpless Africans should be extinct by now shouldn't they?
Notice a pattern they basically take their race fantasies and paste them onto Africans to boost the self-esteem of their worthless whites hides.
These freaks never go into how the people in eastern Sudan have also been fighting a war and how the people of northern Sudan have also had grievances and disturbances with the government. And the reason is that it fucks up their racial hierarchy fantasies. You know the blacks vs. the non-blacks. You see in their crazed minds the northern Sudanese are more African than the eastern Sudanese (as if the eastern Sudanese are not Africans ("black"). The same with Mali.
They do this time and time again, whether it is Uganda, Nigeria, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Niger, Chad, Sudan, Mauritania, and others. These folks over here are Africans and these folks over here aren't. These people over here are "black" and these people over here aren't.
Frosty take your ass and worry about them Russian barishnakovs and get them wrinkles off your face.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: akoben08
Please tell me the other side of the conflict.
If you think raping of women and children is just propaganda please tell me what have you read that the Ethnic Africans have done to the women and children of the janjaweed and Government.
Understand that I realize both sides are Black but it still is racism I think because the difference is that the Government views itself as "Arabs" and the stories of the women being raped and called racist names is known. The rape of males is news to me because you heard stories of the same thing happened in the south of sudan where they were raping little boys. Do you deny that this kind of rape is used to demoralise and corrupt the future(Children) and make them not reach there full potential. Rape tactics are used to break the spirit of the people being attacked when they target the children you know the main reason is to corrupt the future of these people so the children don't grow up to be leaders of their community, it's called get them young. Corrupt them young so they cannot make a difference.
I will be interested in your reply.
Peace
Your emotional and confused reaction to my post tells me that you might not be really interested in my reply. But I will give it anyway. I never said raping of women and children were propaganda, I said focusing on one side is propaganda. You see appealing to emotions through atrocity tales is nothing new in war. That you have not heard of (or pretend to not hear) the killings of civilians, government troops, aid works (mostly Sudanese), and AU troops by some of the rebel groups is understandable since you sound like a Mia Farrow type activist. The fact that you cling to ridiculous and misleading terms such as "ethnic African" and still see the conflict as "racial", even though you admit they are all blacks, is symptomatic of the type of desperation the propagandists are now reduce to.
I think the aim is clear, to appeal to emotion to garner support so as to overthrow Sudanese government (just coming out of a decades old conflict) or at least destabilize the country, just as in the DRC. And it is working as the rebels, egged on by the west, are now trying to destroy the capital; this I must support because I as black nationalist I have a problem with Arab chauvinism? Certainly not.
Besides from my readings and following the conflict I am not prepared to believe it is about Arabisation. As a result I am willing to go with the Sudanese ambassador that the recent conflict is over water and land, since resources are always source of conflicts anyway. The "race" and "genocide" part is just a cover to garner support. Same with Rwanda, "genocide" is propaganda, not fact.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
akoben08 argyle104
All right I admit that I mostly hear one side of the story. That of the "Africans" being attacked by "Arabs" Understand that I "Know" that both sides are Black and African. All I am saying is that if this war was really just over land and water then why do we hear stories of Women and Children being raped. What do they have to do with the conflict. You don't think rape tactics are used against women and children to disefranchise and crush there spirit. Raping Children hurts the future generation.
Is there proof that the Rebels are also raping women and children? Yes I will agree with you that there are probably atrocities on both sides.
Can you please tell me a little more about the civilians the Rebels have killed.
As for Argyle: Why are you so racist towards whites what does baggy skin or any of these ignorant and racist comments have to do with being white. Look beneath the skin and realize that we are all human and one people.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Rape is not unusual in war and the fact that it happens it doesn't make it racial conflict either. There are reports of autrocities on both sides. If you are really interested in getting a broader understanding of the conflict you could read issues of the New African magazine, check www.allafrica.com they have regular updates on African affairs and politics, including Darfur.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
akoben08
Peace and Blessings to you for the Links. This is all I wanted was a different view of things I will make sure to read these links. thanks. God Bless.
Peace
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by HORUS^*^: that agile is a funny bastard.
quote:This synopsis on argyle104 was Originally posted by Trollshredder:
quote:Originally posted by argay: I have no life
Your whinny posts tell me that you must have dick-milk for every breakfast, as well as an appetizer for lunch and dinner...which in any case, is never enough for you, as evidenced by the way you spend the bulk of your life in chatrooms, painstakingly seeking male attention with your never-ending queer calls at them.
These queer calls take the shape of gay potshots at any male who refuses to pay attention to you, and of course, from the safe distance of your keyboard.
The fitting name for you would thus be, the endlessly begging "keyboard queer queen". You can thank me later for bestowing upon you that long overdue title.
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
quote:Originally posted by HORUS^*^: ^I think what he meant was that the incident was sparked by racism. Basically, the effects of the racism on the "wannabe" arabs minds lead them to kill their own brothers.
if one group of self hating blacks feel the need to attack another group of blacks it is not racism no matter how you put it. mind you all this is of course assuming the story he presented is true.
Well, race is a social/political concept, so one could make the argument that the conflict is indeed 'racial'.
Which only makes the situation more sick, that it is indeed ethnic.
Look at Sudanese millitary, it's people, and even those who call themselves 'Arab'.
Some of these people are in need of some serious mental help.
quote:Originally posted by argyle:
You pink pillowy pasty sucker what do you know about the conflict outside of white news media?
You damn yettis are always sitting on your dead asses fantasizing about Africans and these supposedly non Africans that only exist in your deranged fantasies fighting. Notice they never tell you that it is a civil war, they never tell you that there is a power struggle within the government that is one if not the main reason of the conflict. They never tell you what the rebel groups are doing to their own people. They never tell you that these groups from the south, west, and east are also members of the Sudanese government.
Its always these fantasy poor old helpless Africans with these faceless dreamland non-Africans that they hardly ever show. As if you can't go and find out what these people look like. They've been claiming genocide for the past 5-10-15+ years. These so called poor old helpless Africans should be extinct by now shouldn't they?
Notice a pattern they basically take their race fantasies and paste them onto Africans to boost the self-esteem of their worthless whites hides.
These freaks never go into how the people in eastern Sudan have also been fighting a war and how the people of northern Sudan have also had grievances and disturbances with the government. And the reason is that it fucks up their racial hierarchy fantasies. You know the blacks vs. the non-blacks. You see in their crazed minds the northern Sudanese are more African than the eastern Sudanese (as if the eastern Sudanese are not Africans ("black"). The same with Mali.
They do this time and time again, whether it is Uganda, Nigeria, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Niger, Chad, Sudan, Mauritania, and others. These folks over here are Africans and these folks over here aren't. These people over here are "black" and these people over here aren't.
Frosty take your ass and worry about them Russian barishnakovs and get them wrinkles off your face.
You may be a no-life troll who's posts show sings of utter retardation, posted by a latent homosexual whore, yet I still agree with the above. Good analysis.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:If one group of self hating blacks feel the need to attack another group of blacks it is not racism no matter how you put it
^ Incorrect of course. Racism is exactly what you described.
Self hate is still hate.
Hate rooted in conception of race is racism.
The distinction between self-hate and hatred of others is largely superfluous.
The Nazi's [ultimate racists] killed millions of mostly white Europeans out of racism and hatred.
In disgust, Hitler finally killed himself.
Sudan's self distruction is likewise a monument to racism.
The main difference is that Hitler's racism is rooted in a fake ideology he called Aryanism [itself ultimately a stolen and perverted concept from non-white non Europeans].
Sudans racist ideology is called Arabisation.
Both Nazism and Arabisation are equally vile.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Evergreen wrote: Furthermore the melanin levels indigenous to tropical Asia seem to have been inheirited by immigrants during the original out-of-Africa migration and did not evolve insitu in tropical Asia.
Define this range and the non-sense ends.
Rasol responded: ^ Agreed, but only if the people you are speaking of are intelligent enough to understand.
Currently on ES, this is often not the case.
As if you possess some superior knowledge of melanin research that others here cannot comprehend.
I guess I read far too much in your statement hoping you had some knowledge in the area.
^ You read far too poorly, that's for sure.
quote:It shall not happen again. Peace.
Excellent. Peace to you as well. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Incorrect of course. Racism is exactly what you described.
No it's not if the two groups involved are black. Common sense please.
Self hate is still hate. Hate rooted in conception of race is racism.
By that flawed reasoning black on black gang violence (a product of self hatred) in the USA is a "racist conflict". Utter rubbish.
The distinction between self-hate and hatred of others is largely superflous.
Why?
The Nazi's [ultimate racists] killed millions of mostly white Europeans out of racism and hatred.
Don't be silly Nazis aren't the "ultimate racists", other whites (like British) killed far more nonwhites than them. Just because Nazis killed mainly white Jews and white people doesn't make them most evil anything. Shows how much you value non-white life. Plus Nazi problems with white Jews wasn't so much "race" but religion. Jews were allowed to join Nazi army as long as they saw themselves as German. Some Jews wanted to even join Nazi party like Ikshak Shamir. Real history is more complicated than simple propaganda.
Sudan's self distruction is likewise a monument to racism.
Disagree.
The main difference is that Hitler's racism is rooted in a fake ideology he called Aryanism [itself ultimately a stolen and perverted concept from non-white non Europeans].
Explain.
Sudans racist ideology is called Arabisation.
You are still living in the past. Today it is more complex, Arabisation is not at the heart of the current conflict. Again the real history is more complicated than emotional sound bites on CNN etc Stop being lazy and go do research.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: By that flawed reasoning black on black gang violence (a product of self hatred) in the USA is a "racist conflict". Utter rubbish.
Nah mate... I think perhaps your reasoning is a little flawed. To judge something, a phenomenon or whatever, you have to look to its ORIGINAL CAUSE. And, the original cause of "black on black gang violence in America" is racism. These young black teens have been TAUGHT by a RACIST SYSTEM at home (TV or damaged parents), in school and by society that they are worthless. And if that's all you're ever told since you've been born - what type of superhuman are you that you will not conform to your conditioning?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Amazing. So by this logic we can say all internecine violence wether over here or on the continent from Ivory Coast to South Africa should be seen as a "racial conflict" because they are products of colonial conditioning and self hatred. LOL Look man, stop stretching a useless argument whichever way to justify labelling the conflict in Sudan "racist". It is not.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: So by this logic we can say all internecine violence wether over here or on the continent from Ivory Coast to South Africa should be seen as a "racial conflict" because they are products of colonial conditioning and self hatred.
When ever did I say or imply or use any logic that says the violence in Ivory Coast to South Africa is or must-be caused by "racial conflict"? Stop putting words in my mouth akob. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Your inability to see your own reasoning applied to similar situations outside of black America and the Sudan is also amazing.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
^You're annoying.
My point is and has always been that the ethnic violence of the "arab blacks" versus the "black blacks" is rooted in racism. That is a FACT. I'm not trying to make any other point. YOU are.
Violence is happening all over the world. Some of it is caused by racism, some of it isn't. I really don't know what your point is.
You're just talking a whole bunch of nonesense.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
"arab blacks" versus the "black blacks".
Simply amazing; the intellectual gymnastics that has to be performed to justify casting the conflict in Sudan as racial. LOL
Look, put this in context. In response to Rasol insistence on viewing the situation in the Sudan in racial terms I said By that flawed reasoning black on black gang violence (a product of self hatred) in the USA is a "racist conflict". In response to this you agreed that black gang violence can indeed be viewed as racist because To judge something, a phenomenon or whatever, you have to look to its ORIGINAL CAUSE. And, the original cause of "black on black gang violence in America" is racism. These young black teens have been TAUGHT by a RACIST SYSTEM at home (TV or damaged parents), in school and by society that they are worthless. And if that's all you're ever told since you've been born - what type of superhuman are you that you will not conform to your conditioning?
I contend that based on this reasoning black on black violence in other parts of Africa would also have to be seen as a "racist conflict" as we are all products of colonial conditioning and self hatred. No word in mouth. If, however, you and Rasol want to argue that the Sudanese conflict and/or black gang violence in the US are examples of inter racial conflict then fine. But this is not what you all seem to be saying. Rasol insists on casing the conflict in Sudan in racial terms in order to propagandize against the "Arab" Sudanese government. But he is campaign is couple years too late, Arabsation has not been the main policy anymore since coalition government, and is not the driving force behind this correct conflict.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
^You're not too bright. I can understand how you can find what I'm saying Amazing. Let me break it down.
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
I contend that based on this reasoning black on black violence in other parts of Africa would also have to be seen as a "racist conflict" as we are all products of colonial conditioning and self hatred.
How the hell does racism's EFFECTS in Sudan and ghetto America lead to your contention that ALL the "black on black violence" in other parts of Africa is due to "racial conflict"?
In Nigeria, Yoruba people and Igbo people have fought each other over philosophical differences for God knows how long and they still do. Certainly before any "white" man showed up. For sure, they killed (and therefore "violated") each other. But it wasn't due to RACISM, it was not based on a perception of "race".
No, we Africans are not all products of self-hatred or colonial conditioning, FYI.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^You're not too bright. I can understand how you can find what I'm saying Amazing. Let me break it down...In Nigeria, Yoruba people and Igbo people have fought each other over philosophical differences for God knows how long and they still do. Certainly before any "white" man showed up. For sure, they killed (and therefore "violated") each other. But it wasn't due to RACISM, it was not based on a perception of "race".
In your swift retort you missed the part where I contexualised my African examples to colonialism. Hence conflicts in pre-colonial "Nigeria" is irrelevant. So I repeat I find yuo simply amazing. LOL
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
I never stated all the black on black violence in other parts of Africa is due to racial conflict. I said this is the conclusion that would have to reached based on your justification for labeling black gang violence in the US as a racist conflict because of white conditioning/brainwashing.
Arab is not a race, it is a culture. Arabsation is form of a cultural imperialism. But it is irrelevant to the current conflict.
No, we Africans are not all products of self-hatred or colonial conditioning, FYI.
Name one country that has escaped colonialism and neo-colonialism?
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: Incorrect of course. Racism is exactly what you described.
No it's not if the two groups involved are black. Common sense please.
So Dave Chapelle, in that one skit, where he's a clansmen who 'hates niggers' isn't "racist"?
Arabs who hate all Jews, though they have the same skin tone .. isn't racist?
'Uncle Ruckus' isn't racist?
Whatchu smokin?
That an act is racist doesn't depend on the 'race', ethnicity or even color of the perpetraiting agent, but on that of his victoms.
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
I contend that based on this reasoning black on black violence in other parts of Africa would also have to be seen as a "racist conflict" as we are all products of colonial conditioning and self hatred.
Actually, 'this reasoning' applies where hatred based on race, creed, or color is involved.
So know, that wouldn't necissarily make violence in other parts of Africa racist conflicts.
Think it's safe to say that Rwanda was a racist conflict.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: I never stated all the black on black violence in other parts of Africa is due to racial conflict. I said this is the conclusion that would have to reached based on your justification for labeling black gang violence in the US as a racist conflict because of white conditioning/brainwashing.
Arab is not a race, it is a culture. Arabsation is form of a cultural imperialism. But it is irrelevant to the current conflict.
No, we Africans are not all products of self-hatred or colonial conditioning, FYI.
Name one country that has escaped colonialism and neo-colonialism?
I did not label anything ... I never said arab was a race ... . But the Africans percieve race when they say ... never mind .
You're a confused child. And it is impossible to have a meaningful talk with you since the ideas in your head are still hazy and incoherent.
I will have to leave you be at this point. Come back and talk to me when you grow up a little bit more.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Arab chauvinism and white supremacy are two different ideologies. One rooted in racism other in culture (in Sudan). That you have white Arabs who are anti-black is not in doubt. But the problem you and the falcon god having is that you all see "Arab" as a race. Arab, Jew, these are culture/language groups not racial terms although they have been used as such in popular discourse especially in the west.
Arabs and Jews are Semites. Arab "racism" towards Jews, so-called anti-Semitism, is an accepted absurdity because of mass media anti-Arab hatred. Bear in mind, you have white Jews Ashkanzani who arent Semites who hate Arabs and black Jews, that is racism.
Rwanda 1994 was an ethic conflict, no such thing as Hutu or Tutsi race. Plus RPF and Interhamwe had both Tutsi and Hutus. Hotel Rwanda is Hollywood propaganda.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ sorry meant to say Rwanda 1994 was a political conflict
Posted by Jo Nongowa (Member # 14918) on :
^ Fact.
Posted by Jo Nongowa (Member # 14918) on :
And the conflict in Sudan is political/ethnic/territorial - NOT RACIAL!
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
"In the gacaca court, I told them how we killed our fellow men and I asked for forgiveness in front of the court and the whole district was there," Bizimana said.
"The people who died in this very area -- I knew all of them because they were our neighbors." Watch Bizimana describe how he killed Tutsis »
He places blame squarely on the extremist Hutu government at the time, and on vile radio broadcasts that urged on the killers during the 100-day slaughter.
"They were giving instructions all the time, that was from the government and so we thought it as the right thing because we were getting this instruction from the government," Bizimana said.
He showed where he and a Hutu mob had killed 25 people, including members of Mukantabana's family, a few yards from where he had just shared lunch with her. "We used machetes, hoes and wooden clubs," he told CNN.
^ What's your point?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ I think Meninarmer's point is that CNN and Amanpour gives accurate picture of conflicts in Africa. LOL
Meninarmer, if you want to understand African politics your research has to go beyond CNN. I can't believe after WMD debacle people still look to these news outlets for accurate information. Sad very sad.
Posted by Jo Nongowa (Member # 14918) on :
^ Co-sign.
Posted by Jo Nongowa (Member # 14918) on :
Case in Point: Hutu/Tutsi
The deadly power of the split between Hutu and Tutsi in central Africa is witnessed not only by the genocide of more than half a million carried out by Hutu extremists against Tutsi and moderate Hutu in Rwanda in 1994, but also by a long list of massacres by extremists on both sides in recent years, in Rwanda, in Burundi, and in eastern Congo.
Trying to understand this set of conflicts is as complex as trying to understand the Holocaust in Europe, or current conflicts in the Middle East or the Balkans. No outside framework or analogy to another region can substitute for understanding the particularities of the tangled recent history of the Great Lakes region. But one point is clear: there are few places in Africa where the common concept of "tribe" is so completely inappropriate as in this set of conflicts. Neither understanding nor coping with conflict is helped in the slightest by labelling the Hutu/Tutsi distinction as "tribal."
Before European conquest the Great Lakes region included a number of centralized, hierarchical and often warring kingdoms. The battle lines of pre-colonial wars, however, were not drawn between geographically and culturally distinct "Hutu" and "Tutsi" peoples.
Furthermore, within each unit, whether pre-colonial kingdom or the modern countries defined by colonial boundaries, Tutsi and Hutu speak the same language and share the same culture. Stereotypes identify the Tutsi as "pastoralists" and the Hutu as "agriculturalists," the Tutsi as "patrons" and the Hutu as "clients," or the Tutsi as "rulers" and the Hutu as "ruled." Some scholars have tried to apply the concept of "caste." Yet each of these frameworks also exaggerates the clarity of the distinction and reads back into history the stereotypes of current political conflict.
In two respects, such stereotypes are misleading. First, shared economic, social and religious practices attest to the fact that interaction was much more frequent, peaceful and cooperative than conflictual. Second, the historical evidence makes it clear that there was at least as much conflict among competing Tutsi dynasties as between Tutsi and Hutu polities.
What is clear from recent scholarship is that the dividing line between Hutu and Tutsi was drawn differently at different times and in different places. Thus, leading Burundi scholar Rene Lemarchand notes the use of the term "Hutu" to mean social subordinate: "a Tutsi cast in the role of client vis-a-vis a wealthier patron would be referred to as 'Hutu,' even though his cultural identity remained Tutsi" (Burundi: Ethnic Conflict and Genocide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, 10). But both "clients" and "patrons" could be either Hutu or Tutsi. There were Hutu as well as Tutsi who raised cattle. A family could move from one group to the other over generations as its political and economic situation changed.
As historian David Newbury notes, the term "Hutu" in pre- colonial times probably meant "those not previously under the effective rule of the court, and non-pastoralist (though many 'Hutu' in western Rwanda owned cattle, sometimes in important numbers)" (David Newbury, Kings and Clans. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1991, 277). More generally, the Tutsi/Hutu distinction seems to have made sense in relation to the political hierarchy of a kingdom. It accordingly differed, and changed, in accord with the political fortunes of the different kingdoms and with the degree of integration of different regions into those kingdoms.
Under colonial rule, first by the Germans and then by the Belgians, this hierarchical division was racialized and made more rigid. Ethnic identity cards were required, and the state discriminated in favor of Tutsi, who were considered to be closer to whites in the racial hierarchy. This was reinforced by versions of history portraying the Tutsi as a separate "Hamitic" people migrating into the region from the north and conquering the Bantu- speaking Hutu. In fact, current historical evidence is insufficent to confirm to what extent the distinction arose by migration and conquest or simply by social differentiation in response to internal economic and political developments.
In the post-colonial period, for extremists on both sides, the divide has come to be perceived as a racial division. Political conflicts and inequalities in the colonial period built on and reinforced stereotypes and separation. Successive traumatic conflicts in both Burundi and Rwanda entrenched them even further. Despite the efforts of many moderates and the existence of many extended families crossing the Hutu/Tutsi divide, extremist ideologies and fears are deadly forces. Far from being the product of ancient and immutable "tribal" distinctions, however, they are based above all in political rivalries and experiences of current generations.
[For a collection of articles introducing the complex Great Lakes crisis, see the Association of Concerned Africa Scholars Great Lakes Briefing Packet, December 1996 (available for US$9.00 from ACAS, 326 Lincoln Hall, 702 S. Wright St., Urbana, IL 68101; e-mail: acas@prairienet.org; web: http://www.prairienet.org/acas).] Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ thanks for this one.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ I think Meninarmer's point is that CNN and Amanpour gives accurate picture of conflicts in Africa. LOL
Meninarmer, if you want to understand African politics your research has to go beyond CNN. I can't believe after WMD debacle people still look to these news outlets for accurate information. Sad very sad.
I agree.
And for the record, I never said (or meant to say) the Sudanese conflict was racial as in literal Arabs/non-Africans vs. Africans.
I just meant racist, in the same way African Americans are often racist (it's often towards our very own).
Posted by Jo Nongowa (Member # 14918) on :
^ One cannot be racist towards their kind or 'own'.
Posted by Ima Trollman (Member # 15271) on :
horseshit
they sho can
a few black cops r > racist than most wyte cops
they act like plantation overseers to blax juss like kappos acted nazi to other jewz
i see it plenty nuff
quote:Originally posted by Jo Nongowa: ^ One cannot be racist towards their kind or 'own'.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jo Nongowa: ^ One cannot be racist towards their kind or 'own'.
I really don't know if you are African American or African but that comment is funny to me.
Don't know about Africans, but African American can and ARE racist against our "OWN". I have heard and seen AA call someone a shade darker than them..."Black" in a degrading way...compare certain AA to monkeys..ect. Rap music is FULL of self hate and mintrocity...the desire for long haired Light Skinned women...the ridiculous claim to have "Good Hair", ect
I don't know if it is racism but it sure is self hate.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ there you have it, it's an example of self hatred, not racism. argument done.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
Though I tire of off-topic discussion, akoben, please note that I do see your conern.
Saying this is a racist conflict can imply it is racial, as in, between to different -perhaps even biologically- peoples.
This isn't the case.
Posted by Habari (Member # 14738) on :
We are all Black, whether Asian, European or African, very light skin among humans is very recent, it appeared 20k years ago when humans moved in areas where the UV index was quite low...I don't care about the politics of Americas...but scientifically speaking we are all Black humans and some among us became lighter due to the environment we lived in...so white Americans and Black Americans have black ancestors...
Posted by Evergreen (Member # 12192) on :
quote:Originally posted by Habari: We are all Black, whether Asian, European or African, very light skin among humans is very recent, it appeared 20k years ago...
^^ What study are you basing this date on?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Habari: We are all Black, whether Asian, European or African, very light skin among humans is very recent, it appeared 20k years ago when humans moved in areas where the UV index was quite low...I don't care about the politics of Americas...but scientifically speaking we are all Black humans and some among us became lighter due to the environment we lived in...so white Americans and Black Americans have black ancestors...
Sounds like a nice humanist perspective but you don't seem to want to live in the real world where such things don't matter when it comes to how whites percieve us.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:One cannot be racist towards their kind or 'own'.
sigh.
all racism is against one's 'own' kind.
the notion of 'kinds of races' is by definition a contrivance.
One day a man is a German, the next day according to racist tenants of the NAZI's he a Jew and therefore by defintion a racial enemy of the German race.
One day a man is a Rwandan - the next day he wakes up and is a Tutsi invader and an enemy of the rightful Hutu owners of Rwanda.
You must learn to see past the fog of race.
Those who cannot or will not are trapped by and will repeat the deadly mistakes of history...over and over.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
all racism is against one's 'own' kind. One day a man is a Rwandan - the next day he wakes up and is a Tutsi invader and an enemy of the rightful Hutu owners of Rwanda.
There are no Hutu or Tutsi races, don't be a fool...oh it's you, ok fine be yourself.
One day a man is a German, the next day according to racist tenants of the NAZI's he a Jew and therefore by defintion a racial enemy of the German race.
Nazi porblems with Jews were more about religion not "race". Jews financed his programs, were in his army and wanted to join his party, go ask your friend Itshak Shamir.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): Saying this is a racist conflict can imply it is racial, as in, between to different -perhaps even biologically- peoples.
^ I understand what you are trying to say, however this is and error.
Racism is and irrational ideology.
Racial conflicts are the result of this ideology.
That is as true of the Arabisation of the Sudanese as it is of the Apartheid of the Dutch Boers.
Biologically Boer and Bantu are no more 'races' than Arab and African.
To pretend that Apartheid South Africa is ideologically racist, but that Arabisation Sudan is not, is simply a form of self delusion.
Apartheid is racism.
Arabisation is racism.
Now, those who don't like hearing this, can feel free to make their best excuses, for which the Arabisation racists are eternally grateful.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Nazi porblems with Jews were more about religion not "race".
^ Wrong.
Nazi's included both Christians and pagans, who rejected Christianity precisely because it is a Judaic faith, and there were many atheist Nazi's as well.
Many of the ethnic Jewish victims were atheists also...which would not spare them.
Nazi's put millions of Christian [Poles, Russians, whom they regarded as RACIALLY INFERIOR SLAVIC PEOPLES] to death also.
Nazi's were extremely cynical about religion, which they used but did not particularly advocate.
Nazi's "believed" in racial purity, and murdered millions in order to racially purify Germany.
Nazism is by definition a racist philosophy, not a theocrisy.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
lol Little Rasol ranting away as usual when he doesn't understand a topic. As expected you completely went over the issue. Nazism was never a religious movement so telling me about Nazi Christians, pagans, atheists and also how ethnic Jewish victims were atheists is besides the point (they became targets being partisians), only trolling...opps you do it too?
The period of World War Two is more complex than your kindergarten reading and Holocaust propaganda. Zionism and Nazi collaboration showed that Hitler's main problem with the Jews had to do with their refusal to assimilate, the age old problem in Europe. He was happy to work with Zionists on Jewish emigration to Palestine. While those who saw themselves as German would join the army and as I said some even wanted to join his party. Coupled with the fact of Jewish bankers bankrolling his regime, it is obvious that the "racial ideology" against Jews is misplaced. Please don't run and quote from Mein Kamf, the book he wrote before he came to power and back tracked on many of his rants.
To pretend that Apartheid South Africa is ideologically racist, but that Arabisation Sudan is not, is simply a form of self delusion.
A fair comparison you think? Were there any black Boers discriminating against blacks during Apartheid little Rasol? Come now stop being an irrational...oh its you, ok fine be yourself.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Yes, Nazi policy of Jewish ethnic cleansing was "racist".
And yes, racist dogma relies precisely on its irrationality so as to allow its enablers to preside over and cover its true intention: that is, to effectively divide the working proletariat, and render it adequately weak to pose a serious "threat" to the social order of the powers that be.
As to question of Jewish scapegoating in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, the following quote may well be instructive...
"By the 1870s, the Jews appeared as the bourgeois par excellence in a society that was still not fully embourgeoised, as innovative modernizers in a nation that was not yet modernized." - Robert Wistrich, Socialism and the Jews: The Dilemmas of Assimilation in Germany and Austria-Hungary
^Jews were earlier targets of resentment for the perceived Jewish "exclusive collectivism" and hence, for their inadequate assimilation into the broader European society; yet as the citation above makes clear, they also became targets of resentment for having "successfully" assimilated into the European societies, to the point of doing reasonably well from a socio-economic standpoint.
And to quote the words of a reactionary author...
"Everything seems impossible or terribly difficult without the providential appearance of anti-Semitism. It enables everything to be arranged, smoothed over, and simplified. If one were not an anti-Semite through patriotism, one would become one through a simple sense of opportunity." - Charles Maurras
^In other words, "racism" seeks to overcome any organized consciousness of common class interests and associated outpouring of "intra-class" sympathy amongst the working proletariat, through the cloak of "patriotism" or sense of "exclusive collectivism" along subjective socio-ethnic and/or nationalistic lines, and sometimes, divisive "hot botton" issues of [largely socio-economically unimportant] cultural "values". This "patriotism" usually comes in the form of the scapegoating of one group or the other, in order to divert the attention of the target group of the reactionary and exclusive patriotic 'collectivism' from the real socio-economic problems they are facing, which in reality, usually has little to do with the group(s) being scapegoated. Reactionary ethno-centric patriotism has proven to be quite an effective tool at dividing the broad layers of working people!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Reactionary ethno-centric patriotism has proven to be quite an effective tool at dividing the broad layers of working people!
This is Marxist gibberish.
policy of Jewish ethnic cleansing was "racist".
It was no more "racist" than German hatred of Poles, Pole hatred of Germans, British hatred of Germans, Russians...and so on. They all hated each other, and all hated the Jews. Hitler's hatred of blacks in the Rhine was racism but others are examples of white interracial tribal warfare, not racism
The was no "perceived" Jewish exclusive collectivism, Zionism was/is a fact. Anti-Semitism here is really a misnomer since these "Jews" were really Europeans, Khazars. The resentment of the European white right towards them having successfully assimilated into the European societies as bourgeoisie oppressors (according to them) is no different from the resentment of successful minorities whether in Asia or Africa by indigenous movements, as admitted by Jewish scholars themselves.
Posted by Wolofi (Member # 14892) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): Saying this is a racist conflict can imply it is racial, as in, between to different -perhaps even biologically- peoples.
^ I understand what you are trying to say, however this is and error.
Racism is and irrational ideology.
Racial conflicts are the result of this ideology.
That is as true of the Arabisation of the Sudanese as it is of the Apartheid of the Dutch Boers.
Biologically Boer and Bantu are no more 'races' than Arab and African.
To pretend that Apartheid South Africa is ideologically racist, but that Arabisation Sudan is not, is simply a form of self delusion.
Apartheid is racism.
Arabisation is racism.
Now, those who don't like hearing this, can feel free to make their best excuses, for which the Arabisation racists are eternally grateful.
Then the phrase shouldn't be "Racism" but "Ethnic prejudice" or "Ethnic hatred".
If there are no Races then the term "Racism" shouldn't be used.
Posted by fivebifive (Member # 14129) on :
quote:Originally posted by Wolofi:
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): Saying this is a racist conflict can imply it is racial, as in, between to different -perhaps even biologically- peoples.
^ I understand what you are trying to say, however this is and error.
Racism is and irrational ideology.
Racial conflicts are the result of this ideology.
That is as true of the Arabisation of the Sudanese as it is of the Apartheid of the Dutch Boers.
Biologically Boer and Bantu are no more 'races' than Arab and African.
To pretend that Apartheid South Africa is ideologically racist, but that Arabisation Sudan is not, is simply a form of self delusion.
Apartheid is racism.
Arabisation is racism.
Now, those who don't like hearing this, can feel free to make their best excuses, for which the Arabisation racists are eternally grateful.
Then the phrase shouldn't be "Racism" but "Ethnic prejudice" or "Ethnic hatred".
If there are no Races then the term "Racism" shouldn't be used.
Race = social construct Ethnicity = social construct.
As a result ethnicity can be racialized.
These terms are not mutually exclusive. They can and have overlap.
German = ethnicity and it also equaled race as dictated by the Nazi's.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
Jo Nongowa wrote:
quote: The deadly power of the split between Hutu and Tutsi in central Africa is witnessed not only by the genocide of more than half a million carried out by Hutu extremists against Tutsi and moderate Hutu in Rwanda in 1994, but also by a long list of massacres by extremists on both sides in recent years, in Rwanda, in Burundi, and in eastern Congo.
In the Western mind the so-called "Rwandan genocide", repeated ad nauseam whenever Rwanda is mentioned in the Western media--just like "sub-Saharan Africa", serves as some kind of archetype for "modern genocide" but committed by "primitive" people--using "primitive weapons". But if one looks carefully, one will note that this characterisation of the 1994 Rwandan civil war won by the Tutsis under the leadership of Paul Kagame is not much more than a psychic Western reflex action just after the "loss" of South Africa.
Here's why: In pre-war Rwanda(1994)the population of Rwanda was some 6.9 million people of which the Tutsis were approximately 9%. So if there were 1 million mostly Tutsis killed in the space of 100 days by Hutu militias using mainly clubs and machetes--as the Western writers claimthen could someone explain why the present Tutsi population is at least 15% of Rwanda's present population of some 8.5 million people.
There are those who argue that the present Tutsi population is that high because of Tutsi refugees returning post-war from places like Uganda and Tanzania. That argument doesn't hold because that refugee number was never more than 20,000.
I want to believe that "Rwanda" and all its hotels is just a manufactured figment of the Western psyche as it gazes constantly on Africa for its own psychic satisfaction and reinforcement.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Originally posted by Wolofi:
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box): Saying this is a racist conflict can imply it is racial, as in, between to different -perhaps even biologically- peoples.
^ I understand what you are trying to say, however this is and error.
Racism is and irrational ideology.
Racial conflicts are the result of this ideology.
That is as true of the Arabisation of the Sudanese as it is of the Apartheid of the Dutch Boers.
Biologically Boer and Bantu are no more 'races' than Arab and African.
To pretend that Apartheid South Africa is ideologically racist, but that Arabisation Sudan is not, is simply a form of self delusion.
Apartheid is racism.
Arabisation is racism.
Now, those who don't like hearing this, can feel free to make their best excuses, for which the Arabisation racists are eternally grateful.
Then the phrase shouldn't be "Racism" but "Ethnic prejudice" or "Ethnic hatred".
If there are no Races then the term "Racism" shouldn't be used.
I understand what you are trying to say, but again this is also wrong.
It is a fundamental error of logic.
You posit:
"Since there are no races, then there can be no racism".
This would be sound thinking if racism was being advocated as legitimate.
However if you admit that racism is and illegitimate ideology, then by definition it is rooted in a false premise.
The correct posit is:
"Racism exists and is illegitimate."
This is precisely *because* it is rooted in [many] false premises. This is a logical axium: A false premise -still exists- as such.
Hope this helps.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:So if there were 1 million mostly Tutsis killed in the space of 100 days by Hutu militias
Brilliant.
It never happened. It's the Rwandans, and Western Media, and West African and South African media, and the united Nations all conspiring.
Sometimes I think the puppies compete to see who can make the most utterly stupifying claim.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
Rasol, Come on now. I never wrote that there wasn't a civil conflict in Rwanda. I try to read and parse things with a critical eye--given the fact that Western interpretations of events in Africa--historical, anthropological, archaeological, political, economic, etc,--is always done through ideological lenses. Even photographs and images can tell a 1000 misleading or distorting words.
I provided an analysis based on numbers so let's some replies in terms of the same.
The present population of Rwanda--based on Rwanda's latest census and population numbers presented by the U.N., for what it is worth--is some 8.5 million people with the Tutsis being at least 15% of that number. Rwanda's president is Tutsi and the Tutsis were able to get him elected for the second time running in the last election.
I repeat my question--with absolutely no denial that there was a civil conflict in Rwanda in 1994 that lasted 100 days resulting in a Tutsi victory with the defeated Hutu militias fleeing to Goma, Congo thereby creating a huge Hutu refugee crisis--why are the Tutsis, supposedly the victims of genocide greater in absolute and percentage numbers after the conflict than before the conflict? Serious answers only.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Now don't think that I am trying to defend the Western Media.
All I want to know is that maybe the genocide in Rwanda was not as reported. But where did all the skulls of humans come from?
I mean there is pictures as Rasol has shown. Something must of happened in Rwanda. Reading the link they say that 500,000 was the least.
Now are people saying all these numbers are overblown and not accurate.
The problem I have is people say "Never Again" and it keeps happening again and again. This way has not stopped violence or hate or fear. We need to be able to *communicate* with eachother without one side getting angry and threatning violence. The problem is that people have a hard time showing love. Loving your eneimes is difficult but we tried it the other ways and all that led us down is death and more death. If both sides in conflict respected eachother and looked at the other in brotherly Love then we would not have these senseless wars. Most of these wars happen in the same country. These people are brothers in the countires they are in. They must resolve there conflict like a giant family. Love is the greatest weapon we have, it is time we started using it instead of hate.
Peace
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Rasol, Come on now. I never wrote that there wasn't a civil conflict in Rwanda. I try to read and parse things with a critical eye--given the fact that Western interpretations of events in Africa--historical, anthropological, archaeological, political, economic, etc,--is always done through ideological lenses. Even photographs and images can tell a 1000 misleading or distorting words.
I provided an analysis based on numbers so let's some replies in terms of the same.
The present population of Rwanda--based on Rwanda's latest census and population numbers presented by the U.N., for what it is worth--is some 8.5 million people with the Tutsis being at least 15% of that number. Rwanda's president is Tutsi and the Tutsis were able to get him elected for the second time running in the last election.
I repeat my question--with absolutely no denial that there was a civil conflict in Rwanda in 1994 that lasted 100 days resulting in a Tutsi victory with the defeated Hutu militias fleeing to Goma, Congo thereby creating a huge Hutu refugee crisis--why are the Tutsis, supposedly the victims of genocide greater in absolute and percentage numbers after the conflict than before the conflict? Serious answers only.
^ don't stress it Lamin. rasol has to build straw men because he doesn't want to engage you on what you say. It's too complex for him so he reduces everything to simple emotional understandings: genocide denial, support for Arabisation, Hitler hated Jews etc because of race. Notice when evidence is brought to the contrary they simply repeat their rehearsed lines. lol
But back to the issue, the civil conflict did not end in a "Tutsi victory" only victory is the American puppet Kagame and his cronies. Ordinary Rwandans are as poor and miserable as they were before.
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
lamin
Man you ask some serious questions that just has me stunned. It really does not make much sense. Since I can't answer your question I hope others can give a better opinion.
AKOBEN08
Just finished reading your post on Rwanda. Kagame is sadly basically a puppet for the west like alot of other leaders in Africa. If what you say is true that the people in Rwanda are still struggling then all can be said that the money and wealth in the country does not filter down to the people. Puppet governments could careless about there people, there more concerned with pleasing the people who "Control" the West. The hutus and Tutsis need to realize that united they can bring down the puppet governemet and establish a governemet that will be for the people. The hutus and tutsis were given cards to seperate them and have them hating and fearing each other. Now they need to do away with this brainwashing and realize that they are *ONE PEOPLE* and things won't get better until they demand it, the people in power are pawns to hold them down and still believing they are too different to come together. They need to stand *united* and demand there rights.
Peace
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
quote:
Man you ask some serious questions that just has me stunned. It really does not make much sense. Since I can't answer your question I hope others can give a better opinion.
Peace ]
Noted! We the collective African people in terms of critical self-analysis have a lot to answer to--like a football or basketball team that does not live up to its potential--but matters are not helped when our opponents--in deeds if not words--simply pile on--just for the effect.
That's why I prefer to read things with a critical eye--hopefully--and ask questions.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by KING: lamin
Man you ask some serious questions that just has me stunned. It really does not make much sense. Since I can't answer your question I hope others can give a better opinion.
The question Lamin posted it's not too hard to understand really because what is "Tutsi" and "Hutu" are political designations (not "tribes") that change with time and circumstances as the article Jo posted made clear. If you try to understand Rwandan politics in simple "tribal" (or in ridiculously "racial" terms as rasol does) it will confuse you.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
Good point:
quote:Originally posted by rasol: all racism is against one's 'own' kind.
I was just thinking that.
Since, technically no races exist, and if you say all that matters is ethnicity, then "non-black" 'Arabs' verses 'black' Africans would indeed make this a racial concept.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
^speak on it bruv!
(also, please check your YouTube mailbox).
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Rasol, Come on now. I never wrote that there wasn't a civil conflict in Rwanda. I try to read and parse things with a critical eye--given the fact that Western interpretations of events in Africa--historical, anthropological, archaeological, political, economic, etc,--is always done through ideological lenses. Even photographs and images can tell a 1000 misleading or distorting words.
I provided an analysis based on numbers so let's some replies in terms of the same.
The present population of Rwanda--based on Rwanda's latest census and population numbers presented by the U.N., for what it is worth--is some 8.5 million people with the Tutsis being at least 15% of that number. Rwanda's president is Tutsi and the Tutsis were able to get him elected for the second time running in the last election.
I repeat my question--with absolutely no denial that there was a civil conflict in Rwanda in 1994 that lasted 100 days resulting in a Tutsi victory with the defeated Hutu militias fleeing to Goma, Congo thereby creating a huge Hutu refugee crisis--why are the Tutsis, supposedly the victims of genocide greater in absolute and percentage numbers after the conflict than before the conflict? Serious answers only.
Yeah i agree with you the numbers of tutsis killed is inflated. Same in Darfur, at most 9000 were killed as president Bashir proclaimed but the media reports half a million, and everyone buys it. The media and it's backing institutions can sh7t out any number and the consuming hordes take it as absolute truth.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by Wolofi: Then the phrase shouldn't be "Racism" but "Ethnic prejudice" or "Ethnic hatred".
If there are no Races then the term "Racism" shouldn't be used.
quote:Originally posted by fivebifive to wolofi: Race = social construct Ethnicity = social construct.
As a result ethnicity can be racialized.
These terms are not mutually exclusive. They can and have overlap.
German = ethnicity and it also equaled race as dictated by the Nazi's.
^Exactly.
quote:Originally posted by rasol to wolofi: I understand what you are trying to say, but again this is also wrong.
It is a fundamental error of logic.
You posit:
"Since there are no races, then there can be no racism".
This would be sound thinking if racism was being advocated as legitimate.
However if you admit that racism is and illegitimate ideology, then by definition it is rooted in a false premise.
The correct posit is:
"Racism exists and is illegitimate."
This is precisely *because* it is rooted in [many] false premises. This is a logical axium: A false premise -still exists- as such.
Hope this helps.
Yep.
Afrocentrist scholarship in Meso-American context, and Eurocentric work in an "Egyptology" (and other Africana), both at times rely on faulty premises, but they still exist.
As for the Rwanda genocide, Paul Rusesabagina gives a thourough understanding in his hotel Rwanda book.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:But back to the issue, the civil conflict did not end in a "Tutsi victory" only victory is the American puppet Kagame and his cronies. Ordinary Rwandans are as poor and miserable as they were before.
Which is ofcourse false, rwandas economy has grown rapidly since the Hutsi and Tutsi showdown. Today rwanda with such a small population is the most powerfull nation in central-africa.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
An impication of my query is that even if 10,000 people were killed in the Rwandan conflict--that would still be unfortunate and sad. But 10,000 is a very far cry from scream of " 1,000,000 slaughtered in the Rwanda genocide".
That's why there was Hotel Rwanda--whose veracity was seriously questioned by an on the spot Senegalese peace-keeping military man.
And that's why BBC, CNN, RFI, Reuters, Deutche Welle, Times of London, Le Monde, Die Welt, La Stampa, NY Times, Financial Times, Hollywood, etc. reign supreme when it comes to Africa and the Black world in general.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
I've heard about the movie, never saw, it, but hopefully no one's assuming An Ordinary Man -the book from which it was based- is anything like the movie (interms of misleading notions and views).
Yes, as I recall, he does mention and appears to "accept" the 1 million figure.
However, in it's detail, it isn't at all contradictory to what lamin is saying. I hope before anyone speaks on the book, and assumes I posted it to support any specific agenda, that they have read the book.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Lamin wrote: An impication of my query is that even if 10,000 people were killed in the Rwandan conflict--that would still be unfortunate and sad. But 10,000 is a very far cry from scream of " 1,000,000 slaughtered in the Rwanda genocide".
It's also interesting to note why the numbers are always so perfect, "1 million killed", "half a million killed", "hundred thousands killed".
Its never "755 thousands killed" or "295 thousands killed", what do they mean that a couple of hundred thousands here and there is not important? Or did the last Hutu killing Tutsi say "HEY GUYS STOP, according to my calculation this guy is the millionth Tutsi, we've reached our goal".
Yeah right, it's all a hoax, numbers inflated for geo-political reasons same as in the Darfurian case.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
akoben - emotions don't carry too much weight on this forum. Felt the need to point that out if you couldn't already tell.
Paul Rusesabagina? lol already exposed, read New African magazine issue dealing with him.
Which is ofcourse false, rwandas economy has grown rapidly since the Hutsi and Tutsi showdown. Today rwanda with such a small population is the most powerfull nation in central-africa.
Economics 101, growth and development are not the same thing. Kagame and cronies rich, Rwandan people still poor. It is most powerful militarist state in the region because it is a US client state whose sole purpose is to ensure the rape of the resources of the Great Lakes region. That was why Kagame, trained in the US was given arms to overthrow the French backed government in 94. French/US proxy war. Do a little research people stop being so lazy... Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
Reactionary ethno-centric patriotism has proven to be quite an effective tool at dividing the broad layers of working people!
This is Marxist gibberish.
It is natural for one to take something that one doesn't have the attention span to understand as merely "gibberish".
Ps -- People who see the simple-stated fact as "gibberish", are the same people who hold the proletariat back from reaching organized consciousness of their common class interests, as opposed to focusing on distractive & divisive issues like those centered on ones skin color, religion, guns, gender orientation, abortion, and so forth--things that do nothing to advance their socio-economic cause. Boy, do politicians love people like you; it makes politics almost effortless!
quote:akoben08 writes:
policy of Jewish ethnic cleansing was "racist".
It was no more "racist" than German hatred of Poles, Pole hatred of Germans, British hatred of Germans, Russians...and so on. They all hated each other, and all hated the Jews. Hitler's hatred of blacks in the Rhine was racism but others are examples of white interracial tribal warfare, not racism
First of, how do you define "race", and thereof, "racism"?
Jews are not indigenous to Europe, so what "tribalism" are you referring to?
Anti-Jewish sentiment transcended the borders of those national entities you mentioned. Also, Jews were supposedly citizens of those same national entities. In otherwords, "Jews" is not a nationality, as the other entities you mentioned. So what is the basis of your comparison?
There was no holocaust, transcending national borders, of Germans, British or Russians on any scale as that of Jews. Neither Jews, nor Blacks represent nationality or some monolithic "tribe". So, how's Hitler's hatred of Jews any less "racist" than his hatred of Blacks?
quote:akoben08 writes:
The was no "perceived" Jewish exclusive collectivism, Zionism was/is a fact.
Come on, give me a break, will ya! The "perceived" [by non-Jewish Europeans] Jewish exclusive collectivism here refers to those earlier periods when anti-Jewish sentiments in non-Jewish groups were mainly related to religious and tradition-centered prejudices, at a time when Jewish minorities were not particularly prominent in European national life.
However, later on, mainly from the latter part of the 19th century onwards, anti-Jewish sentiment was driven by the need of ruling layers of European bourgeois to keep the proletariat at bay, i.e. as a counter-revolutionary tool. This was facilitated by the fact, that by that time, Jewish minorities were doing relatively well in European national life; the keyword here, being "minorities"...figuring "prominently" in national life. Hence, the considerably successful integration of Jewish minorities into European national life, especially in economy-related spheres, made them susceptible to being targets of xenophobia. And if you need any evidence of this, I offer some quotes right from the horses' mouths:
"One must suppress the proletariat,...One must give these people something to defend, something to conquer." Marquis de Mores
By this, Marquis de Mores was pointing to the campaign of anti-Semtism towards Jewish minorities of the society. The idea was to set up a counter-revolution to that of the proletariat, as noted in the citation; in otherwords, give the counter-revolutionary movement a socialist appearance, to be facilitated by anti-Semitism, which would give the proletariat "something to defend, something to conquer," and hence, effectively "suppress the proletariat".
Another quote, which was already posted earlier...
"Everything seems impossible or terribly difficult without the providential appearance of anti-Semitism. It enables everything to be arranged, smoothed over, and simplified. If one were not an anti-Semite through patriotism, one would become one through a simple sense of opportunity." - Charles Maurras
From the German Social Democratic party in 1881,
"The scandal of the anti-Semitic disturbances was first made possible after the anti-socialist law; that they did not assume the extent of a general Jew-bait is solely due to the Social Democrats, who warned the working class against this disgraceful activity, springing from the basest motives."
Only an idiot will miss the implications of these quotes from non-Jewish European figures of the times in question.
Anti-Semitism towards European Jews was made easier from the fact that they were viewed as *minorities*, whom at those times, came to hold prominent places in European socio-economic life. Hence, there was anti-Semitic campaigns in not only Germany, but also in other places like France and Russia, where these reactionary activities were no less vile.
Quoted earlier, Robert Wistrich noted:
"By the 1870s, the Jews appeared as the bourgeois par excellence in a society that was still not fully embourgeoised, as innovative modernizers in a nation that was not yet modernized."
Wistrich points out that, courtesy of David North of the Socialist Equality Party,...
22 percent of the employees working in banks and on the stock exchanges in 1882 were Jews.
Jews accounted for little more than one percent of the German population, [yet] they represented 43.25 percent of the proprietors and directors of banking and credit enterprises.
Some of the greatest banks in Germany were controlled by Jews, such as that of Bleichrder in Berlin, Warburg in Hamburg, Oppenheim in Kln and Rothschild in Frankfurt.
In the early 1900s, the renowned economist Werner Sombart noted that 25 percent of the members of the boards of directors in 10 major branches of German industry were Jews.
Another important feature of the success of German Jewry was its prominent position in the skilled professions: by 1882 11.7 percent of all doctors, 8.6 percent of journalists and 7.9 percent of all lawyers were Jews. As these figures indicate, Jewish youth attended colleges in great numbers.
Gist: "This success provided further grounds for anti-Semitic appeals to the insecurity of the German Mittelstand, which resented Jewish competition."
Related to the above, German author Konrad Heiden writes having examined Hitler's Mein Kampf,...
"Suddenly the 'Jewish question' became clear...The labor movement did not repel him because it was led by Jews; the Jews repelled him because they led the labor movement."
^This last point accounts for the basic motive behind Hitler's campaign of Jewish scapegoating and ethnic cleansing.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Anti-Semitism here is really a misnomer since these "Jews" were really Europeans, Khazars.
To the extent that any of these were what Jewish literature refers to as "gentiles" who converted or those who no longer spoke a Semitic language, this may be so, but understable to the extent that these folks were seen as descendants of Semitic-speaking groups of the former State of Israel in the Levant, who dispersed to other regions as a result of the destruction brought upon that state by the Assyrians back in ca. 8th century BC. The latter point, was to be the platform upon which the Zionist movement was justified.
quote:akoben08 writes:
The resentment of the European white right towards them having successfully assimilated into the European societies as bourgeoisie oppressors (according to them) is no different from the resentment of successful minorities whether in Asia or Africa by indigenous movements, as admitted by Jewish scholars themselves.
On that note, it is good to know that somewhere deep down, you actually understood my point about the whipping up of xenophobia by the elite layers against "minorities", to capitalize on the "politics of fear" and misdirected 'resentment' towards those deemed to be "different", so as to divert a rather more well-placed anger towards the existing social order [presided over by the ruling layer].
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Because of your ideology you are making some fundamental errors that's throwing off your entire thesis. 1) You reduce everything to ruling class interests so you fail to appreciate the experiences of the common folk themselves with Jews re usury and anti-gentile/Christian hatred in the Talmud. Even the blood liable charge had some truth to it as Jewish scholars admit. Essentially you are saying they are like robots waiting to be programmed by evil bourgeoisie. Typical leftist condescension. 2)The original Hebrews were not indigenous to Europe, Khazars were. Whatever they wanted to believe about themselves is irrelevant, they were/are white people.
My use of "races", like most people on ES, does not refer to any biologically distinct entities, I am merely referring to superficial phenotypes that would distinguish a Nahum Goldman (white) from a Loi Armstrong (black). So Hitler's prejudice towards blacks is racism, towards white Jews etc was not. But you have to understand like everything Europe took the race concept to extremes, so you will find Hitler talking about a "German race", British colonials a "British race" and Zionists a "Jewish race". Even the Slavs had their Slavic supremacy crap. But they were all white people, all examples of European tribalism. And please don't start talking about uniqueness of Jewish suffering in Europe blah blah blah. Apart from it being not true, I find it quite boring.
On that note, it is good to know that somewhere deep down, you actually understood my point about the whipping up of xenophobia by the elite layers against "minorities", to capitalize on the "politics of fear" and misdirected 'resentment' towards those deemed to be "different", so as to divert a rather more well-placed anger towards the existing social order [presided over by the ruling layer].
Again because of your ideology you only see anti-Jewish sentiment as merely xenophobia against minority "whipped up" by the ruling classes. Hence you misinterpret my African and Asian reference. I wasn't admitting to any scapegoating but referring to the power relations between the two: like anti-Jewish hatred, it was not a weapon of powerful against the weak, but other way around.
I hope you are not seeking a quotation war, because I can bring quotes by Jews themselves that blame anti-Jewish hatred to Jewish behavior, not "scapegoating". To understand Jewish history you have to put aside ideology and look at it from an objective, well as objective as possible, point of view. Yes non-Jewish elite took advantage of anti-Jewish sentient among the peasants, but it is not the full story.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Ausarian said:
Ps -- People who see the simple-stated fact as "gibberish", are the same people who hold the proletariat back from reaching organized consciousness of their common class interests, as opposed to focusing on distractive & divisive issues like those centered on ones skin color, religion, guns, gender orientation, abortion, and so forth--things that do nothing to advance their socio-economic cause. Boy, do politicians love people like you; it makes politics almost effortless!
Nicely stated, Supercar!
quote:.
By the way, akoben08, this isn't about pride, being right (vanity), or hurt feelings or anything.
This is just a discussion board.
Sorry if I made you feel that way (if I came across as being contestive or anything ... or maybe it was rasol or his 'ego' ), but if feel something should be said I just say it.
^The above has nothing to do with your immediate post preceding it.
quote:.
As for racism, though I still agree with everone else here, dictionary.com's definition seems to state what you do:
racism. n.
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
***
3. hatred or intolerance of ANOTHER race or other races.
***
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
Then again!
Sorry, but from Merriam-Webster we get :
racism. n.:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
**
From The new American Webster handy college Dictionary (third edition):
rac'ism (rA' siz-[i]um) n. prejudice against certain peoples. -racist, n.
From (my favorite dictionary) The American Heritage Dictionary (4th Edition): [list=1]
The *belief* that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race. -rac'ist adj.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ausarian is Supercar? I have read a few of his old posts, good stuff, but I didn't know he is so leftist? Oh my, you would think that after all our experiences with the white left, new and old, black Marxists would see the folly of their thinking. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
Because of your ideology
What would that "ideology" be? Perhaps you can clue me in on that.
I do know however, that I posted quotes from non-Jewish European bourgeois figures of the timeframe in question, hence putting it into historical context, essentially telling the audience point blank that Jews were being scapegoated as a counter-revolutionary asset, and yet, here you are still not aware of the fact. Are you really that intellectually unsophisticated, whereby even as a person tells you point blank about his/her motives behind his/her actions, you'll still be in denial of that which was just literally confessed to you?
But wait, Hitler will tell you something point blank, which leaves very little to imagination and which is literally common knowledge, but will go right over your head:
Hitler quotes from Mein Kampf:
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science and technical skill, which we see before our eyes today, is almost exclusively the product of Aryan creative power."
"On this planet of ours human culture and civilization are indissolubly bound up with the presence of the Aryan. If he should be exterminated or subjugated, then the dark shroud of a new barbarian era would enfold the earth."
"Jewish youth lies in wait for hours on end satanically glaring at and spying on the unconscious girl whom he plans to seduce, adulterating her blood with the ultimate idea of bastardizing the white race which they hate and thus lowering its cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate."
"The Russian Empire in the East is ripe for collapse; and the end of the Jewish domination of Russia will also be the end of Russia as a state."
^Guess what had happened in Russia a little prior to Hitler's early years as a rightwing "activist" at the end of the first World War?
Yeap, the Russian revolution...which was tied in with the German November revolution, with the latter blamed for the German defeat in the first World War by German rightwing cliques.
Guess what movement was associated with these revolutions? Yeap, the "Jewish Marxism", as they called it.
So you have it, right from the horse's mouth: the contextualization of Jews into a distinct "race", and one whose members were seen as the main drivers behind the proletariat revolution. I'd already quoted the German author Konrad Hein [who examined Mein Kampf] with regards to this association made by Hitler; that is, Jewish spearheading of labor movements that "repelled" him [Hitler]. I suspect though, this is all too confusing and complex for you to understand, akoben.
And if you need any further convincing of the above, there here's what Hitler had to say elsewhere:
Never, never will I depart from the task of eradicating from Germany Marxism and its accompaniments,
One must be the victor here: either Marxism or the German people!
I can't believe I'm teaching you what is generally accepted fact.
quote:akoben08 writes:
you are making some fundamental errors that's throwing off your entire thesis. You reduce everything to ruling class interests so you fail to appreciate the experiences of the common folk themselves with Jews re usury and anti-gentile/Christian hatred in the Talmud.
Not a matter of my "reducing" anything to one thing; the matter at hand, is your selective reading and attention span. The ruling class capitalization of anti-Jewish sentiments was contextualized within the historical timeframe of the revival of anti-Semitism towards Jews in Europe, in the latter part of the 19th century through to the Nazi campaign of Jewish ethnic cleansing. You were briefly informed of earlier epochs of anti-Jewish sentiments in Europe, but your selective reading eluded it.
If you are trying to tell the informed, that anti-Jewish sentiment in the later part of the 19th century and the Nazi era were simply continuations of previous reactionary traditions, without seeing the necessity for putting this phenomenon into the specificities of that era of "modern anti-Semitism", then my friend, the joke must be on you.
Moreover, what evidence do you have that anti-Jewish sentiment was rampant in the proletariat across the board, as opposed to mainly amongst the 'petty bourgeois' and the top bourgeois layers?
It seems that it is you who is "reducing" anti-Semitism to some phenomenon without a temporal or socio-political context, while "reducing" the European society(s) to some undifferentiated monolithic group(s) that had a knack for anti-Semitism.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Even the blood liable charge had some truth to it as Jewish scholars admit. Essentially you are saying they are like robots waiting to be programmed by evil bourgeoisie.
"Essentially", what I'm saying has escaped your attention span. In the later part of the 19th century and onwards, whatever pre-existing anti-Jewish sentiments were there across certain sections [not all] of European populations, it wasn't organized into and pushed foward as something of a common socio-economic interest transcending the discrete classes in Europeas though the class interests of the bourgeois layers and the proletariat were undifferentiateduntil the systematic campaigns of anti-Jewish baiting by rightwing bourgeois cliques. In other words, it didn't find expression through national "socialist" movements spearheaded mainly by elements of the bourgeois layers.
It certainly didn't find expression until then, into the sort of racial hierarchy [again] which was partly aimed at downplaying the importance of class differentiations and their corresponding socio-economic priviledges as that set up by the Nazi to ultimately precide over their genocidal campaign.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:akoben08 writes:
Typical leftist condescension.
By this, I take it that you view "facts" as "the leftwing thing". That idea is "typical condescension" of the intellectually-incapacitated.
quote:akoben08 writes:
2)The original Hebrews were not indigenous to Europe, Khazars were. Whatever they wanted to believe about themselves is irrelevant, they were/are white people.
Apparently you and those anti-Semitic Europeans are not on the same page; they saw the Jews not as "gentile" converts, but largely as the descendants of the Levantine Jews.
On what DNA testing(s) are you basing this idea that all the Jewish populations in Europe were the so-called Khazars, and hence, had nothing to do with Levantine Jews?
What they "wanted to believe about themselves" may be irrelevant to you, but it is relevant to history and all able-thinking folks; it had implications on anti-Semitism in the late 19th century and early 20th century, as well as the Zionist movement, the impact of which is still being felt in the 21st century.
In fact, the U.S. political establishment would greatly disagree with you.
quote:akoben08 writes:
My use of "races", like most people on ES, does not refer to any biologically distinct entities, I am merely referring to superficial phenotypes that would distinguish a Nahum Goldman (white) from a Loi Armstrong (black). So Hitler's prejudice towards blacks is racism, towards white Jews etc was not.
That's false; "most people on ES" do not prescribe to "races", let alone as you do; that is an invalidated broad generalization of posters on this board.
Hitler's citations make it clear that he referred to Jews and Aryans as belonging to what he saw as distinct "biological races".
Counter to you, he did NOT view Jewish people as "White people".
Your "races" is just as irrational and subjective as Hitler's was. So who are you to be determining what should be "racist" and what shouldn't, when you can't even get an objective definition out of it?
According to Hitler's world viewpoint [as cited above], he should be branded as a "racist" towards Jews!
quote:akoben08 writes:
But you have to understand like everything Europe took the race concept to extremes, so you will find Hitler talking about a "German race", British colonials a "British race" and Zionists a "Jewish race".
See above; how's Hitlers view of "races" any less rational than your subjective viewpoint of 'races'?
quote:akoben08 writes:
And please don't start talking about uniqueness of Jewish suffering in Europe blah blah blah. Apart from it being not true, I find it quite boring.
Not here to entertain to you, but challenge you on facts. Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?
quote:akoben08 writes:
On that note, it is good to know that somewhere deep down, you actually understood my point about the whipping up of xenophobia by the elite layers against "minorities", to capitalize on the "politics of fear" and misdirected 'resentment' towards those deemed to be "different", so as to divert a rather more well-placed anger towards the existing social order [presided over by the ruling layer].
Again because of your ideology you only see anti-Jewish sentiment as merely xenophobia against minority "whipped up" by the ruling classes.
You use the word "merely" and read my post that way, because of 1) selective and wishful reading, and 2) you are an amateur in the understanding of politics.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Hence you misinterpret my African and Asian reference. I wasn't admitting to any scapegoating but referring to the power relations between the two: like anti-Jewish hatred, it was not a weapon of powerful against the weak, but other way around.
Who is the powerful here, and who is the weak? How do you intend to substantiate this idea that anti-Jewish sentiment was the weapon of the weak against the powerful?
quote:akoben08 writes:
I hope you are not seeking a quotation war, because I can bring quotes by Jews themselves that blame anti-Jewish hatred to Jewish behavior, not "scapegoating".
Your hope is intellectually bankrupt. There is no semblance of a "war" here; just one-sided objectivity on my end, and mere dismissal of that objectivity on your end. I posted quotes that substantiate the
1)Nazi motives behind anti-Jewish campaign in Germany at the time,
2)demonstrate the campaign of scapegoating and politics of fear by European bourgoeis as a counterrevolutionary tool with a cloak of socialism to that of the proletariat, henceputting it in a specific socio-political and temporal context.
3)how this was made easier with improved Jewish integration into European socio-economic life, especially at a time other sections of the society were experiencing deteriorating socio-economic situations after the exhaustive first World War, causing middle class layers of the German society for example, to become "bitter".
Moreover, Jewish prominence in some of the financial organizations blamed for playing some role in the worsening situation didn't help either.
4)Nazis, and Hitler in particular, characterized Jews as a separate race from "White people", just as they saw "Blacks" as a separate race from "Whites".
quote:akoben08 writes:
To understand Jewish history you have to put aside ideology and look at it from an objective, well as objective as possible, point of view.
^Got it twisted, my friend to understand Jewish history, you need to do the following:
do minimal research on the specificities peculiar to the era under study rather than merely supplanting your own worldview onto that of the subjective and objective components of history,
take geopolitics 101,
learn how to approach history through scientific methodology,
learn to produce counter-material instead of offering mere denials,
learn how to read precisely what people tell you in its totality,
and learn to be specific about what you're responding toe.g. pinpoint and substantiate the empty rhetoric about some "ideology" being thrown around.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Yes non-Jewish elite took advantage of anti-Jewish sentient among the peasants, but it is not the full story.
False sense of self-fulfillment through some straw horse never ceases to amaze.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Ausarian is Supercar? I have read a few of his old posts, good stuff, but I didn't know he is so leftist? Oh my, you would think that after all our experiences with the white left, new and old, black Marxists would see the folly of their thinking.
Well, to the extent that you think that bombarding you with "facts" that only confuse you is a leftist thing, since that is all that I offered in our exchanges, then I suppose that would make me leftist by your definition. However, being incapacited to respond back with counter-facts, generally speakingand hence not my subjective opinion, shows intellectual weakness; You may now procede to find an appropriate "label" that characterizes you as such. If I pick it for you, it will only offend you.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alive-(What Box):
quote:Ausarian said:
Ps -- People who see the simple-stated fact as "gibberish", are the same people who hold the proletariat back from reaching organized consciousness of their common class interests, as opposed to focusing on distractive & divisive issues like those centered on ones skin color, religion, guns, gender orientation, abortion, and so forth--things that do nothing to advance their socio-economic cause. Boy, do politicians love people like you; it makes politics almost effortless!
Nicely stated, Supercar!
Thanx for the placement of emphasis...on what should otherwise be the obvious. To put it into some perspective, this seems to be what akoben08 thinks of as some abstract "ideology", while it is what's taken for granted as the fairly obvious [reality] to anybody who is *remotely* socio-politically conscious.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
From the tone of your reply, filled with insults and irrelevant quotes, its obvious you are again making your ideology (Marxism) get the better of you. I will not spam my reply with quotes as you, simply refer you to books important to teh subject. Your arguments and counter arguments are predictable so it is not intended for you but anyone wanting wider understanding of the subject.
I see you insist on using the term "anti-Semitism" even though I made it clear they are white people not original Hebrews. Never said all European Jews were Khazars, maybe you missed that part in your emotional state. And I already told you that the different white tribes used "race" and nation synonymously, so quoting Hitler's use of it re German and Jewish "race" is not disputing anything. They are all white people despite what they thought of each other. I don't know about you but I can't tell an Ashkenazi from a German; and don't tell me blue eyes they have that too.
I already told you the problems with reading Mein Kamf outside the context of him coming to power and backtracking on his rants (typical of frustrated youths of his time) against Jews, those gentiles connected to capitalist Jews, capitalism etc Politicians do it all the time. The fact that you didn't address his connections with Jewish financers, Zionists, Jews in his army etc only proves my point that you are unwilling to put aside your ideology, an ideology that reduces everything to (non-Jewish) ruing class interests. You fail to see that Jews were/are very much an important part of the white ruling class from their days as court Jews to big banking houses. You cannot understand European imperialism and genocide outside critical Jewish involvement: financing Columbus, involvement in African slave trade, to scramble for Africa. [Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews, NOI; Imperialism: A Study, Hobson]
So you see its more than just resentment made simple by Jewish prominence in "some" of the financial organizations, but resentment for the role they played in the oppression of the working classes and the petty bourgeoisie at the time. Jewish role in and affuence during weimar Germany and international boycott of Nazi Germany is a fact. Hence a weapon of weak (frustrated youths like Hitler) against strong (Jewish elite). [W. D. Rubinstein, Jewish Journal of Sociology]
Anti-imperialism presented out side of Jewish role=Marxism.
So telling me about how the politically minded petty bourgeoisie used anti-Jewish sentiment to their advantage is not disproving anything I said since 1) I already stated they did - politics and opportunism go hand in hand... duh! 2) it wasn't entirely scapegoating anyway since Bolshevik revolution was essentially Jewish and financed by Jewish bankers. Hitler got mass support, including outside Germany, because what he was saying everybody knew. I cannot believe someone as widely read as you is unaware of the Jewish role in Bolshevism, communist international, even the American Marxist left and its hold over AA politics. [MacDonald (2000); Martin (1993); Cruse (1967)]
I baffled as to why you come down on me for my definition of race it is not that unusual and you yourself refer to "racism" meaning you accept it. Another poster made the point earlier that if you don't believe in race don't use the term racism. But you do too, hypocrite. Plus I see you now what DNA (race?) proof re Jews, I hope you are not going for any study that will "prove" white Jews are "real" Jews. So predictable.
Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?
Bolshevik genocide of Russian Christians and anybody against their dogma, Ukrainian genocide 1920s, WW2 bombing of German civilian areas which Churchill seemed to delight in (he was anti-German, another example of white tribalism), ethic cleaning, mass killings, rape and deportation to labor camps of Germans after WW2.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
From the tone of your reply, filled with insults and irrelevant quotes
Au contraire, you set that tone in this conversation, when you were *confused* with hard facts.
quote:akoben08 writes:
, its obvious you are again making your ideology (Marxism) get the better of you.
Actually, it looks like those Marxist facts got the better of you, as you've failed to refute them. Offering immaterial emotionalism via name-calling/labeling as response doesn't constitute counter-facts!
quote:akoben08 writes:
I will not spam my reply with quotes as you, simply refer you to books important to teh subject. Your arguments and counter arguments are predictable so it is not intended for you but anyone wanting wider understanding of the subject.
Translation: I can't refute your arguement, and hence I referr to the phantom idea of a "quote war" which is really the lame argument of the intellectually weak.
The fact of matter, is the what the non-Jewish European quotes, their actions thereof, the extant social structure in Europe, and the specificities of the socio-economic conditions they were operating under tell us the revival of anti-Semitism in from the late 19th century, and translating into "national socialism" of bourgeois politics as that seen in Nazi Germany.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I see you insist on using the term "anti-Semitism" even though I made it clear they are white people not original Hebrews.
You've made that clear from what perspective, where: molecular genetics? historical context of the term, or linguistic?
Please help me out with requested answers from an earlier post, because you haven't addressed my points on that matter.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Never said all European Jews were Khazars, maybe you missed that part in your emotional state.
I must have missed it; so help me understand what is not a generalizing of European Jews about the following:
The original Hebrews were not indigenous to Europe, Khazars were. Whatever they wanted to believe about themselves is irrelevant, they were/are white people. - akoben08
- I see you insist on using the term "anti-Semitism" even though I made it clear they are white people not original Hebrews - akoben08
I told you that that anti-Semitism, a term coined by the likes of Wilhelm Marr from the late 19th century, is used within the context that Jews were of Semitic ancestry...the question then is, where? from Turkey, akoben08? Lol.
I offered you to present evidence that those European Jews whom you blanketly characterize as simply Khazars, had not genealogical ties with the Levantine Jewry. You failed; instead you offer 'backtracking'.
quote:akoben08 writes:
And I already told you that the different white tribes used "race" and nation synonymously, so quoting Hitler's use of it re German and Jewish "race" is not disputing anything. They are all white people despite what they thought of each other. I don't know about you but I can't tell an Ashkenazi from a German; and don't tell me blue eyes they have that too.
I not entertain obtuseness. You talk of tribes I challenged you on that, and you respond with grave silence.
You talk of *your* fact-free definition of race, deeming Hitler's racism as being irrelevant, and hence, not "actually" racism.
I challenged you to demonstrate how your idea of "race" is any more rational than Hitler's idea of "race", and you respond with this material-free bankrupt nonsense.
I offered Hitler's quotes, which demonstrate that he justified his genocidal anti-Jewish campaign through "racism". Now, you may not accept that, but Hitler's prespective on race has more historical weight than your equally fact-free idea of race, on what his "racial" justifications for his genocidal anti-Jewish campaign.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I already told you the problems with reading Mein Kamf outside the context of him coming to power and backtracking on his rants (typical of frustrated youths of his time) against Jews, those gentiles connected to capitalist Jews, capitalism etc
Not particularly interested in you telling me things; rather, I'm more interested in you refuting the substantive argument I bombarded you with, putting the Mein Kampf into context. You must be the only reader here, that I can discern, who missed on the extra-Mein Kampf material that all place Mein Kampf quotations into context. As the saying goes: "I can lead you to the water, but I can't make you drink it"
quote:akoben08 writes:
Politicians do it all the time. The fact that you didn't address his connections with Jewish financers, Zionists, Jews in his army etc only proves my point that you are unwilling to put aside your ideology, an ideology that reduces everything to (non-Jewish) ruing class interests.
You don't have a clue politicians do, which is why you are acting like a Nazi apologist for Hitler. You are now trying to say, that the guy is not really a racist towards Jews, and hence just used that racism for political reasons, which would go back to my point about his capitalizing of xenophobia towards Jews; why is that?...because of the, lack of integration of Jews into European socio-economic life, which I've shown to be just "baloney" at that time?...please do explain away!
I've got to go to work, but rest assured, I'll return to address the rest of your poor excuses of an argument.
So long.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Wow Ausarian, you sound really pissed! Please be gentle with me when you come back! lol
But from reading the rest of your post it seems as if frustration is the least of your problems, as you are now delusional! What "substantive argument" have you "bombarded" me with? Your quotes are impressive spam but refute nothing, you are like Winters now. You see fundamentally your premise is unsound, the facts are overwhelmingly in my favour:European Jews are indeed white people and had always been an integral part of western imperialism and aggression. Due to your ideological orientation you have to try and separate Jews from all this. So you grudgingly admitted that "some" prominent Jews are among the elite, but they as a group are by and large victims of race-baiting by the non-Jewish petty bourgeois. You were absolutely predictable!
European Jews as white people
I am not backtracking on any so-called Jewish origins. Your confusion is due to your lack of basic knowledge. The Khazars/Ashkenazi or Eastern European Jews are converts; you seem unaware of Author Koestler and his book The Thirteenth Tribe, amazing given your obvious interest in the Jews of Europe.
What is "race"
What is your problem here? Is my definition that different from the popular definition based on what we now know from recent studies in genetics: that there are no biologically distinct races, only phenotypical differences. In this respect Kemet was a black civilisation and white Jews are white people. What is so hard to understand? White Jews have always been seen as whites by AA as they are a part of the power structure: James Baldwin, "Negroes Are Anti-Semitic Because They're Anti-White" The New York Times Magazine.
And in socio-economic context, "religious breakdown of retail merchants: 37.9% were Jewish; 36.0% were Protestant; and 22.9% were Catholic... The breakdown by religion, when race is considered, increases the number: 51.3% of the white merchants are Jewish; 18.7% are Protestant; and 27.0% are Catholic." - Jack Nusan Porter Mr. Goldberg and John Henry: The Relationship Between Afro-Americans and American Jews So why jump on me for stating the obvious?
As for as Hitler's genocidal campaign against them, it cannot be seen outside the context of WW2 as partisans, in other words it was politics, not race. If it were the latter why did he have them as financiers, in his army, work with them to build up a Jewish community in Palestine? These facts contradict your arguments so you dismiss them "Not particularly interested in you telling me things". Yet the "things" are important to understanding how after coming to power he backtracked from most of his rants in Mein Kamf. Therefore the context is: face with the reality of Jewish power Hitler turned from the fiery activist to the compromising politician - as politicians do when they come to power. This is not unusual.
So you see you refute nothing only make vague references to the "extra-Mein Kampf material" (I wonder what that is ) but if you want to say something on this "extra-Mein Kampf material", then say it. But I hope you are noting going to be predictable again.
which is why you are acting like a Nazi apologist for Hitler.
This is what you are reduced to. Sad.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
My last post here, which I hastily wrote down as I was on my way to work, is now cleaned up and edited ...
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
From the tone of your reply, filled with insults and irrelevant quotes
Au contraire, you set that tone in this conversation, when you were *confused* with hard facts.
quote:akoben08 writes:
, its obvious you are again making your ideology (Marxism) get the better of you.
Actually, it looks like those "Marxist" facts got the better of you, as you've failed to refute them. Offering immaterial emotionalism via name-calling/labeling as response doesn't constitute counter-facts!
quote:akoben08 writes:
I will not spam my reply with quotes as you, simply refer you to books important to teh subject. Your arguments and counter arguments are predictable so it is not intended for you but anyone wanting wider understanding of the subject.
Translation: I can't refute your argument, and hence I'm reduced to referring to some self-delusional idea of a pointless "quote war" posting quotes just for the heck of it, without attention to initiator argument at hand [which happens to be Hitlers genocidal racism against Jews] which is really the lame argument of the intellectually weak.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I see you insist on using the term "anti-Semitism" even though I made it clear they are white people not original Hebrews.
You've made that clear from what perspective, where: molecular genetics? historical context of the term, or linguistic?
Please help me out with the requested answers from an earlier post, as it relates to this, because you haven't addressed my points on that matter.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Never said all European Jews were Khazars, maybe you missed that part in your emotional state.
I must have missed it; so please help me understand what about the following is NOT generalization of European Jews:
The original Hebrews were not indigenous to Europe, Khazars were. Whatever they wanted to believe about themselves is irrelevant, they were/are white people. - akoben08
- I see you insist on using the term "anti-Semitism" even though I made it clear they are white people not original Hebrews - akoben08
I told you that anti-Semitism, a term coined by the likes of Wilhelm Marr from the late 19th century, was used in that period through to Nazi Germany, within the context of the Semitic ancestry of Jews...the question then becomes: where did Semitic ancestry come from ? presumably from Turkey, according to you, akoben08? Lol.
I offered you the opportunity to present requested evidence that those European Jews whom you indiscriminately characterize as Khazars, had no genealogical ties with the Levantine Jewry. As predicted, you failed on that account; instead, youve been reduced to offering 'backtracking'.
quote:akoben08 writes:
And I already told you that the different white tribes used "race" and nation synonymously, so quoting Hitler's use of it re German and Jewish "race" is not disputing anything. They are all white people despite what they thought of each other. I don't know about you but I can't tell an Ashkenazi from a German; and don't tell me blue eyes they have that too.
I don't entertain obtuseness. You spoke of 'tribes' I challenged you on that, and you responded with graveyard silence.
You spoke of *your* own pseudo-scientific definition of race, and then qualified that pseudo-scientific and pseudo-historic definition as logical to rendering Hitler's racist ideology irrelevant, and hence, to conclude that Hitlers racism was in fact not "really" racism.
I challenged you to demonstrate how your idea of "race" is any more rational than Hitler's idea of "race", and you responded with this material-free longwinded rant.
I offered Hitler's quotes, which demonstrate unequivocally, how he justified his genocidal anti-Jewish campaign through "racism". Now, you may not accept that fact, but Hitler's perspective on race carries more historical weight than your equally irrational idea of race; it was his racist dogma, not the one you *wishfully* want to supplant onto him, that was carried out with action that is, the Jewish Holocaust.
You can be an apologetic for the Nazi genocide all you like, but it has no bearing on the reality of the above mentioned fact.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I already told you the problems with reading Mein Kamf outside the context of him coming to power and backtracking on his rants (typical of frustrated youths of his time) against Jews, those gentiles connected to capitalist Jews, capitalism etc
Not particularly interested in you telling me things; rather, I'm more interested in you refuting the substantive argument I bombarded you with, putting the Mein Kampf into context. You must be the only reader here, that I can discern, who missed on the extra-Mein Kampf material that all place Mein Kampf quotations into context. As the saying goes: "I can lead you to the water, but I can't make you drink it"
Matter of fact, Hitler was consistentfrom his rightwing activist years through to his Nazi leadership, about making the connection between Jews and Marxism, and hence, his hatred of them.
I challenge you to produce a Hitler quote stating his admiration/love for Jews.
Yes, politicians have a habit of backtracking, because what they actually do and what they tell people [based on what they think people want to hear], are usually at odds.
If one wants to understand the drivers behind politicians, it is important to take note of what they actually do, and which rhetoric of their'susually filled with a mixture of both coded and undisguised messageshas obvious connections to that action, and in what socio-political environment the said action was undertaken. Only then, does the actual motives of politicians for their actions become clear.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Politicians do it all the time. The fact that you didn't address his connections with Jewish financers, Zionists, Jews in his army etc only proves my point that you are unwilling to put aside your ideology, an ideology that reduces everything to (non-Jewish) ruing class interests.
You apparently don't have a clue about what politicians do, which is why you are reduced to a Nazi apologist for Hitler and a revisionist!
Now of course, Jewish prominence in German financial institutions and their improved integration into German socio-economic life was already relayed to you, not once but multiple times...with hard facts; that you were too obtuse to take notice, is your problem. You merely reiterated what amounts to a snapshot of that integration.
You are now in effect trying to say, that the guy is not really a genocidal racist towards Jews; he just used racism for political expediency, which would at any rate, go back to my point about his capitalization of ant-Jewish xenophobia; if so, why is that?...according to you, this was presumably because of the lack of Jewish integration into European socio-economic life?! I've already shown how this idea of yours is nothing but "baloney", and your own talk of his relations with Jewish financers and Jews in the army does the same...but please, entertain us with more contradictory material-free excuses and explain away!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Now, where I had left off, as far as akoben08's post prior to his last one is concerned:
quote:akoben08 writes:
You fail to see that Jews were/are very much an important part of the white ruling class from their days as court Jews to big banking houses.
You think accordingly, because basic reading is not one of your talents. When I had gone through this issue earlierwith hard mathematical figureswere you living under a rock?
quote:akoben08 writes:
You cannot understand European imperialism and genocide outside critical Jewish involvement: financing Columbus, involvement in African slave trade, to scramble for Africa. [Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews, NOI; Imperialism: A Study, Hobson]
I've already laid out the actual main reason behind Hitlers anti-Jewish campaign, backed up with primary text citations. That reason was critical to understanding Nazi anti-Semitism.
So now, you tell us what this "Jewish involvement" entails, and how it directly accounts for Hitler's genocidal racism against Jews as the *main* reason, *outside* of what Hitler sees as Jewish ties to labor movements.
quote:akoben08 writes:
So you see its more than just resentment made simple by Jewish prominence in "some" of the financial organizations, but resentment for the role they played in the oppression of the working classes and the petty bourgeoisie at the time.
Nope, I don't see it.
First off, when you talk about resentment; specifically whose resentment are you referring to? Is it that of Hitler's and the top bourgeois layer, or the petty bourgeois, or yet, the proletariat?...or do you not see any distinctions in the drivers behind anti-Jewish sentiment across the entire German social class structure?
You also treat Jews as though they were of some monolithic class; were Jews not also part of the German proletariat, aside from being a part of the German bourgeois?
quote:akoben08 writes:
Jewish role in and affuence during weimar Germany and international boycott of Nazi Germany is a fact. Hence a weapon of weak (frustrated youths like Hitler) against strong (Jewish elite). [W. D. Rubinstein, Jewish Journal of Sociology]
You are such a jokester, aren't you?...considering Hitler to be a member of the weak. Tell me, was he weak because he was a youth? Also, where there no other German elites, beside the Jewish constituents of that elite?
Your Nazi apologia, particularly treating Hitler as a victim, is amusing to say the least.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Anti-imperialism presented out side of Jewish role=Marxism.
So telling me about how the politically minded petty bourgeoisie used anti-Jewish sentiment to their advantage is not disproving anything I said since 1) I already stated they did - politics and opportunism go hand in hand... duh!
If you had agreed with my premise about the bourgeois politics behind anti-Semitism, then there would have been no argument to begin with. You also wouldnt have characterized the fact as some abstract ideology. And if you actually understood that politics, then you wouldn't have been mystified by Hitler's genocidal racism against Jews.
So, its not enough to say that the bourgeois used anti-Semitism for political expediency; it is necessary to understand the specific drivers behind that campaign, which I already spelt out above and in previous posts on this subject.
What's at hand, is that you are clueless about those drivers, because you've offered no specific contexts or material on the nature of those drivers, the socio-economic conditions under which they took place, much less lay out the objective and subjective components of those drivers.
quote:akoben08 writes:
2) it wasn't entirely scapegoating anyway since Bolshevik revolution was essentially Jewish and financed by Jewish bankers. Hitler got mass support, including outside Germany, because what he was saying everybody knew.
In other words, all European Jews deserved to be mass murdered on the basis of racism, and the genocide was justified, simply because there were members of the labor movements that happened to be Jewish.
It mattered not, that Jews were not exclusive of the European elite. It mattered not, that Jews were also part of the European proletariat.
Even though the Russian October evolution [as well as the German November revolution], constituted of considerable non-Jewish European figures, youlike Hitler, tie it exclusively to Jews.
You, like Hitler, see the proletariat movement a crime that needs to be penalized by genocide. And since, you are a Nazi apologist, I'll have to also assume that, youlike Hitler, had beef with Marxism because encouraged the proletariat labor movement. Hence, you like Hitler, are a reactionary anti-socialist, who is an enemy of the proletariat just about *anywhere*.
Face it, man. You are a Nazi! Maybe you should be posting in neo-nazi forums, like stormfront.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I cannot believe someone as widely read as you is unaware of the Jewish role in Bolshevism, communist international, even the American Marxist left and its hold over AA politics. [MacDonald (2000); Martin (1993); Cruse (1967)]
I can't believe you are incredibly illiterate.
Where were you, when...
I mentioned in a passing, the Russian revolution; what did you assume I was referring to?
I quoted Hitler, speaking of Jewish control of Russia; what did you think he was referring to...the Czar, perhaps? Lol.
I quoted Hitler, tying Marxism to Jews?
You either need reading glasses, or a special reading class, or better yet, a special ed. for the intellectually slow.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I baffled as to why you come down on me for my definition of race it is not that unusual and you yourself refer to "racism" meaning you accept it.
Your bafflement is not surprising; you are slow.
Tell us why your definition of racism is any more rational than Hitler's, and why we need to simply toss out Hitler's *own* definition of race [which was an important component of his genocidal campaign] out of its historic context, and instead supplant your equally pseudo-scientific racialist dogma to Nazi German history?
quote:akoben08 writes:
Another poster made the point earlier that if you don't believe in race don't use the term racism.
You are indeed slow. Just because I happen to acknowledge that "racism" as *a pseudo-scientific* social construct exists, doesn't mean I actually prescribe to "racialism" as an objective science. Use your head.
quote:akoben08 writes:
But you do too, hypocrite. Plus I see you now what DNA (race?) proof re Jews, I hope you are not going for any study that will "prove" white Jews are "real" Jews. So predictable.
Don't be so obtuse. DNA doesn't equal "race". If German Jews were simply Europeans, as you like to casually recite, then you'd expect them to cluster much more closely to Europeans than to "Southwest Asian" populations. Show me a study that concludes, that European Jews clustered more closely to other European populations than to the so-called "Middle Eastern" groups! Ps- I hope I don't have tell you what "cluster" means.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Bolshevik genocide of Russian Christians and anybody against their dogma, Ukrainian genocide 1920s, WW2 bombing of German civilian areas which Churchill seemed to delight in (he was anti-German, another example of white tribalism), ethic cleaning, mass killings, rape and deportation to labor camps of Germans after WW2.
Hot air. Produce the hard numbers of each and every European segments that existed as *socio-ethnic* entities and the names of those segments [meaning, that is not a nationality], and show how they were singled out and mass murdered on the bases of some national socialist campaign against a designated socio-ethnic "collectivism".
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
Wow Ausarian, you sound really pissed! Please be gentle with me when you come back! lol
If presistently confusing you with facts is a sign of anger to you, then I don't want to be gentle with you.
quote:akoben08 writes:
But from reading the rest of your post it seems as if frustration is the least of your problems, as you are now delusional! What "substantive argument" have you "bombarded" me with? Your quotes are impressive spam but refute nothing, you are like Winters now.
Don't always agree with him, but Winters is far more educated than you are it is unwise to look down on those who outclass you!
Fact is, the moment Hitler's quotes on his "racialist" dogma was posted, you were toasted, because that was what you were presumably arguing against. All the other stuff, is just gravey...just fyi material for those in the little know about his most basic motives behind Hitler's genocidal *racist* campaign. Though Hitler was obviously a genocidal extremist, at basic, his case goes back to that point I made about politicians hiding their most basic motives of keeping the labor movements at bay, by focusing their populist rhetoric on those socio-cultural issues that divide and distract the proletariat, but really do nothing to advance their [the proletariat's] socio-economic cause.
quote:akoben08 writes:
You see fundamentally your premise is unsound, the facts are overwhelmingly in my favour:European Jews are indeed white people and had always been an integral part of western imperialism and aggression. Due to your ideological orientation you have to try and separate Jews from all this.
Funny; you say my premise is unsound, when you have yet to correctly get it down, even at the very basic level.
You reiterate your dubious generalization about European Jews, yet have no genealogical fact to hold onto.
quote:akoben08 writes:
So you grudgingly admitted that "some" prominent Jews are among the elite, but they as a group are by and large victims of race-baiting by the non-Jewish petty bourgeois. You were absolutely predictable!
If not for your slowness, can you explain what is supposedly 'begrudging' to me about pointing out the improved and rather successful integration of Jews into European socio-economic life [backed by mathematical figures], when it in effect supports the case I was making: It was precisely posted to refute your point about lack of Jewish integration being the main reason behind Hitler's genocidal racism so does it not then make more sense, that you'd be begrudged by that fact?
quote:akoben08 writes:
European Jews as white people
I am not backtracking on any so-called Jewish origins. Your confusion is due to your lack of basic knowledge. The Khazars/Ashkenazi or Eastern European Jews are converts; you seem unaware of Author Koestler and his book The Thirteenth Tribe, amazing given your obvious interest in the Jews of Europe.
You have that "basic knowledge" so locked down, that you can't answer to a simple request made of you to produce the corresponding genealogical evidence for it - that Ashkenazi Jews are really European converts with no genealogical ties to the Levantine Jewry. Nice!
quote:akoben08 writes:
What is "race"
What is your problem here?
My problem: Your definition of "race"; it is not only pseudo-scientific, but it is also pseudo-historic where Nazi Germany history is concerned. You simply want to erase the *fact* that Hitler saw Jews as a distinct race from his own, by projecting your own pseudo-scientific labels onto this history.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Is my definition that different from the popular definition based on what we now know from recent studies in genetics: that there are no biologically distinct races, only phenotypical differences.
What genetics tells us that "race" is "phenotypical differences"?
quote:akoben08 writes:
As for as Hitler's genocidal campaign against them, it cannot be seen outside the context of WW2 as partisans, in other words it was politics, not race.
What do you think "racialism" has always been about, if not politics or dogma? It is certainly not rooted in the biological definition of the term. Use your head.
quote:akoben08 writes:
If it were the latter why did he have them as financiers, in his army, work with them to build up a Jewish community in Palestine?
Easy:
1) The progress of Jewish integration into European socio-economic life preceded his ascendancy to power.
2)He realized [unlike you] that Jews did not belong to some monolithic class or ideological movement, even though he capitalized on anti-Jewish xenophobia to suppress the labor movement. Remember, he was a politician. [Although not as extreme to the extent of being a genocidal campaign, a modern example can perhaps be seen in how Hispanic bourgeois figures work together with their white Euro-American counterparts, yet anti-immigrant populist rhetoric, directed at largely Hispanic immigrants, has increasingly become rampant in American bourgeois politics.]
3)Zionist and the Nazi were strange bed fellows, because certain Zionist players saw brutal aggression and collective punishment against their fellow Jews by non-Jewish elements as an instigator for Jewish unification, and pushing forward the argument of a Jewish state in the Jewish homeland, while Hitler saw the scapegoating of Jews as central to his suppression of labor movements, in many of which according to him, Jews were also prominent. The question now for you, is whether Hitler had made any *visible* and tangible efforts to move all the German Jews to a Jewish homeland outside of Germany? If not, why not?
quote:akoben08 writes:
These facts contradict your arguments so you dismiss them "Not particularly interested in you telling me things". Yet the "things" are important to understanding how after coming to power he backtracked from most of his rants in Mein Kamf.
Learn about my argument first, and then critique it [with counter-facts]!
quote:akoben08 writes:
Therefore the context is: face with the reality of Jewish power Hitler turned from the fiery activist to the compromising politician - as politicians do when they come to power. This is not unusual.
What do you understand by that "Jewish power" that Hitler was supposedly so fearful of. What is it specifically? You just espoused empty rhetoric, without any "context".
quote:akoben08 writes:
So you see you refute nothing only make vague references to the "extra-Mein Kampf material" (I wonder what that is) but if you want to say something on this "extra-Mein Kampf material", then say it. But I hope you are noting going to be predictable again.
To the extent that you offer nothing in response to the refutation of your superficial claims about Nazi genocidal racism, there really is nothing else to refute.
If I must spoon-feed you, the "extra" Mein Kampf material refers to primary documentations or citations that were not taken from Mein Kampf, but place the Mein Kampf material into context, substantiate indepth outsider analysis of the thought or ideas that went into the writing of Mein Kampf, and correlate these ideas with the actions that Hitler *actually* undertook, during his ascension to power.
quote:akoben08 writes:
which is why you are acting like a Nazi apologist for Hitler.
This is what you are reduced to. Sad.
Superficially, you seem ticked off by it, but fact is, as I have already laid out, you have too much ideologically in common with Hitler; you are both anti-revolutionary personalities who are dangerously hostile to the labor or proletariat movement, and you are both convinced that Jewish genocide was necessary and justified. The difference here, is that he had the political power to carry out such a genocide!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Hold up! Ausarian, do you have a problem with historical revisionism now? Are you saying we must accept historical interpretations of data from the mainstream? Please tell me that's not what you are saying on ES? lol
But come now, from your replies it is obvious that you who are the apologist for genocide, initially you asked Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews? yet when presented with it you dismiss it as "hot air" and try to move the goal post to names (not nationalities?) of said victims and examples they were singled out as victims of Nazi campaign etc, when I said no such thing!! My point is they were victims of political violence and European tribalism and that Jewish suffering in Europe wasn't unique! And you call me an apologist for genocide?!?! Now you want to play the "hard numbers" game, this is pointless as Not only does the '6 Million' figure become more untenable but the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers. [Finkelstein 2000] and really obscene quite frankly as suffering is suffering.
All these exchanges are really as a result of you wilfully ignoring what I actually say and proceed to build case on the basis of your strawman: according to you, this [Hitler's beef with Jews] was presumably because of the lack of Jewish integration into European socio-economic life so you to build a pointless case "proving" Jews were in "some" institutions of power (damn Jewish apologist) and quote spam. When this was 1) not the totality of my argument to begin with, only your strawman 2) the "some" here is misleading.
I can understand you wanting see their "improved" socio-economic integration during this time as "evidence" that he was wrong to say they were still nation within a nation. But you fail to see that 1)their so-called "proved" economic integration during this time is misleading as it was really building on their already existing ruling class status from before. (are you going to refute that too?) 2) socially, his problems were not that they were not assimilated, but assimiliate ones were (as he saw it) "degenerating" German culture and national life. Obviously many agreed with him. Even today can you seriously tell me Hollywood and ganga rap etc does not denigrate us?
You also build straws with the relevance of Mien Kamf. I repeatedly stated he had to backtrack on his rants because of the reality of Jewish power, never said he had "admiration/love for Jews".
What do you understand by that "Jewish power" that Hitler was supposedly so fearful of. What is it specifically? You just espoused empty rhetoric, without any "context".
"the Jewish-led, world-wide anti-Nazi boycott was indeed the one weapon Hitler feared" Edwin Black.
Jewish finance is a powerful world factor. It can destroy men, organizations and nations. When the Jewish capitalists get together they will strike back at Germany and the fire of Communism will be lighted and Hitler and his gang will disappear as they have disappeared in Russia . . . If Hitler will not act sensibly then Germany must pay the price as Russia did. Marcus Garvey.
Its amazing your ignorance on the subject.
As for politicians and backtracking, you do seem to understand (there is hope for you) that "it is important to take note of what they actually do" but the reason why you cannot discuss the implications and the extent of his dealings with Jews (Zionist and others), and reasons for the campaign against them as partisans during WW2 is precisely because it undermines your thesis about his motives: "all European Jews deserved to be mass murdered on the basis of racism". But there is no evidence for this. None whatsoever. I amnot an apologist I just go where facts lead. Mass killing yes, but not for reasons you offer.
The question now for you, is whether Hitler had made any *visible* and tangible efforts to move all the German Jews to a Jewish homeland outside of Germany? If not, why not?
Not all wanted to leave, duh!
Show me a study that concludes, that European Jews clustered more closely to other European populations than to the so-called "Middle Eastern" groups!
Look man, I already told you what I thought of "race" and why they are to be seen as white people never claimed it was scientific, another one of your strawman. I am aware of the "studies" that attempt to refute Koestler's thesis which claims that "some Ashkenazi" contained mutations that are also common among Middle Eastern peoples. These "studies" are understandable, Koestler died mysteriously and was a thorn in their side as the political implications for white Jewish imposters are obvious. But I am also aware of the critiques, I honestly cant recall the one I read but it came out of Harvard pointing out the flaws and the continuous Jewish obsession with "race".
But what is amazing about this attempt on your part to authenticate white Jews is that as a "progressive" you are now reduced to pushing for a quasi "Jewish race" argument along with the Zionists, nice job. lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
Hold up! Ausarian, do you have a problem with historical revisionism now?
You bet I do, including the one you are engaging in.
quote:akoben08 writes:
But come now, from your replies it is obvious that you who are the apologist for genocide, initially you asked Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews? yet when presented with it you dismiss it as "hot air" and try to move the goal post to names (not nationalities?) of said victims and examples they were singled out as victims of Nazi campaign etc, when I said no such thing!!
Malarkey. You give no specific figures nor context; just a hodgepodge of heresay and casual reference to *war victims* in certain countries. German is a nationility, whereas Jewish isn't; but it's natural for you to play dumb upon failing to address what you're specifically challenged to produce.
quote:akoben08 writes:
My point is they were victims of political violence and European tribalism and that Jewish suffering in Europe wasn't unique!
Circular nonsense. You've already been informed of the fact that Jewry is not indigenous to Europe; so how you keep describing it as a component of European tribalism is beyond any stretch of logic. I suppose in your world, you see "German" as a separate tribe, mutually exclusive of German Jews, even though the latter are Germans too. Circular argument is the art of the intellectual lame duck.
quote:akoben08 writes:
And you call me an apologist for genocide?!?! Now you want to play the "hard numbers" game, this is pointless as Not only does the '6 Million' figure become more untenable but the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers. [Finkelstein 2000] and really obscene quite frankly as suffering is suffering.
Yes, I call it as the shoe fits. Failure to take on the challenge that was at hand, you are now reduced to just another holocaust denier!
quote:akoben08 writes:
All these exchanges are really as a result of you wilfully ignoring what I actually say and proceed to build case on the basis of your strawman: according to you, this [Hitler's beef with Jews] was presumably because of the lack of Jewish integration into European socio-economic life so you to build a pointless case "proving" Jews were in "some" institutions of power (damn Jewish apologist) and quote spam. When this was 1) not the totality of my argument to begin with, only your strawman 2) the "some" here is misleading.
Backtracking; which I can understand, since your premise has been turned upside down. Here are your words, that crumbled quickly to scrutiny:
Zionism and Nazi collaboration showed that Hitler's main problem with the Jews had to do with their **refusal to assimilate**, the age old problem in Europe. - akoben08
Mere demonstration of successful Jewish integration into German socio-economic life was enough to turn that statement on its head. You may now continue with backtracking!
quote:akoben08 writes:
I can understand you wanting see their "improved" socio-economic integration during this time as "evidence" that he was wrong to say they were still nation within a nation.
Yes, hard figures of the former [highlighted] turn the latter [highlighted heresay] on its head.
quote:akoben08 writes:
But you fail to see that 1)their so-called "proved" economic integration during this time is misleading as it was really building on their already existing ruling class status from before. (are you going to refute that too?)
Lacks any context! And even if you had one, it has no bearing on the [reiterated] fact that they were already successfully integrated into German society by Hitler's ascension to Nazi power how does that fact help you?
quote:akoben08 writes:
2) socially, his problems were not that they were not assimilated, but assimiliate ones were (as he saw it) "degenerating" German culture and national life.
So, by this, I take it that you no longer agree with this...
Zionism and Nazi collaboration showed that Hitler's main problem with the Jews had to do with their **refusal to assimilate**, the age old problem in Europe. - akoben08
...or do you need convincing that it is backtracking?
quote:akoben08 writes:
Obviously many agreed with him. Even today can you seriously tell me Hollywood and ganga rap etc does not denigrate us?
Hence, Jewish genocide was justified! Nevermind the "many" who didn't agree with him...and you say you are not a Nazi apologist; who are you trying to kid?
quote:akoben08 writes:
You also build straws with the relevance of Mien Kamf. I repeatedly stated he had to backtrack on his rants because of the reality of Jewish power, never said he had "admiration/love for Jews".
Yet those straws were obviously and continue to be so powerful, as you've failed to break them, when they directly shattered your characterization of your idol, Hitler's genocidal anti-Jewish racism as anything but the racism that it was.
Plus, if he never showed affection for Jews and you can't quote him ever doing so, how does the *unmistakable* signs of his dangerous disaffection for them in Mein Kampf translate into backtracking?
quote:akoben08 writes:
What do you understand by that "Jewish power" that Hitler was supposedly so fearful of. What is it specifically? You just espoused empty rhetoric, without any "context".
"the Jewish-led, world-wide anti-Nazi boycott was indeed the one weapon Hitler feared" Edwin Black.
Like the world needed Jewish guidance, in order to be repulsed by Nazi savage aggression? And in any case, how do you separate this from the issue of Hitler's fear of labor movements of the proletariat, which he tied to Jewish leadership or 'Jewish Marxism'?
quote:akoben08 writes:
Jewish finance is a powerful world factor. It can destroy men, organizations and nations. When the Jewish capitalists get together they will strike back at Germany and the fire of Communism will be lighted and Hitler and his gang will disappear as they have disappeared in Russia . . . If Hitler will not act sensibly then Germany must pay the price as Russia did. Marcus Garvey.
Can you direct me to considerable *tangible* material that showed *capitalism* was Hitler's fear, when in fact his fear of labor movements was precisely related to his perception of them as dangerous agents of the weakening of German capitalism? If there's none, how then would Jewish *capitalist* be the subject of Nazi fear? And again, [went unanswered earlier] were Jews *exclusive* of the German ruling elite?
quote:akoben08 writes:
Its amazing your ignorance on the subject.
Which even if were true, would make it multiple times as amazing that you fair far worse.
quote:akoben08 writes:
As for politicians and backtracking, you do seem to understand (there is hope for you)
None-starter - none-issue, which in any event ties in with what I stated about the capitalization by ruling bourgeois layers, of divisive subjective socio-cultural quibbling to distract and keep the proletariat in check, when you mindlessly decided to brand the fact as some abstact "ideology". So as we can see, there's no hope for you on the other hand...but then again, if you're now backtracking, then maybe there's *slight* hope.
quote:akoben08 writes:
that "it is important to take note of what they actually do" but the reason why you cannot discuss the implications and the extent of his dealings with Jews (Zionist and others), and reasons for the campaign against them as partisans during WW2 is precisely because it undermines your thesis about his motives: "all European Jews deserved to be mass murdered on the basis of racism".
Your illiteracy has rendered you an incredibly dense debater. What you call a thesis, was in fact a statement made *about your apologia for Nazi genocidal racism*. Also, You were told ad nauseam that Hitler's genocidal racism was the political ends to his hatred of the labor movement, which he had largely attributed to Jewish leadership. You may now procede to tell me again, that you have a hard time understanding what I just said.
quote:akoben08 writes:
But there is no evidence for this. None whatsoever. I amnot an apologist I just go where facts lead. Mass killing yes, but not for reasons you offer.
When you say his genocidal *racism* was not in fact a form of irrational scapegoating, then that by default, is saying that these were rational, and therefore, the genocide that followed was justified. When you go onto justify this genocide further, on the grounds that Jews supposedly took part in aggressions of the past, then that my friend, makes you Hitler's apologist par excellence!
quote:akoben08 writes:
The question now for you, is whether Hitler had made any *visible* and tangible efforts to move all the German Jews to a Jewish homeland outside of Germany? If not, why not?
Not all wanted to leave, duh!
Obtuse; you were asked to produce tangible material on *tangible* efforts on Hitler's part to prepare a Jewish homeland where Jews could voluntarily or involuntarily [knowing Hitler's standards] vacate to. As such a move would have surely been welcomed by Zionist figures. In the event that there's no tangible evidence of any such thing, then obviously he needed the Jewish segments around, as Marquis de Mores had put it, to give the German proletariat "something to defend, something to conquer", to "suppress the proletariat".
quote:akoben08 writes:
Show me a study that concludes, that European Jews clustered more closely to other European populations than to the so-called "Middle Eastern" groups!
Look man, I already told you what I thought of "race" and why they are to be seen as white people never claimed it was scientific, another one of your strawman.
You attempted to justify your characterization that Hitler's racism was not really 'racism', by relaying that these people were not only "gentile" converts [essentially, meaning no ties to the Levantine Jewry] who were "really" Europeans, but were also white. Challenged to justify this act of turning history on its head, you failed, and now you're reduced to dismissing the challenge. As for the latter; well, it means nothing, because Hitler did not see Jews as his kind, i.e. the "white race", by his very own words.
No matter how many ways you wish to come at it to justify it and mischaracterize it, Hitler's racism will remain "racist", and by his very own definition of it!
quote:akoben08 writes:
I am aware of the "studies" that attempt to refute Koestler's thesis which claims that "some Ashkenazi" contained mutations that are also common among Middle Eastern peoples. These "studies" are understandable, Koestler died mysteriously and was a thorn in their side as the political implications for white Jewish imposters are obvious. But I am also aware of the critiques, I honestly cant recall the one I read but it came out of Harvard pointing out the flaws and the continuous Jewish obsession with "race".
Immaterial & heresay diversions. Put up the requested genetic evidence [showing genetic clustering] for your characterization of the ancestry of European Jewry, or shut up!
quote:akoben08 writes:
But what is amazing about this attempt on your part to authenticate white Jews is that as a "progressive" you are now reduced to pushing for a quasi "Jewish race" argument along with the Zionists, nice job. lol
LMAO. 1)I don't prescribe to "human races" as objective science; virtually anyone who's been here long enough knows that. 2)I'm not authenticating anything; rather, I'm challenging you to authenticate your broad characterization of European Jewish ancestry, and 3)I'm challenging you to authenticate the objective rationality of your idea of "races" on the basis of "phenotypic variations" over that of Hitler's.
FYI - That I've been and continue to be very critical of the consequences of Zionism in the so-called "Middle East", is no secret, but then what else to expect from a newbie?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
You bet I do, including the one you are engaging in.
Then what the hell are you doing on ES? You do know that works from Diop, Dr. Ben et al are refereed to as historical revisionism too do you? Unless you are dumb enough to equate historical revisionism with holocaust denial or pseudo history. In this respect you reveal yourself as not only an ignoramous but a desperate Talmudic Jew apologist.
Revisionism is at the very core of historical scholarship. It is a well-known maxim of the historical profession that each generation rewrites history. This may be due to new documentary evidence, new theories or simply a result of historians asking new questions of old data in the light of new contemporary issues Professor Tony Martin
You give no specific figures nor context; just a hodgepodge of heresay and casual reference to *war victims* in certain countries.
Oh please, I said Jewish suffering wasn't unique, you challenged this and I brought evidence not only of suffering of Germans during and after WW2, but Bolshevik mass killings. You dismiss it again because they are your ideological brethrens, you commie. You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?!Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie!
German is a nationility, whereas Jewish isn't
*sigh* can't bother explain the notion of nation within a nation when applied to Jews of Europe.
Mere demonstration of successful Jewish integration into German socio-economic life was enough to turn that statement on its head. You may now continue with backtracking!
Poor you. No backtracking, didn't know you were that dense; did you not see in the same post where I said but those who saw themselves as German would join army etc? I ddint know I had to spoon feed you (of all people!) and say Hitler's main problem with them had to do with their refusal to genuinely assimilate. Now before you jump on me again and embarrass youself, please be advised that Nahum Goldmann, after referring to successful Jewish integration in Germany after the Emancipation, admits "The majority of the German Jews were never fully assimilated and were much more Jewish than the Jews in other West European countries". [Goldman, 1982]
So there you have it assimilation, not race, was his main problem. But I know you will come back because your ideology cannot allow you to accept this!
And again, [went unanswered earlier] were Jews *exclusive* of the German ruling elite?
My point is they were the most influential of white ruling class, then and now. [Mearsheimer, 2000] when I point this out you squeal how does that fact help you? because you're clueless, you then asked why would Hitler fear them, after I showed they were the super capitalists of Europe!!! My god! Where does you ignorance end?
Jews and Bolshevism: your problem is typical of hardheaded Marxists, refusal to appreciate facts. Fact: disproportionate Jewish representation in Marxist movements, as bourgeois leaders makes communism a "Jewish" movement. You are one of the die hard few unwilling to accept this, even Jewish scholars admit this now. Hence no irrational scapegoating Germans saw the horrors of Bolshevik Russia and Stalinist Ukraine and wanted no part of it.
Hence, Jewish genocide was justified!
Never said this, don't lie, makes you look pathetic.
Obtuse; you were asked to produce tangible material on *tangible* efforts on Hitler's part to prepare a Jewish homeland where Jews could voluntarily or involuntarily [knowing Hitler's standards] vacate to. As such a move would have surely been welcomed by Zionist figures. In the event that there's no tangible evidence of any such thing,
You don't have a clue who Edwin Black is do you? Never heard of the transfer agreement and extensive collaboration with Zionists to build Jewish communities in Palestine etc. You are not ready for a debate on this subject. Go back and do homework. If I knew how to paste pics like Washington I would paste a pic of you in kindergarten like little rasol. lol
Immaterial & heresay diversions. Put up the requested genetic evidence [showing genetic clustering] for your characterization of the ancestry of European Jewry, or shut up!
Oh jesus, Koestler already stated their origins are from W.Asia and Southern Russia, so it wouldnt be surprising to find some of them with likely connections to ME peoples. Now if you want to spin ME peoples into "Levantine Jewry", go ahead, but it is just that, spin. White Jews are white people, Hitler accpeted them as financiers, doctors, in his army...well you get the picture. Are you telling me that we could have assimilated as they did in germany and Europe? It must be you and your love for Talmudic Jews. Are you really black BTW?
he needed the Jewish segments around, as Marquis de Mores had put it, to give the German proletariat "something to defend, something to conquer", to "suppress the proletariat".
And this is the crux of your entire argument which is why this exercise goes on for so long. It along with him wanting to kill all Jews because of race. And the fact that you insist on advancing it even though there is no evidence for it means you are a hopeless ideologue. When facts fail you try straws: so I, like Hitler, "tie it [labor movement] exclusively to Jews". This is what you are reduced to.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
You bet I do, including the one you are engaging in.
Then what the hell are you doing on ES?
Exchanging ideas and keeping deceitful propagators, like you, in check. That simple!
quote:akoben08 writes:
Unless you are dumb enough to equate historical revisionism with holocaust denial or pseudo history. In this respect you reveal yourself as not only an ignoramous but a desperate Talmudic Jew apologist.
What currency does accusation by some beaten down nazi lapdog, like you, hold? None, that's what.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Revisionism is at the very core of historical scholarship. It is a well-known maxim of the historical profession that each generation rewrites history. This may be due to new documentary evidence, new theories or simply a result of historians asking new questions of old data in the light of new contemporary issues Professor Tony Martin
Self-flatterer, but at the end of the day, how does irrelevantly citing people have any bearing on your revisionism, which is not to be confused with setting facts straightbut rather, turning historical facts on their head? Don't confuse crack history with facts!
quote:akoben08 writes:
You give no specific figures nor context; just a hodgepodge of heresay and casual reference to *war victims* in certain countries.
Oh please, I said Jewish suffering wasn't unique, you challenged this and I brought evidence not only of suffering of Germans during and after WW2, but Bolshevik mass killings. You dismiss it again because they are your ideological brethrens, you commie.
^Intellect-free garble; empty heresay and context-free ranting is no substitute for *revelant* and fully-contextualized along with figures and data answers to the request that was at hand.
quote:akoben08 writes:
You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?!Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie!
You're deluded beyond comprehension, my friend; In *reality* however, I "insist on" substantiated and contextualized answers *relevant* to what you were requested to produce, not hairbrain and context-free holocaust denial gobbledygook, you queer swastika-molester.
quote:akoben08 writes:
German is a nationility, whereas Jewish isn't
*sigh* can't bother explain the notion of nation within a nation when applied to Jews of Europe.
Will somebody tell this idiot that Jewish is not a nationality!...and that "successful Jewish integration in German national life" is the anti-thesis of "a nation within a nation". Blinded by apologia to an unmistakable genocidal ideology, i.e. being the nazi apologist that he/she is, he/she fails to see that one can't equate a nationality with an ethnic group; the latter is a subset of the former, you nazi dunce!
quote:akoben08 writes:
Mere demonstration of successful Jewish integration into German socio-economic life was enough to turn that statement on its head. You may now continue with backtracking!
Poor you. No backtracking, didn't know you were that dense; did you not see in the same post where I said but those who saw themselves as German would join army etc?
Misguided sense of sympathy, no? Being a numbskull has rendered you incapable of reading even your own writing. Let me help you, again with emphasis in bold; this is what was said:
Zionism and Nazi collaboration showed that Hitler's ***main*** problem with the Jews had to do with their ***refusal to assimilate***, the age old problem in Europe. - akoben08
...and now, compare that with this:
socially, his problems ***were not*** that they were ***not assimilated***, but assimiliate ones were (as he saw it) "degenerating" German culture and national life. - akoben08
The second quote is in direct contradiction of the first. And of course this happened, because you were pressured to backtrack when your claim crumbled with scrutiny. Haven't seen this level of flip-flopping in recent times since John Kerry's run for office.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I ddint know
That's just it; what do you really know? Nothing, that's what.
quote:akoben08 writes:
I had to spoon feed you (of all people!) and say Hitler's main problem with them had to do with their refusal to genuinely assimilate.
You couldn't spoon-feed me your pseudo-science garble, even over my dead body. You on the other hand, need to relentlessly be fed with reality, which is that, this claim of "refusal to genuinely assimilate", is just nazi apologia pseudo-science garble that is turned on its head by the very same fact that you deemed irrelevant, and that you contradict yourself with, by repeating it elsewhere: the successful Jewish integration into German socio-economic life, backed by hard numbers!
quote:akoben08 writes:
Now before you jump on me again and embarrass youself, please be advised that Nahum Goldmann, after referring to **successful Jewish integration in Germany after the Emancipation, admits "The majority of the German Jews were never fully assimilated and were much more Jewish than the Jews in other West European countries". [Goldman, 1982]
Actually, I'll just jump on you and embarrass you again, as I have done so over and over before:
The former, which is this:
**successful** Jewish integration in Germany after the Emancipation
...is the anti-thesis of this:
"The majority of the German Jews were **never fully assimilated**
...and falsified by this:
Quoted earlier, Robert Wistrich noted:
"By the 1870s, the Jews appeared as the bourgeois par excellence in a society that was still not fully embourgeoised, as innovative modernizers in a nation that was not yet modernized."
22 percent of the employees working in banks and on the stock exchanges in 1882 were Jews.
Jews accounted for little more than one percent of the German population, [yet] they represented 43.25 percent of the proprietors and directors of banking and credit enterprises.
Some of the greatest banks in Germany were controlled by Jews, such as that of Bleichrder in Berlin, Warburg in Hamburg, Oppenheim in Kln and Rothschild in Frankfurt.
In the early 1900s, the renowned economist Werner Sombart noted that 25 percent of the members of the boards of directors in 10 major branches of German industry were Jews.
Another important feature of the success of German Jewry was its prominent position in the skilled professions: by 1882 11.7 percent of all doctors, 8.6 percent of journalists and 7.9 percent of all lawyers were Jews. As these figures indicate, Jewish youth attended colleges in great numbers.
Gist: "This success provided further grounds for anti-Semitic appeals to the insecurity of the German Mittelstand, which resented Jewish competition." - David North, courtesy of Robert Wistrich."
^In other words, the *excessively* successful integration of Jews into German national life, made them more susceptible to the venomous Nazi anti-Jewish jingoism!
[*Successful integration* is measured by the hard numbers with respect to Jewish population size as a subset of the German population, and how that stacks against that of the remaining German population size. If Jews were not successful in meaningful numbers vis-a-vis the overall size of the Jewish population against that of the rest of the German society, then the characterization of "success" would be meaningless.]
Also,
in that many ethnics group within nations have a tendency to be conservative about their core cultural traditions - and not just Jews, how does that in anyway take away from the considerably successful Jewish assimilation into German national life, backed by hard figures? And what does it mean, to be "fully assimilated"?
what does it mean to be "more Jewish" than "other Jews"?
why on earth would the Nazi be complaining about the need for Jews to be "fully assimilated", when in fact Hitler was quoted complaining about Jews contaminating the white race, and bent on "lowering" their culture? In otherwords, his complaining about the danger of their successful assimilation, which his complaint implicates as something actually encouraged by Jews for some sinister reasons.
and if Jews, though acheived considerable prominence in German socio-eonomic life, were dominant of the German elite, why would Hitler be complaining about the danger of them bringing down the "[white race's] cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate."
Why would Jews bring down the "White man's" political level so that they "might" dominate, if they had already dominated the Germain elite?
quote:akoben08 writes:
So there you have it assimilation, not race, was his main problem.
You bactrack crazily back and forth like a clock pendulum. Lol.
quote:akoben08 writes:
But I know you will come back because your ideology cannot allow you to accept this!
The fact that you failed to identify what constitutes this ideology and why, shows that you aren't conscious; it is a figment of your imagination.
quote:akoben08 writes:
And again, [went unanswered earlier] were Jews *exclusive* of the German ruling elite?
My point is they were the most influential of white ruling class, then and now.
Really; which is why Hitler would say this?...
ultimate idea of bastardizing the white race which they hate and thus lowering its cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate."
...which goes back to this question:
Why would Jews bring down the "White man's" political level so that they "might" dominate, if they had already dominated the Germain elite?
And
Why would they be "bastardizing" a race that they were a part of, according to you?
quote:akoben08 writes:
[Mearsheimer, 2000] when I point this out you squeal how does that fact help you? because you're clueless
You'd be clueless too, if you were trying to make sense out of nonsense, which is what you offer. To add salt to injury, is your incapacity to read even your own posts: Earlier, you spoke of "successful assimilation" in some past, without any context, which was what incited me to ask about you how that helped your case, when it was in fact one of the main points that destroyed it. Learn to read.
quote:akoben08 writes:
you then asked why would Hitler fear them, after I showed they were the super capitalists of Europe!!! My god! Where does you ignorance end?
You imagine my ignorance, because you can't read...and you're idiot, because you couldn't see this:
Why would Hitler fear super capitalists, if that was the very thing he was defending from the labor movement...and then like a retarded kid, you ask why anyone would ask you a question with regards to the fact.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Jews and Bolshevism: your problem is typical of hardheaded Marxists, refusal to appreciate facts. Fact: disproportionate Jewish representation in Marxist movements, as bourgeois leaders makes communism a "Jewish" movement. You are one of the die hard few unwilling to accept this, even Jewish scholars admit this now.
Misguided hot air. If you weren't such a nazi-appeasing knucklehead, you would have paid close attention when you're being told about Hitler's association of the labor movement with Jewish leadership and what was then called Jewish Marxism. Why would I deny that, when I was the one who educated your uneducated self about the fact?
Remember this?...
"I can't believe you are incredibly illiterate.
Where were you, when...
I mentioned in a passing, the Russian revolution; what did you assume I was referring to?
I quoted Hitler, speaking of Jewish control of Russia; what did you think he was referring to...the Czar, perhaps? Lol.
I quoted Hitler, tying Marxism to Jews?
You either need reading glasses, or a special reading class, or better yet, a special ed. for the intellectually slow."
^...which remains true, to be compounded by your elusive answers to questions therein.
Plus, being the beaten down dodger that you are, you hope to evade the real issue at hand about "exclusivity" of Jews in labor movements...
Recap: "Even though the Russian October evolution [as well as the German November revolution], constituted of considerable non-Jewish European figures, youlike Hitler, tie it exclusively to Jews."
Go and learn your ABCs, before you come in here trying to debate your superiors.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Hence no irrational scapegoating Germans saw the horrors of Bolshevik Russia and Stalinist Ukraine and wanted no part of it.
What horrors: specifically by whom, when, data and context?->
Being uneducated has rendered you handicapped in realizing the complexity in the Bolshevik complex's history, that it had different factions [with their respective standards that need to be contextualized according to respective historical specificities], and the most notably estranged divergent one was that led by the reactionary Stalin.
...and oh, did you know that Germany actually had [and still has] a complex social structure, and that there were German labor movements?...because your broad generalization of them paints you as an ignorant of the fact that German society comprised of not a single stratum but different social strata.
Now, stop being just Hitler's apologetic lapdog and parrot, and explain away how the Nazi genocidal butchering of Jewish masses is considered a very rational thing to do.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Hence, Jewish genocide was justified!
Never said this, don't lie, makes you look pathetic.
Why would I need to lie, when you're lying to yourself about not being an apologist for Jewish genocide.
It's written all over this last posting of yours, and its predecessors. In fact, the quote right above the current one, is one of your crude ahistoric context-free justifications for the genocide.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Obtuse; you were asked to produce tangible material on *tangible* efforts on Hitler's part to prepare a Jewish homeland where Jews could voluntarily or involuntarily [knowing Hitler's standards] vacate to. As such a move would have surely been welcomed by Zionist figures. In the event that there's no tangible evidence of any such thing,
You don't have a clue who Edwin Black is do you? Never heard of the transfer agreement and extensive collaboration with Zionists to build Jewish communities in Palestine etc.
Well, what are you waiting for: where's the requested material [and as specified]?
Note: *Tangible efforts* means actions, not "rhetoric" or "shaking hands".
quote:akoben08 writes:
You are not ready for a debate on this subject.
Let go your delusions of my readiness; just *improve* your scanty readiness, by being a good kid and submit to the aforemention request.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Go back and do homework.
Done; now, why are your's not done?
quote:akoben08 writes:
If I knew how to paste pics like Washington I would paste a pic of you in kindergarten like little rasol. lol
Telling confession: you helplessly can't paste a pic, because you haven't yet overcome your ABCs. The least of your worries should be pasting kindergarten pics of people you've never seen; hit the books on your ABCs first.
quote:akoben08 writes:
Immaterial & heresay diversions. Put up the requested genetic evidence [showing genetic clustering] for your characterization of the ancestry of European Jewry, or shut up!
Oh jesus, Koestler already stated their origins are from W.Asia and Southern Russia, so it wouldnt be surprising to find some of them with likely connections to ME peoples.
Where in W. Asia, and how do you quantify "some", and supported by what genealogical studies?
quote:akoben08 writes:
Now if you want to spin ME peoples into "Levantine Jewry", go ahead, but it is just that, spin.
^Bankrupt-qualifier clownings aside, I'm still waiting for your elusive "genetic evidence" for the broad characterization about the European genealogical origin of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry.
quote:akoben08 writes:
White Jews are white people, Hitler accpeted them as financiers, doctors, in his army...well you get the picture.
Nope, I don't get *your* picture. Where's the Hitler quote, wherein he relayed his acceptance of Jews into "his race", i.e. the "white race"?
Jewish integration into German society was out of Hitler's hands; it's a phenomenon that preceded his ascendancy to national life. However, he did oversee their genocide!
quote:akoben08 writes:
Are you telling me that we could have assimilated as they did in germany and Europe?
Telling you from where are you telling me that you are "hearing things"? Is your basement studio haunted?
quote:akoben08 writes:
It must be you and your love for Talmudic Jews. Are you really black BTW?
Are you really black? neo-nazi blacks are hard to come by.
quote:akoben08 writes:
he needed the Jewish segments around, as Marquis de Mores had put it, to give the German proletariat "something to defend, something to conquer", to "suppress the proletariat".
And this is the crux of your entire argument which is why this exercise goes on for so long. It along with him wanting to kill all Jews because of race. And the fact that you insist on advancing it even though there is no evidence for it means you are a hopeless ideologue.
Well, oh slow one, what good would presented unequivocal evidence [hence, the last nail in the coffin] ever do you, when you can't read?
quote:akoben08 writes:
When facts fail you try straws: so I, like Hitler, "tie it [labor movement] exclusively to Jews". This is what you are reduced to.
I take it that this entire post is your **best effort to date** in the face of your outstanding obligationsthat is, longwinded context-free, material-free and digressive cheap talk saturated with helpless frustration cloaked in juvenile emotionalism. Bravo, pat yourself on the back!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Revisiting
quote:Originally posted by Ausarian:
quote:akoben08 writes:
White Jews are white people, Hitler accpeted them as financiers, doctors, in his army...well you get the picture.
Nope, I don't get *your* picture. Where's the Hitler quote, wherein he relayed his acceptance of Jews into "his race", i.e. the "white race"?
Jewish integration into German society was out of Hitler's hands; it's a phenomenon that preceded his ascendancy to national life. However, he did oversee their genocide!
quote:akoben08 writes:
he needed the Jewish segments around, as Marquis de Mores had put it, to give the German proletariat "something to defend, something to conquer", to "suppress the proletariat".
And this is the crux of your entire argument which is why this exercise goes on for so long. It along with him wanting to kill all Jews because of race. And the fact that you insist on advancing it even though there is no evidence for it means you are a hopeless ideologue.
Goes back to my earlier statement; You were told ad nauseam that Hitler's genocidal racism was the political ends to his hatred of the labor movement, which he had largely attributed to Jewish leadership. You may now procede to tell me again, that you have a hard time understanding what I just said.
^And indeed, as anticipated, youre too blockheaded to it home. You act as though the politics of race and extant socio-economic environment are mutually exclusive. And in doing so, you incessantly try to rationalize Hitlers irrational concept of races with your own irrational concept of races, with yours being based mainly on skin color that is to say, Hitlers racism isnt really racism, because it doesnt quite parallel your own irrational views of human races.
A more detailed gist: To suppress the labor movement of the proletariat, Hitler your mentor, had to
as Marquis de Mores had put it, to give the German proletariat "something to defend, something to conquer", to "suppress the proletariat".
to overcome proletariat alertness to the inter-strata differences, and the accompanying socio-economic privilege differences that characterize them, between the working proletariat and the bourgeois layers, by fabricating a counterrevolutionary socialist movement that blurred those distinctions, and designed to make the working proletariat identify with the bourgeois layers, and hence, invoke a superficial sense of 'unity' transcending the social strata. Racism against the races deemed inferior to the Aryan race [which Hitler professed himself to be a member of], would be the political means to achieve that end. Racialist chauvinism would divert attention of the working proletariat away from the labor movements against the real source of their socio-economic problems, i.e. extant socio-economic order presided over by the ruling layer. To undermine the labor movement, an effectively divided proletariat is needed. To do this, Hitler saw the need to scapegoat leadership of these movements; as far as he was concerned, Jews were prominent in those leadership circles, and so, how else to better target them than through anti-Jewish racism. The appeal of racism has always precisely been the irrationality which characterizes its premise; and obviously, since Jews were a minority in the German society, the desired effect was to instill a sense of racial unisonone of false racial superiority [to be lent legitimacy symbolically, by the perception of the superior racethe Aryan race in Nazi Germanys caserunning the nation], to be felt across the different social strata and hence, blur the distinct inter-strata interests [with the working proletariat being the main targets of this blurring]. Jewish integration to German national life was already at its advanced stage by the time Hitler ascended to power in Nazi Germany, and so, the setting into motion of this phenomenon was out of his hands. And in any case, Jewish capitalists were part of German capitalism, and so this is not what Hitler, defender of German capitalism [against anything that threatened its position locally and globally, including the labor movement], would have any authentic beef with. However, with his counterrevolutionary socialism, folks like Hitler also sought to seize on empty reactionary populist rhetoric that centered on singling out Jewish financers within the network of German financial institutions, a number of which were at some point or another not highly regarded for their perceived role in deteriorating socio-economic situations confronting the masses, even as he continued to deal with sections of these segments and Zionist elements. The obvious idea was to capitalize on tying such developments with successful Jewish integration into German life, for political expediency. One of the outcomes of successful Jewish assimilation, was its susceptibility to the bourgeois politics of fear and resentment; that issuccess of a minority segment of the population, that was cause for resentment in some reactionary segments of German population. His real beef was with leaders and inspirers of labor movements, many of which he attributed to Jewish prominence in leadership. It requires one to be a simpleton to come to the conclusion that the politics of racism and the extant socio-economic environment are mutually exclusive. And it takes sheer insanity to attempt to rationalize one irrational concept of racialism with another concept of racialism, supposedly as an objective science.
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
Danm! It amazes me that Ausarian's bluntness is often interpreted by some as 'anger' or other fear that he's 'hostile'.
And usually it is they that are 'angry', or just fearful/feal threatened (for some strange reason).
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Oh my god! Is that a reply? Oh come now Ausarianstein. In a debate when material is presented in support of an argument and the opposing side ignores or skirts it, this is a sure sign of defeat! Instead of dealing with my sources you squeal like a stuck piglet and repeat ad nausea your already debunked lines and ask for "tangible" evidence as you are clearly unaware of the material!! Amazing! They say ignorance is bliss but for you it is pathetic! Clueless concerning the works (and implications for this debate) of Goldman, Finkelstien, Black et al so instead you fill your posts with:
nazi lapdog queer swastika-molester nazi apologist nazi dunce a numbskull nazi apologia pseudo-science garble hot air Misguided hot air nazi-appeasing knucklehead neo-nazi black
These are the rantings of a frustrated individual! How can I reply to this? You haven't responded to my sources and their implications. You are too proud to admit you are clueless as to information outside your Jewish liberal arts college reading list. This proves my point, you are a simple ideologue, as I suspected a Trotskyite, as your pathetic attempt to blame the horrors of Marxism in Russia on Stalin alone makes clear. AND YOU SAY I AM AN APOLOGIST FOR GENOCIDE?!?!
Your only remaining shield: Hitler's ranting in Mien Kamf and the Marxist dribbleS of Marquis de Mores shows how desperate you are!
I cannot be held responsible for your limited knowledge on the subject Ausarianstein.
Reiterate: 1) Talmudic Jews see themselves as a nation within a nation. Old dual loyalty charge still to be seen today. So-called assimilation into socio-economic life of Germany (as indeed all of Europe) was not genuine. Even as head of state, like Disraeli, they still saw themselves as a superior and separate tribe. Hence Hitlers beef with them and assimilation.
2) Marxism was in fact a Jewish led movement, hence no irrational scapegoating.
3) Hitler's cooperation with Jewish capitalists and backtracking on his more extreme anti-Jewish rants proves his rants in Mein Kamf were just that, rants. Fear of the power of Jewish capitalists (not any "labor movement") was due to their economic clout and having been responsible for putting the Bolsheviks in power, not the Russian people as the propaganda has it.
4) His cooperation with Zionists to build a Jewish community in Palestine (at Germany's expensive), Jews in his army, Jewish doctors etc proves he didn't want to "kill all Jews because of race". Mass killings were in WW2 context as partisans.
5) Jewish sufferening in Europe wasnt unique, in fact when the numbers come tumbling down (as Finkelstein and others note) it will show that they in fact feared better than the other white tribes.
As for white Jews as Levantine Jewry. This what I mean when I say you are like Winters Ausarianstein. You make a wild claim (white Jews are descended from Levantine Jewry) and ask others to disprove it. Go read what The Bass has to say about the rules of debate, newbie. lol
The sheer size of the Khazar Talmudic imposters (among other things) proves they are converts as there was no dispersal..oops, did I say that? [Shlomo Sand When and How the Jewish People Was Invented?] According to Sand like other national movements in Europe..oops, Jews invented their past. So Ausarianstein, Zionism=Nazism=Eurocentrism. White Jews are white people. Argument done
Postscript on white Jews as white people: are you familiar with the "science" of eugenics (classic white science) Ausarianstein? Do you know which group of Germans were at the forefront of it? Take one freakin guess...
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Actually, what I recall was; the proposed relocation site (by the Nazis) was, Argentina, which was rejected by the Zionists who held out for Israel/Palestine.
It is an historical fact that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that: a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.
The Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.
The answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments: a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees. b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war. c) No ransom will be paid This response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Misleading propaganda. The immigration scheme started before WW2. Read Edwin Black's The Transfer Agreement, Lenni Brenner's Zionism in the Age of the Dictators and I think Hannah Arendt has written on it too. Lots of primary German and British sources in Israeli and Palestinian papers on the subject. Wealth of info contradicting the picture painted in the above article. It's a subject well known outside of the controlled US universities.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
My source is correct and not a university text. Your source is more likely propaganda.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
simple question, whats makes it correct and mine propaganda?
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by adolf-hitler-koben08:
Oh my god! Is that a reply? Oh come now Ausarianstein. In a debate when material is presented in support of an argument and the opposing side ignores or skirts it, this is a sure sign of defeat!
Red Herring, adolf hitler jr. Identify what you call "material", and why it would be called one sans any substance, context, hard data or figures?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Instead of dealing with my sources you squeal like a stuck piglet and repeat ad nausea your already debunked lines and ask for "tangible" evidence as you are clearly unaware of the material!!
Must have missed it; please identify the *material* contents of the "debunkee" and the "debunkers" that were to your advantage. All we've heard so far, is bitch-shriek about not being "treated gently", like some cross-dressing queer whom pms just stroke like thunder-lightning.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Amazing! They say ignorance is bliss but for you it is pathetic! Clueless concerning the works (and implications for this debate) of Goldman, Finkelstien, Black et al so instead you fill your posts with
Like a neophyte beedy-eyed nazi loon, you casually undertake mere layman heresay, immaterial citations, and quoting folks out of both context and hard material [like Finkelstein for example]; a trade you've learnt from those kkk loon sites.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
nazi lapdog queer swastika-molester nazi apologist nazi dunce a numbskull nazi apologia pseudo-science garble hot air Misguided hot air nazi-appeasing knucklehead neo-nazi black
These are the rantings of a frustrated individual! How can I reply to this? You haven't responded to my sources and their implications.
Actually, those 'tit-for-tat' characterizations of you were quite generous, coming from me; it could be a lot worse. Rather, my substantially detailed responses demonstrate my genuine desire to keep the discussion materially-engaged on the pressing issues at hand, which you run away from nonetheless with each reply.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
You are too proud to admit you are clueless as to information outside your Jewish liberal arts college reading list. This proves my point, you are a simple ideologue, as I suspected a Trotskyite, as your pathetic attempt to blame the horrors of Marxism in Russia on Stalin alone makes clear. AND YOU SAY I AM AN APOLOGIST FOR GENOCIDE?!?!
You say 'simple ideologue', yet cannot identify an ideology when pressed.
Face it, genocide apologist: these are just mere heresay and ahistoric anti-proletariat lines [lacking any text or context] uncritically recited by ordinary nazi loons, which one finds at cites like stormfrontwhere your kind really belong.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Your only remaining shield: Hitler's ranting in Mien Kamf and the Marxist dribbleS of Marquis de Mores shows how desperate you are!
Reduced to trivializing a section of annihilators of your ahistoric "theries" lacking context.
Mein Kampf punches a huge hole into your main argument against rasol's premise. Hitler quotes outside Mein Kampf put Mein Kampf material into broader context.
Marquis de Mores quotes which you confuse with "Marxist dribbles" testifies to your unread status quo, because even the most retarded nazi loon would recorgnize Mores was no 'Marxist'far from it.
These elements were just tidbits of the holes punched into your defensiveness which you've never recovered from, and yet you're asking for more?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
I cannot be held responsible for your limited knowledge on the subject Ausarianstein.
But you are responsible for the gapping hole that this "limited knowledge" has punched into your hairbrain "theories", if one can even call it that, bonehead adolf-hitler-koben08.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Reiterate:
1) Talmudic Jews see themselves as a nation within a nation. Old dual loyalty charge still to be seen today.
Reiterating ahistoric garble [about German Jewry] that lacks basic common sense does you what good?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
So-called assimilation into socio-economic life of Germany (as indeed all of Europe) was not genuine.
"So-called assimilation" is backed by records of real quantitative figures, that you have no prayer of countering. Your delusion borders total insanity.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Even as head of state, like Disraeli, they still saw themselves as a superior and separate tribe. Hence Hitlers beef with them and assimilation.
You've failed to pin down the root cause of "Hitler's beef", mischaracterizingly reducing it to "refusal to assimilate" [ahistoric garble]. So, what else you got?supposed Jewish "racial superiority"? Please quote Hitler, acknowledging this Jewish sense of superiority.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
2) Marxism was in fact a Jewish led movement, hence no irrational scapegoating.
Scapegoating is the broad campaign of anti-Jewish-baiting genocidal *racism*, stupid swastika loon. Need to rub off the dust and cobwebs building up on your unused brain cells.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
3) Hitler's...backtracking on his more extreme anti-Jewish rants proves his rants in Mein Kamf were just that, rants.
Went on unanswered [multiple times]can you quote Hitler ever expressing admiration for German Jewry, that he backtracked from?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Fear of the power of Jewish capitalists (not any "labor movement") was due to their economic clout and having been responsible for putting the Bolsheviks in power, not the Russian people as the propaganda has it.
In that capitalism is the anti-thesis of the Russian October Revolutionled by Bolshevik leadership, how does it pay for Jewish "capitalists" to identify with it? Or are you an idiot who cannot tell the difference between financers or backers of a movement with actual capitalists?
Like many trolling loons that come here, you contradict yourself when you say,
Jewish capitalists (not any "labor movement") - adolf-hitler-koben08
...to then go onto say:
been responsible for putting the Bolsheviks in power - adolf-hitler-koben08
If you weren't an unread nazi loon, you'd have seen the contradiction in that the October Revolution which led to Bolshevik power, was a labor movement.
And when you say:
not the Russian people as the propaganda has it - adolf-hitler-koben08
You must not be referring to Mein Kampf [or Hitler elsewhere], which makes no mention of "Russian people" either, but it did however, say this:
recap "The Russian Empire in the East is ripe for collapse; and the end of the Jewish domination of Russia will also be the end of Russia as a state." - Hitler
...and you must not have heard him either, when Hitler said--recap:
Never, never will I depart from the task of eradicating from Germany Marxism and its accompaniments,
One must be the victor here: either Marxism or the German people!
What do you think he meant by "German Marxism", if not referring to the labor movement?
Did you not know that "Marxism" was tied to the Russian [Bolshevik - notably, Leninism and Trotskyism] and German labor movements [like those of German SPD and KPD], you nazi bonehead?
When you say:
Fear of the power of Jewish capitalists (not any "labor movement") was due to their economic clout - adolf-hitler-koben08
...you must not have read the man, when he said:
recap: ultimate idea of bastardizing the white race which they hate and thus lowering its cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate." - Hitler
Why would Hitler fear Jewish economic clout, if by his own admission above, they were not yet dominant? Ruling dominance goes hand in hand with leading economic priviledge - or were you not taught that in nazi loon school?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
4) His cooperation with Zionists to build a Jewish community in Palestine (at Germany's expensive), Jews in his army, Jewish doctors etc proves he didn't want to "kill all Jews because of race". Mass killings were in WW2 context as partisans.
The nazi simpleton needs relentless drilling of facts into his blockhead:
In the simplest terms...
Fact1 He mass murdered Jews on the "basis of race".
Fact2 The "race-baiting" was the political means of "suppressing the German labor movement".
Fact3 The labor movement was identified with "Jewish Marxism".
Fact 1, 2 & 3 are not mutually exclusive, but mutually inclusive, get it looney/genocide apologist?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
5) Jewish sufferening in Europe wasnt unique,
Talk of "suffering wasn't unique" is the dead-end bankrupt non-starter of a last straw seizure by the intellectually dead.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
in fact when the numbers come tumbling down (as Finkelstein and others note) it will show that they in fact feared better than the other white tribes.
The wide-eyed looney holocaust denier quotes people he's obviously never read:
Finkelstein at an interview posted by MEMRI, of June 6th, 2006:
"Number 1, there is the issue of the truth of the Nazi holocaust. In my opinion, rational people will not debate whether the Nazi holocaust happened. Of course the Nazi holocaust happened. It was a colossal crime that was committed against Jews, against Gypsies, against the handicapped, against many peoples. Among those people were the crimes committed, colossal crimes, against the Jews. Roughly speaking, you can say between 5 and 5 1/2 million Jews were exterminated during World War 2 [The Destruction of the European Jews, Yale Univ. Press, 2003, c1961)]. That's the factual question and rational people, reasonable people, will not debate the factual question." - Finkelstein
Finkelstein never disputed the fact of the holocaust or the generally accepted figures of the scope of human loss, you crackhead holocaust denier.
Apparently, Finkelstein's assessment renders you not one of those "rational and reasonable people" he spoke of.
Rather, what Finkelstein criticized, and rightfully so, is the use of the Jewish Holocaust for political expediency by Zionist elites and their sympathizers, to silence criticism of Zionist terrorism in the so-called Middle East, amongst other despotic and reactionary activities. As a result, according to Finkelstein, the political opportunism of the Holocaust by the Zionist elites and their sympathizers has invoked reactionary response [by the intellectually weak or misguided], to deny the Holocaust and its scope...
"But then there is a second question, the political question, namely, the use to which the Nazi holocaust has been put. Is the Nazi holocaust being used as a way of enlightening people about human suffering and about crimes committed against innocent people? Or is the Nazi holocaust being used to confuse people and to deny crimes which are being committed now by Jews? That's a political question and we shouldn't confuse the two. ***There are many people unfortunately who, because Israel has misused the Nazi holocaust, exploited the Nazi holocaust, they have decided to deny the Nazi holocaust ever happened.*** Now, to me, **that's foolish**. You can't deny facts. It happened. It was horrific. What you should do, in my opinion, is to expose the wrong purposes, the evil purposes to which these facts are being put. That's a separate question." - Finkelstein
So, by Finkelstein own characterization of Holocaust denial, you are a fool!
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
As for white Jews as Levantine Jewry. This what I mean when I say you are like Winters Ausarianstein. You make a wild claim (white Jews are descended from Levantine Jewry) and ask others to disprove it.
Where was that made; please cite it! Only one wild claim was made about ancestry of European Jewry in this discussion and it came from you. Pressed you on it, but the genetic basis for it still remains elusive.
Who are you still trying to kid, you wacky holocaust denier?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Go read what The Bass has to say about the rules of debate, newbie. lol
I have; in it, he refers to your kind as the "new breed troll" types. Ironic, isn't it? > re: 'newbie' guess you weren't here long enough to have seen it.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
The sheer size of the Khazar Talmudic imposters (among other things) proves they are converts as there was no dispersal..oops, did I say that? [Shlomo Sand When and How the Jewish People Was Invented?] According to Sand like other national movements in Europe..oops, Jews invented their past. So Ausarianstein, Zionism=Nazism=Eurocentrism. White Jews are white people. Argument done
Lol @ this wacky old strip-joint nazi lapdancer...assuming that he can just continue dance away [without notice] vis-a-vis the still elusive response to requested genetic evidence.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Postscript on white Jews as white people: are you familiar with the "science" of eugenics (classic white science) Ausarianstein? Do you know which group of Germans were at the forefront of it? Take one freakin guess..
Here's my "freakin guess": you are one pretty fucked up queer nazi lapdancer still high on crack!
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
akoben08,
You are a fresh air, and just you know, every newbies are tested
So, you read Hannah Arendt?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Wow again you sound frustrated! But I hope in your anger you don't break your fingers typing, I will want you again for another beat down! I had a hard time sifting through the same debunked lines, vile epithets and foul language(ohh so nasty Ausarianstein). But I see you finally tried to deal with one of my sources. But before I destroy you here, again, a few words on the debate thus far.
1) On Hitler's backtracking: You haven't dealt with any of the material putting him in context, you pull only straw man can you quote Hitler ever expressing admiration for German Jewry
2) you are hopelessly clueless about the history of dual loyalty and fake assimilation charge against Jews of Europe, hence your constant squealing about you having "proved" assimilation with "hard data": it's not about them entering into arts, medicine, professions etc Ausarianstein but did they lose their Jewishness? As Goldman noted (and others), they did not. Still nation within a nation.
3) Your historical ignorance again shows up in your failure to grasp the importance of Jewish bankers financing the overthrow of the anti-Jew Csar. Your insistence on labelling Bolsheviks a "labor movement" is indicative of your ideological approach. Pathetic. Your ignorance is too amazing Ausarianstein, I will repeat, you are not ready for a debate on this subject.
4) Khazars and your "Levantine Jewry": Oh I'm sorry, I thought you were nagging me to bring "proof" they were not connected to "Levantine Jewry" hence not Euros, if I'm wrong here then no need to labor this anymore.
Now to Finkelstein and MEMRI interview (nice "research institute" BTW, has many of your kind of folks...) it is another straw as I never denied mass killings of Jews, my use of his quote was to show that the numbers of Jewish victims are coming down because of revisonism. [Pressac, 1989.] Now before you embarrass yourself again Pressac no "holocaust denier" only revised Auschwitz figures, once 4 million! Finkelstein admitted he was no expert in that field, but you do his purpose little justice (like your MEMRI outfit lol) among his aims is to challenge the notion that Jewish suffering as unique, but you edited this part because it was precisely the point I was making!
The "2003" date on the Hilberg's book (so-called standard text) is unfortunate and misleading as that book is old bunk; been exposed as pseudo-scientific garb soon after appearance and final blow at the Zundel Trial in 80s. Hence it has undergone many "revisions", but the 5.1 figure (pulled from air) is from the old version, so it too is bunk. You are TOO PREDICTABLE Ausarianstein.
So again you are like Winters, offer only spam. But I am enjoying myself! I cant remeber any of the rest of your spam (reply) but have to run now.
Arwa,I read an article by her once on Zionism.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by adolf-hitler-koben08:
Wow again you sound frustrated!
Good; you're finally opening up to how you really feel.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
1) On Hitler's backtracking: You haven't dealt with any of the material putting him in context, you pull only straw man can you quote Hitler ever expressing admiration for German Jewry
Meaning, zero evidence of backtracking. So, let's go to your next excuse, shall we.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
2) you are hopelessly clueless about the history of dual loyalty and fake assimilation charge against Jews of Europe, hence your constant squealing about you having "proved" assimilation with "hard data": it's not about them entering into arts, medicine, professions etc Ausarianstein but did they lose their Jewishness? As Goldman noted (and others), they did not. Still nation within a nation.
Your lack of perceptiveness towards anti-thesis cases has duly been noted in the last post and the previous. Anything new, wacky old genocide apologist?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
3) Your historical ignorance again shows up in your failure to grasp the importance of Jewish bankers financing the overthrow of the anti-Jew Csar. Your insistence on labelling Bolsheviks a "labor movement" is indicative of your ideological approach. Pathetic. Your ignorance is too amazing Ausarianstein, I will repeat, you are not ready for a debate on this subject.
Immaterialism mixed with ignorance needn't even be dignified by addressing. Have anything else, wacky holocaust apologist?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
4) Khazars and your "Levantine Jewry": Oh I'm sorry, I thought you were nagging me to bring "proof" they were not connected to "Levantine Jewry" hence not Euros, if I'm wrong here then no need to labor this anymore.
Loony evasion attempt of evidential obligation. Next.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Now to Finkelstein and MEMRI interview (nice "research institute" BTW, has many of your kind of folks...) it is another straw as I never denied mass killings of Jews, my use of his quote was to show that the numbers of Jewish victims are coming down because of revisonism.
Reiterating embarrasing lies [call it your "Finkelstein fiasco"] doesn't help. Blunt Finkelstein citation reiterates the generally acknowledged figures of the Holocaust; no revision here, and no disagreement here from him. According to him, wacky holocaust deniers like you, are "fools". End of story.
And oh, another thing you've gotten wrong; the source is directly from Mr. Finkelstein himself: www.normanfinkelstein.com
^One just can't beat that, right, nazi lapdancer?
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
[Pressac, 1989.] Now before you embarrass yourself again Pressac no "holocaust denier" only revised Auschwitz figures, once 4 million! Finkelstein admitted he was no expert in that field,
Yeah, just throw your own source under the bus. Caught pants down shamelessly lying your ass off and taking Finkelstein totally out of context, now you want to throw your own sourcehaving discredited youunder the bus. You wacky nazi loons don't seize to amaze.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
but you do his purpose little justice (like your MEMRI outfit lol) among his aims is to challenge the notion that Jewish suffering as unique, but you edited this part because it was precisely the point I was making!
Interesting damage control attempt via a pointless dead-end non-starter to soothen the 'Finkelstein fiasco'. Not working. Next.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
The "2003" date on the Hilberg's book (so-called standard text) is unfortunate and misleading as that book is old bunk; been exposed as pseudo-scientific garb soon after appearance and final blow at the Zundel Trial in 80s. Hence it has undergone many "revisions", but the 5.1 figure (pulled from air) is from the old version, so it too is bunk. You are TOO PREDICTABLE Ausarianstein.
More crack-history garble meant to be damage control attempt towards the 'Finkelstein fiasco'. You ought to just stick to lapdancing for fellow queer loons; Debating between intellectuals is obviously not your suit.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
So again you are like Winters, offer only spam. But I am enjoying myself! I cant remeber any of the rest of your spam (reply) but have to run now.
Arwa,I read an article by her once on Zionism.
Actually this entire post of yours is just a string of regurgitated long-descredited hairbrain stuff, the usual mixture of holocaust denial, genocide & Hitler apologia, with anti-proletariat babbling and juvenile emotionalism. Just go back to lapdancing, you wacky holocaust-denying nazi loon...or simply keep trying to recover. Your choice.
Ps - meanwhile, leaving a reminder of one of adolf-hitler-koben08's most laughable fiascos...
Hitler quotes from Mein Kampf:
"Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science and technical skill, which we see before our eyes today, is almost exclusively the product of Aryan creative power."
"On this planet of ours human culture and civilization are indissolubly bound up with the presence of the Aryan. If he should be exterminated or subjugated, then the dark shroud of a new barbarian era would enfold the earth."
"Jewish youth lies in wait for hours on end satanically glaring at and spying on the unconscious girl whom he plans to seduce, adulterating her blood with the ultimate idea of bastardizing the white race which they hate and thus lowering its cultural and political level so that the Jew might dominate."
Apparently adolf-hitler-koben08 is the only one who's convinced that this is not *racism*. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
you were asked to produce tangible material on *tangible* efforts on Hitler's part to prepare a Jewish homeland where Jews could voluntarily or involuntarily [knowing Hitler's standards] vacate to...Why would Hitler fear Jewish economic clout, if by his own admission above, they were not yet dominant?... capitalism is the anti-thesis of the Russian October Revolution..how does it pay for Jewish "capitalists" to identify with it? ...this claim of "refusal to genuinely assimilate", is just nazi apologia pseudo-science garble
As the saying goes: "I can lead you to the water (books on the subject), but I can't make you drink it" So yes, we move on.
Loony evasion attempt of evidential obligation. Next.
Yes, since we both know where the burden of proof lies here and we both know there is no evidence for it, I agree, next.
Your attempt to spin my use of Finkelstein to how you want it (I am losing count of your straw men now) is further evidence you know you dont have a "substantially detailed response". Any half wit would see that he was quoted as acknowledging that the Holocaust Industry's numbers are coming down. Now Finkelstein can believe anything from Hilberg's outdated book (I doubt you even knew it was Hilberg's book until I pointed it out; doubt you even know who he was!), but the scientific approach to statistics, as opposed to magic as with Hilberg, has led to the reduction of the numbers. Something you can't address, despite your "materially engaged" claim, so you hide behind "generally acknowledged" figures as if that translates into "correct"! lol
Generally acknowledged by whom Ausarianstein and how did they come about it? You can't explain because you don't know! I was very disappointed you stayed clear from Pressac, I wanted to see how you would spin him too.
But your dishonesty doesn't stop here. You slither down from there to deny your own words Finkelstein at an interview posted by MEMRI, of June 6th, 2006 to imply it was I who said it was from there. Contrary to your lying self, it was I who pointed out it was from Finkelstein's website by comparing your deceitful editing of his words leaving out what he said about the supposed uniqueness of Jewish suffering. It's amazing you missed that part of his website Ausarianstein since you supposedly knew it was from there.
Dishonesty is also a sign of defeat.
The sum total of your so-called materially-engaged discussion is "Immaterialism mixed with ignorance ...More crack-history garble" lol Please, you are not ready for me.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
you were asked to produce tangible material on *tangible* efforts on Hitler's part to prepare a Jewish homeland where Jews could voluntarily or involuntarily [knowing Hitler's standards] vacate to...Why would Hitler fear Jewish economic clout, if by his own admission above, they were not yet dominant?... capitalism is the anti-thesis of the Russian October Revolution..how does it pay for Jewish "capitalists" to identify with it? ...this claim of "refusal to genuinely assimilate", is just nazi apologia pseudo-science garble
As the saying goes: "I can lead you to the water (books on the subject), but I can't make you drink it" So yes, we move on.
Why bother reciting requests that you can't deliver on. It adds to injury. You nazi turds are funny.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Loony evasion attempt of evidential obligation. Next.
Yes, since we both know where the burden of proof lies here and we both know there is no evidence for it, I agree, next.
Lol @ this loon. Citing requests he's not intellectually-equipped to deliver on.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Your attempt to spin my use of Finkelstein to how you want it (I am losing count of your straw men now) is further evidence you know you dont have a "substantially detailed response". Any half wit would see that he was quoted as acknowledging that the Holocaust Industry's numbers are coming down. Now Finkelstein can believe anything from Hilberg's outdated book (I doubt you even knew it was Hilberg's book until I pointed it out; doubt you even know who he was!), but the scientific approach to statistics, as opposed to magic as with Hilberg, has led to the reduction of the numbers. Something you can't address, despite your "materially engaged" claim, so you hide behind "generally acknowledged" figures as if that translates into "correct"! lol
Generally acknowledged by whom Ausarianstein and how did they come about it? You can't explain because you don't know! I was very disappointed you stayed clear from Pressac, I wanted to see how you would spin him too.
You must not have that half wit, as your 'Finkelstein fiasco' attests to dimwitted damage control attempts [including this one] notwithstanding.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
But your dishonesty doesn't stop here. You slither down from there to deny your own words Finkelstein at an interview posted by MEMRI, of June 6th, 2006 to imply it was I who said it was from there. Contrary to your lying self, it was I who pointed out it was from Finkelstein's website by comparing your deceitful editing of his words leaving out what he said about the supposed uniqueness of Jewish suffering. It's amazing you missed that part of his website Ausarianstein since you supposedly knew it was from there.
Back to the well known troll trade of backtracking, eh, wacky genocide apologist? The holocaust-denying clown thought I'd taken from MEMRI, which is why the loon tried to affiliate me with them.
Now, look here, in the simplest terms: The interview that was posted and *edited* by MEMRI, was re-posted on Finkelstein's site *unedited*. Your blockhead getting it? Hope so.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
The sum total of your so-called materially-engaged discussion is "Immaterialism mixed with ignorance ...More crack-history garble" lol Please, you are not ready for me.
So much writing, but nothin' said. You wacky nazi loons are pathetically predictable. Good luck though, with your next unsuccessful recovery attempt.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Why bother reciting requests that you can't deliver on.
Straw men included, I am losing count of your dishonesty too. I take it you will never read any of the material, hence like I said, hopeless ideologue. lol stupid commie.
Now, look here, in the simplest terms: The interview that was posted and *edited* by MEMRI, was re-posted on Finkelstein's site *unedited*.
Yes Ausarianstein, but you edited his reply, that's my point! lol
Good luck though, with your next unsuccessful recovery attempt.
There's no need to go any further you have clearly waved your white (Jewish) flag by failing to address any of the material, past and recent. Good on curse words, fall short on substance. As I said I am disappointed, would have loved to beat you down more. Even your friends rasolowitz and Meninarmer all would have loved to save you, but stayed clear of this debate. Only you are stupid enough to actually challenge someone on a subject you are hopelessly ignorant about.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Why bother reciting requests that you can't deliver on.
Straw men included, I am losing count of your dishonesty too. I take it you will never read any of the material, hence like I said, hopeless ideologue. lol stupid commie.
Now, look here, in the simplest terms: The interview that was posted and *edited* by MEMRI, was re-posted on Finkelstein's site *unedited*.
Yes Ausarianstein, but you edited his reply, that's my point! lol
Good luck though, with your next unsuccessful recovery attempt.
There's no need to go any further you have clearly waved your white (Jewish) flag by failing to address any of the material, past and recent.
I see it's very slowly setting in, holocaust-denying turd: the towel was thrown in long ago, when the Mein Kampf quotes were thrown in and the "Finkelstein fiasco" put the last nail in the coffin.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Good on curse words, fall short on substance. As I said I am disappointed, would have loved to beat you down more. Even your friends rasolowitz and Meninarmer all would have loved to save you, but stayed clear of this debate. Only you are stupid enough to actually challenge someone on a subject you are hopelessly ignorant about.
Listen up wacky nazi loon, you're too numbed in the skull to sense the joke on you; so I'll clue you in:
1)You're shunned upon your trollin' replies to several posters, 'cause you are a blockheaded dunce that can't be reasoned with. 2)Knew what you're getting into, when you didn't, in deciding to take me on, without at least first getting prep-reading, history 101, geopolitics 101 and bio-anthropology bagged. Now, go lapdance; your fellow queers are getting tired waiting.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Me throw in towel? LOL I see you suffer from the familiar brain disease Ausarianstein. This has led to your people's historical myth making: introduced monotheism, enslaved in Egypt, exodus, Roman dispersal, unique historical suffering, and the world hates Jews. Please get help and when you are well you can start to address the material present concerning:
1) Hitler's attitude towards Jews after coming to power
2) Jewish dual loyalty
3) Jews as supra-capitalist class in western society
4) Same class financing Jewish Bolsheviks to overthrow the Csar
5) Jews killed during WW2 as partisans
6) Jewish suffering wasn't unique; number of Jews killed in WW2 nowhere near 6 or 5 million.
7) White Jews as white people. No dispersal, no Diaspora, no mythological lost tribe of "Levantine Jewry". lol
I think everybody seeing this will know you can't get past Mein Kamf, tired commie rhetoric and cursing. The irony is I actually wanted you to try prove your case. When you have decided to deal with materials then we can start another round of beat down for you. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Me throw in towel?
Well, it wasn't exactly voluntary. Although your stupidity did help make your pulverization effortless.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
LOL I see you suffer from the familiar brain disease Ausarianstein. This has led to your people's historical myth making: introduced monotheism, enslaved in Egypt, exodus, Roman dispersal, unique historical suffering, and the world hates Jews. Please get help and when you are well you can start to address the material present concerning:
1) Hitler's attitude towards Jews after coming to power
2) Jewish dual loyalty
3) Jews as supra-capitalist class in western society
4) Same class financing Jewish Bolsheviks to overthrow the Csar
5) Jews killed during WW2 as partisans
6) Jewish suffering wasn't unique; number of Jews killed in WW2 nowhere near 6 or 5 million.
7) White Jews as white people. No dispersal, no Diaspora, no mythological lost tribe of "Levantine Jewry". lol
I think everybody seeing this will know you can't get past Mein Kamf, tired commie rhetoric and cursing. The irony is I actually wanted you to try prove your case. When you have decided to deal with materials then we can start another round of beat down for you.
Tell you what: Go brush on history 101 first, before making some list of incoherent ahistoric gabble out of your ass. Then come address your outstanding obligations, no, you wacky anti-Semitic loon?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Anti-Semitic? Where are these "Semites" you are referring? lol Look man, stop embarrassing yourself and go read up and try to deal with the seven points laid out.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
^ Anti-Semitic? Where are these "Semites" you are referring? lol Look man, stop embarrassing yourself and go read up and try to deal with the seven points laid out.
Lol @ the genocide-embracing crackpot: ya mean listing regurgited mix of inexplicable stupidity, obligation-evading dead-end non-starters, queer contradictory and crack-history lines?Read back!
Posted by Mmmkay (Member # 10013) on :
^ Nice.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
obligation-evading?
Oh please, stop pretending, you are not that dumb. Read what the Base said about relying upon faulty argumentation to supposedly advance science. Something "isn't true by default until someone comes along and disproves it". So Dr. Clyde Ausarianstein you have some work to do in proving the following:
1) Hitler wanted to kill all of the Jews of Europe after he came to power based on race
2) White Jews are Semites, particularly the Ashkenazi, relevant to this debate
3) Bolshevik revolution was not a Jewish bourgeois dominated movement financed by Jewish bankers, but a genuine "labor movement"
4) Jewish suffering was unique
And while you're at it, do you agree with the "generally accepted" figure of 5.1 million? If so why?
I know you must have some Trotskyite comrades that can help you out. Come now, dare you hammer away at the "newbie". lol Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
obligation-evading?
Didn't stutter, when I said:
Lol @ the genocide-embracing crackpot: ya mean listing regurgited mix of inexplicable stupidity, obligation-evading dead-end non-starters, queer contradictory and crack-history lines?Read back!
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
And while you're at it, do you agree with the "generally accepted" figure of 5.1 million? If so why?
For one, cause as your *own* source said: "No rational" person denies the well-documented fact. Just take a good guess what that makes you.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
No you didn't stutter Ausarianstein, you're just a little scared. But I cannot believe you are not going to even try and prove your arguments. I even reduced it to FOUR (well now five since you agree with the 5.1 million) yet you still refuse to prove your case. Your fans must be so disappointed in you. To tell you the truth, so am I, so please Ausarianstein, I BEG YOU try to prove the five arguments. With sources and studies.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
No you didn't stutter
Finally got one thing right, in this entire thread.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
But I cannot believe you are not going to even try and prove your arguments.
Yes, entertaining your pseudo-argument would tend to dignify it. I leave "holocaust denial' revisionisms to fascists.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Yes, entertaining your pseudo-argument would tend to dignify it.
Wow!!! Standard excuse by holocaust industry when asked to back up their lies!!!!! I knew you were a little Talmudic imposter!
But come now Ausarianstein, you did not address any of the arguments in this debate. Unlike you I had at least four sources compared to your favourite spamming of Mein Kamf and empty commie rhetoric.
When present with my sources you simply ask questions Why would Hitler fear Jewish economic clout, if by his own admission above, they were not yet dominant?... capitalism is the anti-thesis of the Russian October Revolution..how does it pay for Jewish "capitalists" to identify with it?
This is not "proving" anything..other than your cowardice. So can we finally put an end to this nonsense?
(Ausarianstein)Winters has not proved anything, he's simply made claims which he hasn't backed up and instead asks for evidence to refute his claims (Ausarianstein) Winters is now resorting to attacks out of frustration of not being able to actually back up his claims when challenged. This is why (akoben) the Bass said this nonsense has to end. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Yes, entertaining your pseudo-argument would tend to dignify it.
Wow!!! Standard excuse by holocaust industry when asked to back up their lies!!!!! I knew you were a little Talmudic imposter!
fascist bonehead, a simple google will cure your inexplicable stupidity.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
When present with my sources
Which are unread one-liner headers and references that descredit you.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
So can we finally put an end to this nonsense?
Yes, end your trolling. It is futile!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
"Which are unread one-liner headers"
unread by you, no surprise there however.
"and references that descredit you."
example...
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
"Which are unread one-liner headers"
unread by you, no surprise there however.
Go read your sources, kid; it'll save you from more "Finkelstein fiascos".
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Unfamiliarity with my sources is, again, not "proof" against anything Ausarianstein, only proves you are unprepared for this subject.
Since your being deliberately uncooperative, show where I used Finkelstein to show that he himself rejected the inflated figures...and don't run away just yet, prove Hilberg's inflated figures are accurate. Come on must be easy for you to show I am an "irrational and unreasonable person"... Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Unfamiliarity with my sources is
What got you into trouble, aside from natural stupidity.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Since your being deliberately uncooperative, show where I used Finkelstein to show that he himself rejected the inflated figures...and don't run away just yet, prove Hilberg's inflated figures are accurate. Come on must be easy for you to show I am an "irrational and unreasonable person"...
Scroll your rolling buggy eyes over to previous threads!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Oh jesus, you bargain like a true Talmudic Jew Ausarianstein, how can you not be one of them! I am now down to TWO just two measly claims you have to prove, and you cant!! 1) Where I quote him out of context 2) substantiate the 5.1 million! Why?!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Oh jesus, you bargain like a true Talmudic Jew Ausarianstein, how can you not be one of them! I am now down to TWO just two measly claims you have to prove, and you cant!! 1) Where I quote him out of context 2) substantiate the 5.1 million! Why?!
What bargain; I don't bargain with fascists. I destroy them.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
You little s**t, now you succeed in getting me upset. You know damn well you can't back up any of your arguments that's why you are being evasive. From seven to four to TWO and you still run away! All you can do is call names nothing else. Swallow Ashkenazi fairy tales and spout Trotsky commie rhetoric fronting like an Africanist. You little COWARD run to your Jewish girlfriend open arms and cry because you couldn't prove your arguments.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
You little s**t, now you succeed in getting me upset.
The fascist loon has lost it.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
You know damn well you can't back up any of your arguments that's why you are being evasive. From seven to four to TWO and you still run away! All you can do is call names nothing else. Swallow Ashkenazi fairy tales and spout Trotsky commie rhetoric fronting like an Africanist. You little COWARD run to your Jewish girlfriend open arms and cry because you couldn't prove your arguments.
Lol. Read my lips: I don't bargain with fascists. I destroy you people. Now, go cry in your boyfriends arms.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Poor thing. You destroy arguments with proof, not commie rhetoric Ausarianstein. But you know deep down inside why you wisely backed off. Same reason others do, hence your use of their favourite excuse: not dignifying "holocaust denial". So maybe you're not that stupid after all. But you can't fool yourself forever Ausarianstein, if you're really interested in truth.
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
If the six million figure is inaccurate, and I've seen the toll downgraded to five million or even a bit less several years ago because it has been said there wasn't enough time to do the six figures, then what does this say for the 5.1 million figure? I'm saying since the argument drifted slightly from labor movements and a few other things then is Akoben08 suggesting there was/is no cause for alarm since the figure is 5.1 million maybe less? There is a lot more difference from zero to 5.1 there there is 5.1 to 6.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
you're not that stupid after all.
Make that the only two correct things you've said so far, but you, on the other hand, are...unbelievably unread & stupid.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Grumman f6f, The 5.1 million figure is also magic; Hilberg's pulls these figures from his top hat. No statistical evidence for his numbers, none whatsoever. [The Giant With Feet of Clay : Raul Hilberg and his Standard Work on the Holocaust] The true figure of Jewish WW2 killings is less than one million.
In the context of Ausarianstein's argument that Jewish suffering in Europe was unique, the lowering of such figures makes Jewish suffering much less than others, victims of Bolshevik Russia for example. This why he cannot permit it to go down, his comrades would have to seen as worse than Hitler!
On a personal note I myself vividly recall reading Arthur Butz's Hoax of the Twentieth Century and not being able at the time to answer many of his simplest challenges. Finkelstein on the 6 million figures [Remembering Raul Hilberg, 2007]
continues...Hilberg recently made the provocative statement that whereas the Nazi holocaust is an irrefutable fact this was "more easily said than demonstrated."
Yes not easily demonstrated because it is a hoax!
"Bungling, exaggerations, omissions and lies are the signpost of most reports of that ιpoque ... It is inevitable that new documents will come to light which will shatter more and more the official Au-schwitz story. The present, seemingly triumphant portrayal of the universe of concentration camps (Auschwitz), is destined to be doomed. What can be saved of it? Very little!" [Jean-Claude Pressac, 2000]
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
^Some crackpot loon fest going on here.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ didnt lefkowitz and her kind call Afrocentricity "crackpot"? hmmm...you people share insults or what?
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
adolf-hitler-koben08,
I tell you what insults I share with your *own* source:
Roughly speaking, you can say between 5 and 5 1/2 million Jews were exterminated during World War 2 [The Destruction of the European Jews, Yale Univ. Press, 2003, c1961)]. That's the factual question and rational people, reasonable people, will not debate the factual question." - Finkelstein
Right from your own source: You and your unread cheerleader fascist loons, aren't "rational people, reasonable people"
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Asking questions, unfamiliarity with sources and now repeating grossly inflated unsubstantiated figures from Hilberg is not "proving" anything Ausarainstein. Care to try again?
BTW are you calling Pressac a "facist loon"?
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Asking questions
That go unanswered.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
unfamiliarity with sources
Got you into trouble.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
and now repeating
What your *own* source tells about you, which is:
You fascist loons aren't "rational people, reasonable people"
...getting you to spin to other unread and inattentive loons in frenzy.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
How is posting sources that answer your silly questions (a result of your limited reading list from your Trotsky study groups lol) "going unanswered"? You dishonest Talmudic Jew.
And talk about unanswered questions, you completely ignored mine ^. are you for real Ausarianstein? LMAO!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Ausarianstein when faced with books he's unfamiliar with lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
you completely ignored mine ^. are you for real Ausarianstein? LMAO!
Repeat this: I don't bargain with fascists. I destroy you people.
Now turn to Gruman to help you spew your discredited gabble again.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Oh come on don't runaway, PLEASE look I am begging you to answer my question...see now I'm down to only ONE....ONE point YET you still ignore me by keeping your lips tight for fear of more embarrassment!!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
adolf-hitler-koben08's, on the left, reaction to boyfriend; it sums up your the wacky mindset behind picking up unread references and sources that discredit you.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Just as I thought you will gleefully join in an exchange in funny pics with explicit language yet you find it hard to engage the seven, five, four, two, ONE point! Why?! lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
What funny picture? That answer you gave your boyfriend in the pic., *actually* sums up the pattern of your repsonses in this thread...when confronted with material.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
When did answering simple questions become "bargaining" Ausarinstein? You don't "bargain" with (potentially embarrassing) questions only exchange of pictures? Give me a break! you cowardly dishonest little twat, admit it you are outgunned, reduced to cursing Gruman because he isn't as stupid as you to hide behind unsubstantiated figures and wild claims he can't back up....but please try I BEG you Ausarianstein, prove your case.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes: . When did answering simple questions become "bargaining" Ausarinstein?
When those "simple questions" are nothing more than regurgitated loony fascist crackpot.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
reduced to cursing Gruman because he isn't as stupid as you to hide behind unsubstantiated figures
That your own source discredited you with, and that you upgraded to, presumably as a "bargain" -- which you now have no recollection of? Yes, queer fascist.
As for Grumman, he really wasn't paying attention to the exchanges; he doesn't even have the premise of the exchanges correctly down. That's what happens when you're inattentive to what's being posted.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Yow screw this, hopless...when youre ready to prove your arguments let me know.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Yow screw this, hopless...when youre ready to prove your arguments let me know.
Genocide-embracing fascist's finally thrown in the towel with regards to trolling. Towel has already been thrown in, as far as the actual debate is concerned. Told you, trolling is futile!
Now, to address Grumman...
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman f6f:
If the six million figure is inaccurate, and I've seen the toll downgraded to five million or even a bit less several years ago because it has been said there wasn't enough time to do the six figures, then what does this say for the 5.1 million figure?
I'm saying since the argument drifted slightly from labor movements and a few other things then is Akoben08 suggesting there was/is no cause for alarm since the figure is 5.1 million maybe less? There is a lot more difference from zero to 5.1 there there is 5.1 to 6.
The figures of the holocaust genocide toll of approaching 6 million, and there is belief these figures are conservative, is the general consensus, outside of those fringe loons who attempt to deny the scope of the genocide. So, yes, as you put it, whether it is some figures short of the 6 million figure, like the said 5.1 million, it is still a collosal crime against humanity...that should repulse any "rational, reasonable" person.
Digressive hot air 'about unique suffering' is just a.h.koben's straw horse [meant to divert attention from the 'finkelstein fiasco'].
quote:Grumman f6f: I'm saying since the argument drifted slightly from labor movements and a few other things then is Akoben08 suggesting there was/is no cause for alarm since the figure is 5.1 million maybe less?
Now here's where I have a problem with your post, as it allowed a.h.koben to jump in and distract again. The issue at hand was not about the labor movement per se, but what to characterize Hitler's genocidal campaign against Jews. Of course, that issue was never up for debate, at least not by any 'rational' person, as Mein Kampf and the genocide itself attest to. The issue surrounding the labor movement was simply brought up to inform those in the little know, what was the basic root cause of Hitler's *race-baiting* of Jews, and those elsewhere in Europe, like Russia itself [with the Tsar]. Hence, just a fyi thrown out there by me [and to discredit the idea of 'refusal of assimilation' as driver behind the genocide]. The Mein Kempf in itself was enough to put a.h.koben's irrationality to nonsense.
Ps - I retracted my commentary about you. Thought it was a little too harsh.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Oh my god MSNBC known for accurate reports! Give me a break! Even proven lies can still be peddled as facts as Yehuda Bauer declared: The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of the Jews was arrived at.[Bauer, 1992] No surprise then that MSNBC will peddle long proven falsehoods.
But what is teh reality:
No Extermination Camps on German Soil - Simon Wiesenthal
Auschwitz was a terrible place -- but it was not an extermination camp. - Gitta Sereny
Auschwitz deaths: 470.000 [Pressac, 1994 commissioned by the Jewish Beate Klarsfeld Foundation]
Bungling, exaggerations, omissions and lies are the signpost of most reports of that ιpoque ... It is inevitable that new documents will come to light which will shatter more and more the official Au-schwitz story. The present, seemingly triumphant portrayal of the universe of concentration camps (Auschwitz), is destined to be doomed. What can be saved of it? Very little![Pressac, 2000]
Not four million were murdered in Auschwitz, as until recently believed, but probably 1.5 million". [Galinski, 1990]
Yehuda Bauer admitted the falsity of the 4 million figure the manipulation of numbers by Zionists and Communist propagandists and liars alike. [Bauer, 1989.]
So it appears contrary to Ausarianstein the numbers are coming down and this is what Finkelstein was referring to when he stated Not only does the '6 Million' figure become more untenable but the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers[Finkelstein, 2000]
In his (Carl Nordling) study based exclusively on Jewish and Allied statistics, W. Sanning comes to the conclusion that not more than 3.5 million Jews were subject to German power, meaning that that they lived in the German area of influence at the time when the Holocaust was supposedly transpiring.
There is no tangible physical evidence of any such industrialized mass murder, and in the mountains of documents that have been saved from the war years there is not the least indication to it. In order to prove this mass murder, Hilberg has had to invert the long-standing hierarchy of evidence and make witness testimony take precedence over physical and documentary evidence. [Graf, 2001]
Reliability of "Eye witnesses"
Admitting there is no documentary proof Jacques Baynac (no holocaust denier) painfully admit taking everything into account, one is forced to admit -- even if it is "as painful to say as it is to hear" -- that the well-known "testimonies" are not sufficient proof of wartime homicidal gas chambers, and that it is simply not possible to prove, scientifically, that the homicidal gas chambers actually existed.
So-called eyewitness accounts were essential to the John Demjanjuk case. Yet when MSNBC refers to him they did not mention that he was vindicated! So much for eyewitness and MSNBC "research".
have to go now but will beat you down later...
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Oh my god MSNBC known for accurate reports! Give me a break!
You fascist loons have shyt for brains. Don't like MSNBC, then try simple google search, turd...
So it appears contrary to Ausarianstein the numbers are coming down and this is what Finkelstein was referring to when he stated Not only does the '6 Million' figure become more untenable but the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers[Finkelstein, 2000]
Finkelstein Fiasco diagnosis:
pseudoscientists rarely revise...Failures are ignored, excused, hidden, lied about, discounted, explained away, rationalized, forgotten, avoided at all costs. - Rory Coker, Ph.D.
Example -
Lie:
You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie! - adolf-hitler-koben08
And now,
Fact:
Roughly speaking, you can say between 5 and 5 1/2 million Jews were exterminated during World War 2 [The Destruction of the European Jews, Yale Univ. Press, 2003, c1961)]. That's the factual question and rational people, reasonable people, will not debate the factual question." - Finkelstein
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
In his (Carl Nordling) study based exclusively on Jewish and Allied statistics, W. Sanning comes to the conclusion that not more than 3.5 million Jews were subject to German power, meaning that that they lived in the German area of influence at the time when the Holocaust was supposedly transpiring.
There is no tangible physical evidence of any such industrialized mass murder, and in the mountains of documents that have been saved from the war years there is not the least indication to it. In order to prove this mass murder, Hilberg has had to invert the long-standing hierarchy of evidence and make witness testimony take precedence over physical and documentary evidence. [Graf, 2001]
Reliability of "Eye witnesses"
Admitting there is no documentary proof Jacques Baynac (no holocaust denier) painfully admit taking everything into account, one is forced to admit -- even if it is "as painful to say as it is to hear" -- that the well-known "testimonies" are not sufficient proof of wartime homicidal gas chambers, and that it is simply not possible to prove, scientifically, that the homicidal gas chambers actually existed.
^Pseudoscience "research" is invariably sloppy - Pseudoscientists clip newspaper reports, collect hearsay, cite other pseudoscience books, and pore over ancient religious or mythological works. They rarely or never make an independent investigation to check their sources. - Rory Coker, Ph.D.
Posted by HORUS^*^ (Member # 11484) on :
akoben08, why haven't you committed suicide yet???
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Just as I thought you predictable little fart. Name calling and cursing at the wind. Once you hid behind Mein Kamf spam quote, now you hide behind debunked Hilberg figures. Come on Ausarianstein, give me a little competition will you!
As Finkelstein rightly observes "the numbers of the Holocaust industry (not his ...DUH!) are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers" You can cry all you want because you are unfamiliar with the sources (as usual) and scamper for Coker to sooth the wounds of your beat down AGAIN But no documents means NO DOCUMENTS.
Don't like MSNBC, then try simple google search,
And you say I throw my source under the bus?! LOL
have to run but PLEASE come back and challenge my sources again...
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Digressive hot air 'about unique suffering' is just a.h.koben's straw horse
Caught lying again; it was you who askedWhere is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?
This I did and you blew off the evidence as "hot air" and asked for "hard figures"... and you call me a genocide apologist? This is how numbers game got started.
But again, after years of research, debates, court cases, conferences etc no evidence for those grossly inflated figures, none whatsoever. The only "breaking news" is that these papers have been released to the general public. don't believe the hype.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
I agree with most points presented by akoben88 in this debate.
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08: ^ Anti-Semitic? Where are these "Semites" you are referring?
True! Most jews today are Ashkenazi(80% of the world jewry) These people have never spoken a semetic language untill recently after the second world war. It's nonsensical to call them semites. They never knew any semetic language before they got converted and also after they got converted, not untill they revived the hebrewic language post-world war II. It's always funny to hear an Ashkenazi jew calling the real semites of levant "Anti-semite" Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Yonis2 wrote: It's always funny to hear an Ashkenazi jew calling the real semites of levant "Anti-semite".
That's not why it's funny. It's funny to hear one Turk calling another Turk anti-semetic, when both have nothing to do with so-called Semites, except in some cases, a small incidence of admixture genes.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
Now ES is into Holocaust denial.
AlTakruri hit the nail on the head, when he likened this site to and abandoned building now infested with vermin.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Six million figure is old Jewish exaggeration long before WW2. We can see this figure peddled in reference to suffering of Jews in Europe before WW2. The familiar themes "holocaust" and "extermination" by hunger and disease etc can be seen in the reports by Jewish papers at the time. [The American Hebrew, Oct. 31, 1919, pp. 582f. Martin H. Glynn; State of New York between Oct. 17, 1913, and Dec. 31, 1914]
The Talmud also describes wild genocides, one case 64,000,000!!!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Now ES is into Holocaust denial.
AlTakruri hit the nail on the head, when he likened this site to and abandoned building now infested with vermin.
Go back and read the threads and see for yourself it was your buddy Ausarianstein that forced the argument, to his own detriment of course. lol
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
Ausarian said: ''Ps - I retracted my commentary about you. Thought it was a little too harsh.''
Agreed, especially since my initial post was, to me, neutral. Yet neutral only in the sense I was questioning Akoben08's downplaying the holocaust figures and seemingly sweeping a lower figure under the rug thereby showing it to be irrelevant. This is why I don't lend myself to holocaust denying even if someone can lay claim to a lower figure. It says nothing for a lower figure simply because this type of murder was sytemic from the Hitler government. Also I've seen these same arguments before on another website over three years ago quoting the same authors and same material. I read it then just as now, made a brief comment and moved on.
Finally, an article or two from over the years says the extermination camps were in Poland; concentrations camps in Germany. I've seen Auschwitz/Birkenau named recently as a labor camp. No word however on Mengele saying ''to the left, to the right'' as the jews were herded off the trains. This ''to the left'' doesn't sound like labor to me.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
You miss the point, aagin. This has nothing to do with "sweeping under rug". A claim cannot be accepted because it is made by the mainstream, or we all see AE as not black. In any event all mass killings are systematic whether Hitler or Bolsheviks. But Ausarianstein argument is Jewish suffering was unique compared to those that suffered under the Bolsheviks etc, go back and see his apologia. This is why he cannot allow lowering 5.1 million, even though he cannot substantiate it when asked.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-akoben08 writes:
Just as I thought you predictable little fart. Name calling and cursing at the wind. Once you hid behind Mein Kamf spam quote, now you hide behind debunked Hilberg figures. Come on Ausarianstein, give me a little competition will you!
Hey queer troglodyte,
Where is your figures, and how have they been reached? Crack-science holocaust denial is no substute for science.
quote:adolf-hitler-akoben08 writes:
As Finkelstein rightly observes "the numbers of the Holocaust industry (not his ...DUH!) are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers" You can cry all you want because you are unfamiliar with the sources (as usual) and scamper for Coker to sooth the wounds of your beat down AGAIN But no documents means NO DOCUMENTS.
pseudoscientists rarely revise...Failures are ignored, excused, hidden, lied about, discounted, explained away, rationalized, forgotten, avoided at all costs. - Rory Coker, Ph.D.
^Remember that, whenever we revisit your 'Finkelstein fisaco'.
quote:adolf-hitler-akoben08 writes:
Don't like MSNBC, then try simple google search,
And you say I throw my source under the bus?! LOL
Yes, and...?
Your capacity to think is obviously inexplicably paralyzed.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-akoben08 writes:
Digressive hot air 'about unique suffering' is just a.h.koben's straw horse
Caught lying again
Citations?
Pseudoscience-Failures are ignored, excused, hidden, lied about, discounted, explained away, rationalized, forgotten, avoided at all costs.
quote:adolf-hitler-akoben08 writes:
;it was you who askedWhere is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?
Pseudoscience deliberately creates mystery where none exists, by omitting crucial information and important details. Anything can be made "mysterious" by omitting what is known about it or presenting completely imaginary details.
The request required you to produce mass murder of any European ethnic group, *not nationalities*, on the basis of race-baiting--not international conflicts--on the scale of the Jewish holocaust, transcending European national borders. You mystified the request, and answered with a strawman about 'uniqueness of suffering'. And that issue is a separate matter from your wacked out lie about Finkelstein's understanding of the holocaust toll - which is what I pointed out in my last post.
quote:adolf-hitler-akoben08 writes:
But again, after years of research, debates, court cases, conferences etc no evidence for those grossly inflated figures, none whatsoever. The only "breaking news" is that these papers have been released to the general public. don't believe the hype.
What papers? Papers on what and how many - you dunce; that is the 'breaking news'!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
^ Anti-Semitic? Where are these "Semites" you are referring?
True! Most jews today are Ashkenazi(80% of the world jewry) These people have never spoken a semetic language untill recently after the second world war.
I take it by this display of ignorance, you've never read about the *historic perspective* of this term in Germany. If not so, then what do you think they meant by 'Semitic' when they referenced Jews?
quote:Yonis writes:
It's nonsensical to call them semites. They never knew any semetic language before they got converted and also after they got converted, not untill they revived the hebrewic language post-world war II. It's always funny to hear an Ashkenazi jew calling the real semites of levant "Anti-semite"
Apparently you have evidence about Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry that adolf-hitler-koben08 couldn't produce. What does that genetic evidence tell us about that ancestry? Please share it.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman f6f:
Finally, an article or two from over the years says the extermination camps were in Poland; concentrations camps in Germany. I've seen Auschwitz/Birkenau named recently as a labor camp. No word however on Mengele saying ''to the left, to the right'' as the jews were herded off the trains. This ''to the left'' doesn't sound like labor to me.
Elaborate on this last piece, please!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
Now ES is into Holocaust denial.
AlTakruri hit the nail on the head, when he likened this site to and abandoned building now infested with vermin.
Go back and read the threads and see for yourself it was your buddy Ausarianstein that forced the argument, to his own detriment of course. lol
Your reduction to the crack-science of holocaust denial, is what's being referenced, you fascist dunce...not how the issue of the holocaust came up.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben08:
You miss the point, aagin. This has nothing to do with "sweeping under rug". A claim cannot be accepted because it is made by the mainstream, or we all see AE as not black. In any event all mass killings are systematic whether Hitler or Bolsheviks. But Ausarianstein argument is Jewish suffering was unique compared to those that suffered under the Bolsheviks etc, go back and see his apologia. This is why he cannot allow lowering 5.1 million, even though he cannot substantiate it when asked.
Courtesy of Anti-Defamation League,...
In fact, Western scholars have never supported the figure of 4 million deaths at Auschwitz; the basis of this Soviet estimate an analysis of the capacity of crematoria at Auschwitz and Birkenau has long been discredited. As early as 1952, Gerald Reitlinger, a British historian, had convincingly challenged this method of calculation. Using statistics compiled in registers for Himmler, he asserted that approximately 1 million people had died at Auschwitz; Raul Hilberg in 1961, and Yehuda Bauer In 1989, confirmed Reitlinger's estimate of Auschwitz victims. Each of these scholars, nonetheless, has recognized that nearly 6 million Jews were killed overall during the Holocaust.23
*[23 Reitlinger, who conducted his research before Hilberg and other scholars, arrives at a more conservative figure of approximately 4.5 murder victims; he nonetheless estimates that one-third of the internees at concentration camps died as a result of starvation, overwork, disease, and other consequences of their captivity. Although his murder count is somewhat lower than that of later scholars, his overall death count remains consistent with subsequent research.]
Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly recollected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote,
"The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."24
* 24. Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews, p. 437.
The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources excluding periodicals documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained.25
*25. Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, Volume 3, p. 1223.
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than -- as the "revisionists" would -- call it into question.
^And sure enough, the recent retrieval of 50 million pages of Nazi records, documenting stories of some 17 million victims of Jews and other targeted groups like political dissidents, slave laborers and homosexuals, further affirms quantitative reports produced by the likes of Lucy Dawidowicz on the scope of the holocaust, as opposed to downgrading it.
As for the issue of Bolshevik presiding over some unidentified genocide, you retreated from the request to produce figures, text and context [including the specific leadership, the adversary(s), timeline, and socio-economic situations at play]. Why?
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Ausarian wrote: I take it by this display of ignorance, you've never read about the *historic perspective* of this term in Germany. If not so, then what do you think they meant by 'Semitic' when they referenced Jews?
They meant they were of semetic origin, but ofcourse a false notion. Or are you trying to tell me that the term "semetic" has a different meaning in German than English? Remember i speak fluent Swedish which is a sister language of German.
quote:Apparently you have evidence about Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry that adolf-hitler-koben08 couldn't produce. What does that genetic evidence tell us about that ancestry? Please share it.
I don't need to provide evidence myself, however i can direct you to a Israeli professor who's words sounds louder than mine.
An Invention Called The Jewish People Tom Segav Israel's Declaration of Independence states that the Jewish people arose in the Land of Israel and was exiled from its homeland. Every Israeli schoolchild is taught that this happened during the period of Roman rule, in 70 CE. The nation remained loyal to its land, to which it began to return after two millennia of exile. Wrong, says the historian Shlomo Zand, in one of the most fascinating and challenging books published here in a long time. There never was a Jewish people, only a Jewish religion, and the exile also never happened - hence there was no return. Zand rejects most of the stories of national-identity formation in the Bible, including the exodus from Egypt and, most satisfactorily, the horrors of the conquest under Joshua. It's all fiction and myth that served as an excuse for the establishment of the State of Israel, he asserts.
According to Zand, the Romans did not generally exile whole nations, and most of the Jews were permitted to remain in the country. The number of those exiled was at most tens of thousands. When the country was conquered by the Arabs, many of the Jews converted to Islam and were assimilated among the conquerors. It follows that the progenitors of the Palestinian Arabs were Jews. Zand did not invent this thesis; 30 years before the Declaration of Independence, it was espoused by David Ben-Gurion, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi and others.
If the majority of the Jews were not exiled, how is it that so many of them reached almost every country on earth? Zand says they emigrated of their own volition or, if they were among those exiled to Babylon, remained there because they chose to. Contrary to conventional belief, the Jewish religion tried to induce members of other faiths to become Jews, which explains how there came to be millions of Jews in the world. As the Book of Esther, for example, notes, "And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them." Zand quotes from many existing studies, some of which were written in Israel but shunted out of the central discourse. He also describes at length the Jewish kingdom of Himyar in the southern Arabian Peninsula and the Jewish Berbers in North Africa. The community of Jews in Spain sprang from Arabs who became Jews and arrived with the forces that captured Spain from the Christians, and from European-born individuals who had also become Jews.
The first Jews of Ashkenaz (Germany) did not come from the Land of Israel and did not reach Eastern Europe from Germany, but became Jews in the Khazar Kingdom in the Caucasus. Zand explains the origins of Yiddish culture: it was not a Jewish import from Germany, but the result of the connection between the offspring of the Kuzari and Germans who traveled to the East, some of them as merchants.
We find, then, that the members of a variety of peoples and races, blond and black, brown and yellow, became Jews in large numbers. According to Zand, the Zionist need to devise for them a shared ethnicity and historical continuity produced a long series of inventions and fictions, along with an invocation of racist theses. Some were concocted in the minds of those who conceived the Zionist movement, while others were offered as the findings of genetic studies conducted in Israel.
Prof. Zand teaches at Tel Aviv University. His book, "When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?" (published by Resling in Hebrew), is intended to promote the idea that Israel should be a "state of all its citizens" - Jews, Arabs and others - in contrast to its declared identity as a "Jewish and democratic" state. Personal stories, a prolonged theoretical discussion and abundant sarcastic quips do not help the book, but its historical chapters are well-written and cite numerous facts and insights that many Israelis will be astonished to read for the first time. ....................................................................
Ashkenazi jews never spoke a semetic language untill recently, infact they learnt it later than you(and your family) learnt a germanic language (English).
Remember that Professor Shlomo Zand teaches at Tel Aviv university, before you accuse anyone of being "anti-semetic",lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
quote:Ausarian wrote: I take it by this display of ignorance, you've never read about the *historic perspective* of this term in Germany. If not so, then what do you think they meant by 'Semitic' when they referenced Jews?
They meant they were of semetic origin, but ofcourse a false notion. Or are you trying to tell me that the term "semetic" has a different meaning in German than English? Remember i speak fluent Swedish which is a sister language of German.
Ahah, so you were really playing ignorant. So of "Semitic origin", not necessarily the idea that they ought to have actually continued speaking a "Semitic language".
quote:Yonis writes:
quote:Apparently you have evidence about Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry that adolf-hitler-koben08 couldn't produce. What does that genetic evidence tell us about that ancestry? Please share it.
I don't need to provide evidence myself, however i can direct you to a Israeli professor who's words sounds louder than mine.
Well, it is *your* words against those Germans who referenced German Jews as "Semites". And so, I take it that by saying you "don't need to provide evidence", you are saying that *your* characterization of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry is just uneducated instinct-driven opinion and that's all, right? After all, the issue of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry or anybody's ancestry cannot be confirmed by science, and hence, subject to a free-for-all *opinionating*, right?
Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
quote:Ausarian wrote: Ahah, so you were really playing ignorant. So of "Semitic origin", not necessarily the idea that they ought to have actually continued speaking a "Semitic language".
Are you trying to go against Professor Zand of Tel Aviv university when he clearly says that Ashkenazi jews are *NOT* descendants of the original Hebrews from the leavant?
Seriously, you starting to even sound worse than the most nationalist Zionist,lol.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
What does "Israeli professor" Mr. Zand have to say about this:
Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations share a common pool of Y-chromosome biallelic haplotypes
M. F. Hammer,* A. J. Redd,* E. T. Wood,* M. R. Bonner,* H. Jarjanazi,* T. Karafet,* S. Santachiara-Benerecetti,Ά A. Oppenheim,‖ M. A. Jobling,** T. Jenkins, H. Ostrer, and B. Bonnι-Tamir§
Haplotypes constructed from Y-chromosome markers were used to trace the paternal origins of the Jewish Diaspora. A set of 18 biallelic polymorphisms was genotyped in 1,371 males from 29 populations, including 7 Jewish (Ashkenazi, Roman, North African, Kurdish, Near Eastern, Yemenite, and Ethiopian) and 16 non-Jewish groups from similar geographic locations. The Jewish populations were characterized by a diverse set of 13 haplotypes that were also present in non-Jewish populations from Africa, Asia, and Europe. A series of analyses was performed to address whether modern Jewish Y-chromosome diversity derives mainly from a common Middle Eastern source population or from admixture with neighboring non-Jewish populations during and after the Diaspora.
Despite their long-term residence in different countries and isolation from one another, most Jewish populations were not significantly different from one another at the genetic level.
Admixture estimates suggested low levels of European Y-chromosome gene flow into Ashkenazi and Roman Jewish communities. A multidimensional scaling plot placed six of the seven Jewish populations in a relatively tight cluster that was interspersed with Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations, including Palestinians and Syrians.
Pairwise differentiation tests further indicated that these Jewish and Middle Eastern non-Jewish populations were not statistically different. The results support the hypothesis that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population, and suggest that most Jewish communities have remained relatively isolated from neighboring non-Jewish communities during and after the Diaspora.
Other genetic notes:
Both Ashkenazic and Sephardic Israelites are geographically far removed from the Lemba, and, were it not for the Y-chromosome sharing between the Yemeni and Jewish populations, the occurrence of Jewish haplotypes in the Lemba population would be highly suggestive of gene flow between the two groups. However, given the extent of Y-chromosome sharing between the Yemeni and Jewish groups, the presence of such haplotypes because of gene flow from Arab sources cannot be discounted. Support for a Jewish contribution to the Lemba gene pool is, nevertheless, found in the presence, at high frequency in the Lemba, of the CMH (.088 of the entire population and .135 of UEP group 1); the CMH is also observed at moderate frequency in Ashkenazic Israelites (.150 and .231) and Sephardic Israelites (.100 and .161), but it was observed in only a single Yemeni (.020 and .028). Furthermore, in an unpublished study of Palestinian Arabs (A. Nebel, D. Filon, M. Faerman, A. Oppenheim, personal communication), the CMH was present at only very low frequency (less than .025). The CMH has been suggested as a signature haplotype for the ancient Hebrew population, and it may be performing that function in this study (Thomas et al. 1998). Further support for Lemba oral history comes from the Buba or CMH association. However, it is possible that the Lemba CMH Y chromosomes are a consequence of a relatively recent event that, in Lemba oral tradition, has acquired a patina of antiquity.
The question is: Does prevalence of the Cohen Modal haplotype mean anything?
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
Are you trying to go against Professor Zand of Tel Aviv university when he clearly says that Ashkenazi jews are *NOT* descendants of the original Hebrews from the leavant?
As a matter of fact, yes. Read above. What's your genetic response to the studies above?
quote:Yonis writes:
Seriously, you starting to even sound worse than the most nationalist Zionist,lol.
In what specific way, or by what specifically? Elaborate.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
As for the Khazar ancestry, according to Nebel et al. 2001...
Ashkenazi Jews:
Ashkenazi Jews consolidated into a distinct ethnicity in Germany during the Middle Ages and spread eastwards to Poland and Russia in the 13th century (Ben-Sasson 1976). Previous studies of Y chromosome polymorphisms reported a small European contribution to the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool (Santachiara-Benerecetti et al. 1993; Hammer et al. 2000). In our sample, this **low-level** gene flow may be reflected in the Eu 19 chromosomes, which are found at elevated frequency (12.7%) in Ashkenazi Jews and which are very frequent in Eastern Europeans (54%60%; Semino et al. 2000). Alternatively, it is attractive to hypothesize that Ashkenazim with Eu 19 chromosomes represent descendents of the Khazars, originally a Turkic tribe from Central Asia, who settled in southern Russia and eastern Ukraine and converted en masse to Judaism in the ninth century of the present era, as described by Yehuda Ha-Levi in 1140 a.d. (Dunlop 1954).
But in the final analysis, they say...
In conclusion, the present study shows that the Middle Eastern populations we analyzed are closely related and that their Y chromosome pool is distinct from that of Europeans. Genetic dating performed in the present study, together with age estimates reported elsewhere (reviewed by Bosch et al. 1999), suggests that the major haplogroups observed in our sample are much older than the populations in which they are found. Thus, the common genetic Middle Eastern background predates the ethnogenesis in the region. The study demonstrates that the Y chromosome pool of Jews is an integral part of the genetic landscape of the region and, in particular, that Jews exhibit a high degree of genetic affinity to populations living in the north of the Fertile Crescent. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ausarian:
As for the Khazar ancestry, according to Nebel et al. 2001...
Ashkenazi Jews:
Ashkenazi Jews consolidated into a distinct ethnicity in Germany during the Middle Ages and spread eastwards to Poland and Russia in the 13th century (Ben-Sasson 1976). Previous studies of Y chromosome polymorphisms reported a small European contribution to the Ashkenazi paternal gene pool (Santachiara-Benerecetti et al. 1993; Hammer et al. 2000). In our sample, this **low-level** gene flow may be reflected in the Eu 19 chromosomes, which are found at elevated frequency (12.7%) in Ashkenazi Jews and which are very frequent in Eastern Europeans (54%60%; Semino et al. 2000). Alternatively, it is attractive to hypothesize that Ashkenazim with Eu 19 chromosomes represent descendents of the Khazars, originally a Turkic tribe from Central Asia, who settled in southern Russia and eastern Ukraine and converted en masse to Judaism in the ninth century of the present era, as described by Yehuda Ha-Levi in 1140 a.d. (Dunlop 1954).
But in the final analysis, they say...
In conclusion, the present study shows that the Middle Eastern populations we analyzed are closely related and that their Y chromosome pool is distinct from that of Europeans. Genetic dating performed in the present study, together with age estimates reported elsewhere (reviewed by Bosch et al. 1999), suggests that the major haplogroups observed in our sample are much older than the populations in which they are found. Thus, the common genetic Middle Eastern background predates the ethnogenesis in the region. The study demonstrates that the Y chromosome pool of Jews is an integral part of the genetic landscape of the region and, in particular, that Jews exhibit a high degree of genetic affinity to populations living in the north of the Fertile Crescent.
Adding to that...
It is believed that the majority of contemporary Jews descended from the ancient Israelites that had lived in the historic land of Israel until ~2000 years ago. Many of the Jewish diaspora communities were separated from each other for hundreds of years. Therefore, some divergence due to genetic drift and/or admixture could be expected. However, although Ashkenazi Jews were found to differ slightly from Sephardic and Kurdish Jews, it is noteworthy that there is, overall, a high degree of genetic affinity among the three Jewish communities.
Moreover, neither Ashkenazi nor Sephardic Jews cluster adjacent to their former host populations, a finding that argues against substantial admixture of males. These findings are in accordance with those described by Hammer et al. (2000). Posted by Yonis2 (Member # 11348) on :
You expect anyone to take a study conducted by names like oppenheim as objective in light of the current heated geo-political conflict in the Levant?? You're more naive than i thought.
In times of war, all means are employed, learn that my little innocent friend..
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2:
You expect anyone to take a study conducted by names like oppenheim as objective in light of the current heated geo-political conflict in the Levant?? You're more naive than i thought.
In times of war, all means are employed, learn that my little innocent friend..
I don't entertain crack-science mixed with obtuseness. So, let's get down to serious business, shall we:
Do you disagree with the *methodology* utilized in the more than several studies that reach the same conclusion about Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry? If so, lay it out.
Do you have studies that discredit the ones that have been posted? If so, again, let's have it.
Don't have time to kid around with pseudo-science and emotionalism.
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
Elaboration for Ausarian:
''To the left'' is a specific reference to the gas chambers and crematorium, while ''to the right'' was labor of various kinds, which gave prisoners relief from instant death.
Also after seeing ''to the left'' in several not- remembered book titles over the past 40 years I decided to check a bit further for it in a book I've had since April 9, 1994 and came up with:
THE NAZI DOCTORS Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide
Mengele on the Ramp: ppg. 342 (bottom) and 343 (top)
He had an easy rhythm in his conduct of large-scale selections: ''a nice-looking man with a stick [riding crop] in his hand ... [who] looked at the bodies and the faces [for] just a couple of seconds [and said], ... 'links [''left''], . . . Rechts [''right''], Links, Rechts.' ''
This is a specific reference to passengers getting off the train at Auschwitz... on the ramp. The book's author, Lifton, says a survivor told him 'left, right'.
There is much, much more on Mengele and other nazi doctors in this book.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
The request required you to produce mass murder of any European ethnic group, *not nationalities*, on the basis of race-baiting--not international conflicts--on the scale of the Jewish holocaust, transcending European national borders. You mystified the request, and answered with a strawman about 'uniqueness of suffering'.
I mystified nothing you liar , all this came after your initial request Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?.
But now we move on to your "new" source, from MSNBC to proven Israeli front organisation ADL!!! You are getting desperate!
Oh this is too easy Ausarianstein. Gerald Reitlinger admits estimate are largely conjectured and when he sites any sources they are same Soviets, same people that cooked up the four million and other lies. In the final analysis Reitlinger numbers, like Hilberg's, are based on "missing Jews" which is translated into "exterminated Jews". [Graf, 2001] This is not science it is conjecture based on conclusions already drawn on about an "extermination policy". Like Grumman and his "left, right" = extermination. LOL
Hilberg himself was forced to "revise" his second edition after caught lying about Nazi document proving extermination, trying to do what his predecessor Reitlinger also failed to do. [Zundel trial, 1988] He never presented any sources substantiating the 5.1 million. This is why he says its "more easily said than demonstrated." This is why decades later Byner admits there is no documentary proof. There are "incomparable historical records" ,yes, but an extermination plan and 5.1 million, NO PROOF. This is why it is all HYPE. Ausarianstein and the ADL can peddle wild unsubstantiated figures and dig up ghosts long dead and discredited but:
a claim must be proven true to be considered as true, it isn't true by default until someone comes along and disproves it
But again you change the gold post. Now you say 17 million Jews and others; before you were only concern about your people the Jews. But if you want numbers of Bolshevik victims go ask your comrade Grigori Zinoviev. Plus you are aware that the mainstream figures for communist crimes are much higher than their mixed group of 17 million.
As for your pathetic defence of your people and their pseudoscience, Mickey Mouse social science according to one Jewish critic. I know you are aware of the politics of selective sampling and Cavali Sforza's bogus Ethiopians. [Keita, 1997] yet you accept uncritically accept the Hammer study which tries to spin ME peoples into Semites!!! You are truly Talmudic apologist.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ausarianstein and his ways. lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
The request required you to produce mass murder of any European ethnic group, *not nationalities*, on the basis of race-baiting--not international conflicts--on the scale of the Jewish holocaust, transcending European national borders. You mystified the request, and answered with a strawman about 'uniqueness of suffering'.
I mystified nothing you liar , all this came after your initial request Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?.
fascist loon, here's something to reflect on:
Pseudoscience deliberately creates mystery where none exists, by omitting crucial information and important details.
Anything can be made "mysterious" by omitting what is known about it or presenting completely imaginary details. - Rory Coker
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
But now we move on to your "new" source, from MSNBC to proven Israeli front organisation ADL!!! You are getting desperate!
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence. The emphasis is not on meaningful, controlled, repeatable scientific experiments.Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony, stories and tall tales, hearsay, rumor, and dubious anecdotes. Genuine scientific literature is either ignored or misinterpreted. - Rory Coker
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
But if you want numbers of Bolshevik victims go ask your comrade Grigori Zinoviev.
Translation: It is just some crack history that I decided to forge on the spot; it doesn't exist!
numbed skull fascist, Grigori Zinoviev didn't make *your* spurious claims for you, you did; it's your burden to validate them.
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Plus you are aware that the mainstream figures for communist crimes are much higher than their mixed group of 17 million.
As for your pathetic defence of your people and their pseudoscience, Mickey Mouse social science according to one Jewish critic. I know you are aware of the politics of selective sampling and Cavali Sforza's bogus Ethiopians. [Keita, 1997] yet you accept uncritically accept the Hammer study which tries to spin ME peoples into Semites!!! You are truly Talmudic apologist.
^Obligation-evading fascist loon gibberish mixed in with clowning.
...which takes us back to this point:
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence. The emphasis is not on meaningful, controlled, repeatable scientific experiments. Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony, stories and tall tales, hearsay, rumor, and dubious anecdotes.
Genuine scientific literature is either ignored or misinterpreted. - Rory Coker
[Note how the clown cherry-picks what to respond via hearsay, tall tales and off-topic toddler picture spamming, while conveniently evading the request to produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.]
Without a doubt you are one Hitler worshipping and crackpot holocaust-denying loon in dire need of therapy. Nothing more or less.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman f6f: Elaboration for Ausarian:
''To the left'' is a specific reference to the gas chambers and crematorium, while ''to the right'' was labor of various kinds, which gave prisoners relief from instant death.
Also after seeing ''to the left'' in several not- remembered book titles over the past 40 years I decided to check a bit further for it in a book I've had since April 9, 1994 and came up with:
THE NAZI DOCTORS Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide
Mengele on the Ramp: ppg. 342 (bottom) and 343 (top)
He had an easy rhythm in his conduct of large-scale selections: ''a nice-looking man with a stick [riding crop] in his hand ... [who] looked at the bodies and the faces [for] just a couple of seconds [and said], ... 'links [''left''], . . . Rechts [''right''], Links, Rechts.' ''
This is a specific reference to passengers getting off the train at Auschwitz... on the ramp. The book's author, Lifton, says a survivor told him 'left, right'.
There is much, much more on Mengele and other nazi doctors in this book.
Ironic that Mengele himself was a zionist jew, and like many Nazi doctors and scientists, the US put them to work following WW-II.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Now ES is into Holocaust denial.
AlTakruri hit the nail on the head, when he likened this site to and abandoned building now infested with vermin.
Whether 6 people or 6 million people died in the 'H' does not matter, because one innocent person is too many.
I do believe akoben08 attacked the wrong target (the 'H' file, which is in my opinion is waste of time. The latest election in Italy showed that Jews did not bother electing a fascist major, which shows again it is an European affair and the Africans should stay out of it and concentrate how to liberate ourselves from these ideologies) instead of focusing the fascist ideology; Zionism.
And I welcome akoben08's views since he seems well read, and we should give him/her the benefit for introducing new names and figures in the forum.
Rasol,
I really want to ask why you brought AlTakruri into the discussion. Being a Jew has no attach to the 'H'.
To many times The 'H' was misused and even drove out a whole population from their country of a crime committed not by them but the Europeans, so let us not use the 'H' for excluding a discussion, and after all as far I know, AlTakruri is a West African Jew.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Here is the article from The Financial Times about the Jews in Rome electing fascist mayor:
quote: By Guy Dinmore in Rome, The Financial Times
Published: May 5 2008 03:00 | Last updated: May 5 2008 03:00
Romes election last week of its first rightwing mayor since the time of Benito Mussolini has been celebrated by fascists as a historic victory over the left.
Packs of young, thuggish supporters of Gianni Alemanno greeted the new mayors appearance at the Campidoglio city hall with straight-armed Roman salutes, shouting abuse at communists and foreign immigrants.
Before, if you were a fascist you had to pretend to be part of the mainstream to have respectability. Now they are coming out of the closet, said an aide to defeated centre-left candidate Francesco Rutelli.
Debate over the significance of the National Alliances first election victory in a major city has been intense - especially among the capitals small but important Jewish commun-ity, which is widely thought to have swung in Mr Alemannos favour. Romes Jewish voters, numbering about 9,000, explain their shift to the right in various ways, most often because they see the National Alliance as firmly pro-Israel.
Michel Bokhobza, whose family fled from Libya to Rome in 1967, says Italys centre-right is closer to Israel than the pro-Arab bias of the centre-left.
Even if his past was very close to fascism, Alemanno belongs to the coalition guided by [Silvio] Berlusconi and [Gianfranco] Fini, he said, referring to the People of Liberty alliance that swept national elections last month.
Times had changed, he said, since 1993 and the first open elections for Rome. The rights candidate then was Mr Fini, now leader of the National Alliance, who then was part of its neo-fascist predecessor, the MSI, the direct heirs of Mussolini.
Fini was then seen as a demon and neo-fascist, said Sandro Di Castro, president of the Jewish communitys Bene Berith association. The turning point came in 1995 when Mr Fini became head of the new National Alliance and started to steer it towards the mainstream. That process was completed in 2003 when, as deputy prime minister in the second Berlusconi government, Mr Fini denounced fascism as an absolute evil.
Mr Alemannos personal journey is less certain. Leftwing commentators have called the 50-year-old former agriculture minister fascist, neo-fascist and post-fascist
Dominique Sicouri, from Egypts Jewish community, said her heart is with the left but she still decided to work with Mr Alemanno in building ties with Frances ruling UMP party, for which she acts as spokeswoman in Italy. She sees Mr Alemanno as intelligent, serious and a pragmatic moderniser. His Jewish supporters say that in power he will be better placed to rein in extremism. *Italy will take note of foreign concerns after Libya warned against appointing a far-right lawmaker as minister, but it will not accept interference in its internal affairs, the incoming Italian foreign minister said. A Libyan charity chaired by leader Muammer Gaddafis son warned of catastrophic repercussions to bilateral ties if Roberto Calderoli - known for his anti-Islam rhetoric - became Italys reforms minister. *Wolfgang Mόnchau, Page 11
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Finkelstein has correctly diagnosed these fringe david duke-camp holocaust denying loons...
Roughly speaking, you can say between 5 and 5 1/2 million Jews were exterminated during World War 2 [The Destruction of the European Jews, Yale Univ. Press, 2003, c1961)]. That's the factual question and rational people, reasonable people, will not debate the factual question...
***There are many people unfortunately who, because Israel has misused the Nazi holocaust, exploited the Nazi holocaust, they have decided to deny the Nazi holocaust ever happened.***
Now, to me, **that's foolish**. You can't deny facts. It happened. It was horrific. What you should do, in my opinion, is to expose the wrong purposes, the evil purposes to which these facts are being put. That's a separate question." - Finkelstein
...he calls them "fools"!...which is rather polite way of putting these intellectually-hampered reactionary loons.
Total disregard of reality and denying a well-documented historic crime against humanity like the Holocaust simply on the account of reactionary actions and crimes of the contemporary Zionist state, shows severe character and intellectual decay.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
David Duke? Give me a f**ing break. Look, spamming Coker and Finkelstien (i.e. Hilberg), after exhausting Mien kamf, running to the MSNBC and the ADL shows how limited and pathetic you are. There is scientific evidence that the figure is closer to less than one million Jewish deaths, much less than victims of Bolshevikism and German suffering after WW2. Therefore in the context of the present debate Jews did not suffer more than other Euros, in fact they feared batter!
"the mainstream figures for communist crimes are much higher than their mixed group of 17 million"this alone undermines your argument"Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?"
Whether 6 people or 6 million people died in the 'H' does not matter, because one innocent person is too many.
I agree Arwa which was why I said suffering is suffering. But Ausarianstein wants "hard figures", even though they are not in his favor. lol
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa:
To many times The 'H' was misused and even drove out a whole population from their country of a crime committed not by them but the Europeans, so let us not use the 'H' for excluding a discussion, and after all as far I know, AlTakruri is a West African Jew.
Actually, historic records indicate it is much more then European scapegoating. Records indicate Jews were often EXPELLED due to their actions rather then their religion. This trend appears to go back much further then the birth of Zionism, which is a reaction to their not being allowed to conduct themselves in this manner.
It seems over the last 2000 years, Jews have been expelled from every country that was capable of expelling them, European as well as South American, and the islands. NOT for their religion, but for their conduct.
Africa, to their detriment, seems to be INCAPABLE of expelling them. So, South Africa, Botswana, and Africa as a whole (with the exception of Mugabe) must seem like heaven to the Jew.
A famous American had this to say about their conduct.
On December 17, 1862, General Ulysses Grant wrote to the Assistant Adjutant General of the US Army :
"I have long since believed that in spite of all the vigilance that can be infused into post commanders, the specie regulations of the Treasury Department have been violated, and that mostly by the Jews and other unprincipled traders. So well satisfied have I been of this that I instructed the commanding officer at Columbus to refuse all permits to Jews to come South, and I have frequently had them expelled from the department. But they come in with their carpet-sacks in spite of all that can be done to prevent it. The Jews seem to be a privileged class that can travel anywhere. They will land at any woodyard on the river and make their way through the country. If not permitted to buy cotton themselves, they will act as agents for someone else, who will be at a military post with a Treasury permit to receive cotton and pay for it in Treasury notes which the Jew will buy at an agreed rate, paying gold."
Also, on December 17, 1862, General Ulysses S. Grant issued General Orders No. 11. This order banished all Jews from Tennessee's western military.
General Orders No. 11 declared: "1. The Jews, as a class, violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department, are hereby expelled from the Department.
"2. Within 24 hours from the receipt of this order by Post Commanders, they will see that all of this class of people are furnished with passes required to leave, and anyone returning after such notification, will be arrested and held in confinement until an opportunity occurs of sending them out as prisoners, unless furnished with permits from these headquarters.
"3. No permits will be given these people to visit headquarters for the purpose of making personal application for trade permits.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
David Duke?
Didn't stutter. As the shoe fits, so be it, david-duke-camp holocaust denying loon!
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Look, spamming Coker and Finkelstien (i.e. Hilberg), after exhausting Mien kamf, running to the MSNBC and the ADL shows how limited and pathetic you are.
How about doing yourself a favor, david-duke's loony disciple...and actually read what the link says, and not be indifferent to facts as Rory says about you pseudoscience loons.
It tells you about the organization where you can access those documents, so that holocaust denying clowns like you can put your tall tales and other holocaust-denying nonsense to rest.
As for the obligation-dodging regurgitations of other tall tales, they don't need to be dignified with attention.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
...they see the National Alliance as firmly pro-Israel
Yes they are ALL the same birds of a feather...white Jews are white people
Actually, historic records indicate it is much more then European scapegoating.
good observations.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ausarian:
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
David Duke?
Didn't stutter. As the shoe fits, so be it, david-duke-camp holocaust denying loon!
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Look, spamming Coker and Finkelstien (i.e. Hilberg), after exhausting Mien kamf, running to the MSNBC and the ADL shows how limited and pathetic you are.
How about doing yourself a favor, david-duke's loony disciple...and actually read what the link says, and not be indifferent to facts as Rory says about you pseudoscience loons.
It tells you about the organization where you can access those documents, so that holocaust denying clowns like you can put your tall tales and other holocaust-denying nonsense to rest.
As for the obligation-dodging regurgitations of other tall tales, they don't need to be dignified with attention.
And so Ausarianstein is once again reduced to mere name calling and smear. Threw his own source MSNBC under the bus and now directing me to "document links" (not spesific sources) for the 5.1 million, because himself has not read it yet he site it as "evidence"!
Repeat: it's all HYPE, only "news" being these documents have been relased to general public. After years of scrutiny, debates, conferences etc these same documents prove NOTHING in relation to specific claims.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
Threw his own source MSNBC under the bus and now directing me to "document links" (not spesific sources) for the 5.1 million, because himself has not read it yet he site it as "evidence"!
Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts. Instead of bothering to consult reference works or investigating directly, its advocates simply spout bogus "facts" where needed. - Rory Coker
david duke has apparently taught his borderline-retarded disciples like yourself, that lie after lie is the way take cover. As it turns out, he lied to you, as your futile recovery efforts testify to.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
I take that back: that would be deeply-retarded disciples.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ and as this exchange reaches it's end we will see less and less counter sources from Ausarianstein and more cursing and useless spam.... Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
^ and as this exchange reaches it's end we will see less and less counter sources from Ausarianstein and more cursing and useless spam.... [/QB]
Throwing in the towel...yet again. Instead of rolling your buggy eyes, how about actually reading the *outstanding* sources; whinning about them like an infant, while saying that they were thrown under the bus, is self-defeating retardation.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Instead of rolling your buggy eyes, how about actually reading the *outstanding* sources; whinning about them like an infant, while saying that they were thrown under the bus, is self-defeating retardation.
Repeat: it's all HYPE, only "news" being these documents have been relased to general public. After years of scrutiny, debates, conferences etc these same documents prove NOTHING in relation to specific claims. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Repeat this:
Throwing in the towel...yet again. Instead of rolling your buggy eyes, how about actually reading the *outstanding* sources; whinning about them like an infant, while saying that they were thrown under the bus, is self-defeating retardation.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ausarianstein and the Holocaust Industry:
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
^Note how the clown cherry-picks what to respond via hearsay, tall tales and off-topic toddler picture spamming, while conveniently evading the request to produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
Ps - Evil Euro has a disciple in photo spamming and unsuccessfully attempting to lie way out of debates.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Confessions of a drowning man: comparisons with Hitler, David Duke, Evil Euro, when all else fail hide behind Finkelstein, Hilberg, Reitlinger now down to Dawidowitz...all the while failing to realize they all are spawns of each other. All reading same documents as the revisionists, documents which PROVE nothing.
who next Ausarianstein?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ausarianburg going down....oh the humanity!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:adolf-hitler-koben08 writes:
who next Ausarianstein?
This:
Throwing in the towel...yet again. Instead of rolling your buggy eyes, how about actually reading the *outstanding* sources; whinning about them like an infant, while saying that they were thrown under the bus, is self-defeating retardation.
...or go back to your teacher at kkk loon school: david duke.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
stuck piglet squeals: while conveniently evading the request to produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
ignorant of basic rules of debate:a claim must be proven true to be considered as true, it isn't true by default until someone comes along and disproves it Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
^Hey david dukes queer troglodyte, here's a task for you:
Note how the clown cherry-picks what to respond via hearsay, tall tales and off-topic toddler picture spamming, while conveniently evading the request to produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
...or go back to your teacher at kkk loon school: david duke.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
...in the meantime, I've got things to care of. Don't worry though, I'll be back to address your trolling. It hasn't worked for other clowns like yourself in the past, and it won't work with you today. So remember, trolling is *futile*!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
The fact that you are now down to your last hiding place, Dawidowtz, trying to authenticate her by the label "contemporary of the Holocaust era" (BTW there were many such persons and they refute the story) proves you are clueless (no surprise) about the history of holocaust "research". She reads same sources, peddles the same figures as Reitlinger, Hilberg et al and uses same magic method.
Hilberg's methods can be quite clearly seen in his treatment of the demographically key country Poland. He ignores the massive emigration of Jews out of Poland before the war, downplays the mass flight of Polish Jews into the USSR in 1939, lets innumerable victims of gassing in the extermination camps, die a second time as killed in shootings behind the eastern front or perished in the ghettos, does not bother to mention the many hundreds of thousands of Polish Jews who emigrated after the war and pays no attention to the fact that many Polish Jews were no longer recognized as such after 1945. One could not shift and chop statistics any more dishonestly than our Giant has done! Jurgen Graf
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
duke's sodomo-troglodyte writes:
The fact that you are now down to your last hiding place, Dawidowtz - says the holocaust-denier
^Throwing in the towel...yet again. Instead of rolling your buggy eyes, how about actually reading the *outstanding* sources and addressing outstanding requests; obligation-dodging whinning about them like an infant, while saying that they were thrown under the bus, is self-defeating retardation.
And instead of quoting exile holocaust-denying crackpots like Graf, how about undertaking this homework:
Note how the clown cherry-picks what to respond via hearsay, tall tales and off-topic toddler picture spamming, while conveniently evading the request to produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
...in the meantime, I've got things to care of. Don't worry though, I'll be back to address your trolling. It hasn't worked for other clowns like yourself in the past, and it won't work with you today. So remember, trolling is *futile*!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
That's the whole point, there is no scientific approach in arriving at the 5.1 million figure you dufus, Graf demonstrated that. Because you cannot counter you resort ad hominem. This is truly pathetic. You're reduced to Hitler worshipping, holocaust denying blah blah blah because you are going crazy. Your world is crumbling, what you once thought was indisputable fact now blew up in your face! But you are just going through the different stages of grief.
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
Meninarmer, will you provide a source that says mengele was a Jew/zionist?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
While we wait for Ausarianstein to get back on his feet...
Grumman, I don't know where Meninarmer gets his info but I think Mengele had a Jewish assistant.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman f6f: Elaboration for Ausarian:
''To the left'' is a specific reference to the gas chambers and crematorium, while ''to the right'' was labor of various kinds, which gave prisoners relief from instant death.
More evidence of conjecture based on allied propaganda, Sereny herself said Aushwitz wasn't an extermination camp.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's sodomo-troglodyte writes:
That's the whole point, there is no scientific approach in arriving at the 5.1 million figure you dufus, Graf demonstrated that. Because you cannot counter you resort ad hominem.
Of course there is; its called:
...scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
...supplemented by eye-witness accounts.
^Which your crackpot denying sources like the exile couldn't have done at the time the likes of Dawiowicz could...because he wasn't even born, you dunce.
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test. Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselvesand they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. - Rory Coker
Now, to your few tasks:
lay out in *detail* how *your* holocaust figures have been reached by not using the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, concrete figures, settings on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
...then we'll cover other outstanding requests you cowered away from, dunce.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
^...will be back for answers et al.!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Wow you are resilient Ausarianburg, you jump right back into the water, but you still don't know how to swim! I notice also how you lay out your five points YET ignore my seven! No hard feelings, I will go down the line and destroy you anyway:
1) I already showed you how unscientific Dawiowicz, Hilberg et al methods were. Its understandable in your present lunatic state you're not ready to deal with it. Not my fault. 2) I dont know why you bring back Finkelstein when he says the holocaust industry's figures are going down.
3) White Jews as white people: I can't believe you are still pushing this. Against all their anti-black racism etc you still want to separate them from whites! But here again you ignore the basic rules of debate! Where is the evidence Ashkenazi are Semites?!?! NONE That some Ashkenazi have connection to ME peoples is not surprising since Koestler said they have W.Asiatic admixture. ME is not synonymous with Semitic. You are drowning again.
4) Your Bolshevik request is yet another pathetic example of you moving the goal post when evidence is against you. But wether under Trotsky or Stalin many more died compared to less than one million Jews, according to mainstream sources.
5) I don't answer strawmen.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?
later
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, concrete figures, settings on Bolshevik genocide.
LOL Ausarianburg and his ways:
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
supplemented by eye-witness accounts...Which your crackpot denying sources like the exile couldn't have done at the time the likes of Dawiowicz could...because he wasn't even born, you dunce.
Coker- Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence . Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony. <---revisionist argument against "eye witnesses" and the holocaust story... .
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's sodomo-troglodyte recites without understanding:
Coker- Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence . Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony. <---revisionist argument against "eye witnesses" and the holocaust story... .
duke's sodomo-troglodyte,
...*primary Nazi document-backed figures** reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
...supplemented by eye-witness accounts.
*primary Nazi archives of their own actions hardly qualifies as "unverifiable". Use your head, dunce. Oh yeah, there's nothing there.
Meanwhile...
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test. Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselvesand they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. - Rory Coker
Now, to your few tasks:
lay out in *detail* how *your* holocaust figures have been reached by not using the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
...then we'll cover other outstanding requests you cowered away from, dunce.
^And will be back for *real* answers, not obligation-dodging thread spammers.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
"as painful to say as it is to hear" -- that the well-known "testimonies" are not sufficient proof of wartime homicidal gas chambers, and that it is simply not possible to prove, scientifically, that the homicidal gas chambers actually existed." - admits anti-revisionist Jacques Baynac on the lack of documentary proof of holocaust
You just repeat yourself because you're desparate. Already dealt with all your points WHILE you ignore my seven, my sources, build strawmen and curse the wind. You are sinking again. Bye Bye lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's sodomo-troglodyte
"as painful to say as it is to hear" -- that the well-known "testimonies" are not sufficient proof of wartime homicidal gas chambers, and that it is simply not possible to prove, scientifically, that the homicidal gas chambers actually existed." - admits anti-revisionist Jacques Baynac on the lack of documentary proof of holocaust
retard, Nazi archives of their own actions is more than "testimonies". Hitler himself can come up to you and confess his actions all over again, and you'll still deny the holocaust has ever happened. You're that slow.
Knowing you, you are probably also convinced that slavery in the US didn't happen, and will say that "testimonies" and "primary-documents" of slave merchants and owners alike count for nothing.
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test. Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselvesand they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. - Rory Coker
Meanwhile, you say that you have answers for the following...
lay out in *detail* how *your* holocaust figures have been reached by not using the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
...then we'll cover other outstanding requests you cowered away from, dunce.
Well, where are those specifics in the order presented? What's holding you back, besides cluelessness and pseudo-science?
^And will be back for *real* answers, not obligation-dodging thread spammers.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Knowing you, you are probably also convinced that slavery in the US didn't happen, and will say that "testimonies" and "primary-documents" of slave merchants and owners alike count for nothing.
Another predictable argument, but no comparison to (white Jewish dominated) slavery, sorry. Documents for slavery, none for Jewish annihilation policy and the 5.1 million.
Again, all this means you are simply drowning. I have already refuted all of your pathetic attempts at defending white Jews. You have to keep asking because this is just your way of compensating for your beat down. Now continue to sink...
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08 says, ''Sereny herself said Aushwitz wasn't an extermination camp.''
With Sereny having studied the holocaust I can't see where she has come to the conclusion that auschwitz wasn't an extermination camp (in addition to its other function as a labor camp). The quote I pulled from the book above about Mengele and the 'ramp' comes from eyewitness testimony, not the author's interpretation; just one in a sea of powerful and damning comments from survivors. Does Sereny mention Treblinka, and others, that you are aware of? If so, how does she characterize this camp's specific function, which was outright murder with no labor to be found such as at Auschwitz? If not, then what would you make of historical testimony as to its sole purpose? Can you be that revisionist?
Akoben08, there is no mystery in Jews helping their executioners. Jews piled the bodies onto carts after getting them out of the ''showers'', or gas chambers, from the extermination camp at Treblinka and the extermination/labor camp at Auschwitz and several others. So I can see Mengele having Jewish assistants. The will to live can be overpowering in trying circumstances.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's sodomo-troglodyte says:
Knowing you, you are probably also convinced that slavery in the US didn't happen, and will say that "testimonies" and "primary-documents" of slave merchants and owners alike count for nothing.
Another predictable argument
No argument; just being observant...that you'd stoop to even outright denying U.S. slavery, as anyone who would go to great lengths to deny something as well-documented as the holocaust [and even more recent than the trans-Atlantic slavery], is certainly capable of turning reality on its head and also deny the occurrence of U.S. slavery, in the face of all evidence.
quote:duke's sodomo-troglodyte writes:
, but no comparison to (white Jewish dominated) slavery, sorry. Documents for slavery, none for Jewish annihilation policy and the 5.1 million.
Of course there are; even better, there are TV images of the damn thing; but what to expect from a civilization-deprived troglodyte hermit such as yourself, other than being shut out of the *real* world?
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test. Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselvesand they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. - Rory Coker
Meanwhile, you say that you have answers for the following...
lay out in *detail* how *your* holocaust figures have been reached by not using the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz.
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
...then we'll cover other outstanding requests you cowered away from, dunce.
Well, where are those specifics in the order presented? What's holding you back, besides cluelessness and pseudo-science?
Your answers must be in some netherland, as they are nowhere to be found in the living world.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Warning!: Graphic images!
adolf-hitler-koben08 must be convinced that these images were taken out of a science fiction movie.
At what depth can one be mentally and morally destitute, to dismiss such well-documented monstrosity of relatively recent history?!
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
I can't find a recently bought history magazine I have around here that has an article that says a few U.S. soldiers randomly shot and killed a few of the guards after encountering these scenes in various camps, not to mention the ass whuppins they dished out.
I've seen the same type images from my childhood in the late fifties. They are as powerful today as they were then. It made a lasting impact on me.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
that you'd stoop to even outright denying U.S. slavery,
Never said this, you're lying again, more evidence of your desperation. Not surprised that you didn't see the answer, you can't because you are drowning. And no surprise too that you spam with those pictures, I was waiting for that. Typical allied propaganda; those are largely victims of typhus, go read up on the allied own testimony about the disease. Also starvation and lack of medical supplies as a result of allied bombard. That Germans also killed innocents no denying that, but ironic you ask for context for commie crimes, but ignore others. There are horrific pictures of victims of Bolshevikism, the side you have yet to condemn! You are now at the bottom of the pool.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
grumman, US army did more than kill a "few" of the guards, and their counterparts were described as an "army of rapists". Contrary to standard line, WW2 there were no "good guys". You are behind the times, allied propaganda from your childhood of 50s have now been discredited. Serenny is but one of the defenders to concede. Governments and historians lie, get use to it.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Yes, these scenes are nothing compared to the mountains of black bodies amassed during African colonialization and slavery contributed to by some of these same folks and their relatives, both sides.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Indeed, same folks that Ausarianstein defends are the same ones that enslaved us, colonised Africa, insult us in film etc...think Lebron James Vogue gorilla pic.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
BTW Has anybody seen Ausarianstein?
Is he back from the bottom of the pool yet? Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
adolf hitler koben,
Congratulations! You are hereby officially rendered as irrelevant [as your intellectual-paralysis towards substantively answering a few task questions put before you testifies] as the unworthy low brow trolls at stormfront, whose fringe dogma is just way too ridiculously wacko to deserve any level of seriousness. As I have made the point about your capacity to deny U.S. slave history, you're very likely even capable of denying your parents exist as an odd against all reality; that's how extremely loony you are. You are what I call the 'walking corpse' -- that is, you appear to be living, but extremely dead where it countsintellect and soul.
As for the pictures, I leave intelligent folks with the intended point, and let the really dense ones make pointless comparisons of the holocaust monstrosity with whatever other number of crimes against humanity they see fit.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ You have no clue what typhus is do you? lol. Again no surprise here as I observed long ago you are not ready for a debate on this subject. Ad hominem, straw men, name calling, bait and switch yes. But serious debate on the facts no.
Your penchant for lying is extremely disturbing though but indicative of your bankrupt state as far as this debate is concerned. You are indeed at the bottom of the pool, destroyed and left with no more counter arguments. Next time don't swim in the deep end kiddo.
Ironic, since I really hoped you would at least come back with a challenge to my last post and try to prove those are gassed victims, and where they were gassed. You would end up trounced like Sereny, forced to admit Auschwitz was no death camp. Exhausted like Baynac into finally admitting there are no documents for the story. No wonder holocaust revisionism is outlawed in Europe. Freedom to question sacred cows are bad for the powerful.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Come on Ausarianstein don't die on me now!!!
Posted by Mmmkay (Member # 10013) on :
^ Maybe he'll respond when you've gained 20 IQ points.
Until then, by all means continue your mentally inept rantings.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Please don't start with the pink panties again. I am waiting on the knowledgeable Ausarianstein to come back and whip the "newbie"! lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
adolf hitler koben,
I know you've flunked prep-school, but please try your darnest to remember this:
You are hereby officially rendered as irrelevant [as your intellectual-paralysis towards substantively answering a few task questions put before you testifies] as the unworthy low brow trolls at stormfront, whose fringe dogma is just way too ridiculously wacko to deserve any level of seriousness. As I have made the point about your capacity to deny U.S. slave history, you're very likely even capable of denying your parents exist as an odd against all reality; that's how extremely loony you are. You are what I call the 'walking corpse' -- that is, you appear to be living, but extremely dead where it countsintellect and soul.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
akoben08. You're a loser. Go away.
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08, Typhus is an umbrella term used to describe a variety of conditions caused by bacteria in the Rickettsiae family. Although there are several forms of typhus, the main types are epidemic typhus, Brill-Zinsser disease, murine or endemic typhus, and scrub typhus. Every form is passed on to humans through infected insects.
Epidemic typhus, also called Rickettisa prowazekii, is caused by contact with body lice. While living on a persons body, the lice defecate. These feces contain the bacteria that cause typhus. When the person scratches the wounds caused by the lice, the feces are rubbed into the wounds.This form of typhus typically affects large groups of people, as lice spread quickly in areas where people are crowded and unable to bathe regularly.
...like concentration and extermination camps.
Can you provide a link that German civilians in the cities and towns suffered Typhus like those people in the campsand that it produced the same results as those pictures indicate?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ausarianstein:these pictures of from unspecified German concentration camps are evidence of a German annihilation policy.
Basic rules of debate:a claim must be proven true to be considered as true, it isn't true by default until someone comes along and disproves it
Grumann, the conditions in the concentration camps and German cities during the war cannot produce "same results". German citizens such as Chief Rabbi Leo Baeck who stayed during the war (yet Ausarianstein says Hitler wanted to kill "all Jews") would not suffer from same conditions as the inmates. But for a picture of the overall situation in Germany after WW2 see John E. Gordon, "Louse-borne Typhus Fever in the European Theater of Operations, U. S. Army, 1945," in Rickettsial Diseases of Man (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1948)
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
grumman, you also make a distinction between concentration camps and extermination camps, would you please define "extermination camp" and where I can find it.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
adolf hitler koben,
Have some more drink...
...hitler says the drink is on him [source: hitler's will to adolf hitler koben]
...and cases full of Mussolini wines are on their way to you:
And while you are at it, refer to...
Posted by Grumman f6f (Member # 14051) on :
Answers.com with some paraphrasing by me.
One needs to distinguish between two types of concentration camps. There were the ''death camps'' (''extermination camps'') used for the holocaust. These were in Poland-Auschwitz/Birkenau, Treblinka, Majdanek, Sobibor, Chelmno and Belzec.
Concentration camps in Germany include Dachau, Buchenwald, Neuengame, Bergen-Belsen. Bergen-Belsen was used with people with infectious diseases.
There were many other concentrations camps throughout Germany.
Later in the war the distinction between different types of camps became blurred. [This is where Akoben08 comes in]. Some of the ''ordinary camps'' were also used as deathcamps in a smaller scale.
Google Auschwitz, Sobibor, Majdanek and Chelmno and see the real distinction between concentration and extermination camps.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
I am sorry but Answers.com is not a scholarly source. All those other sites and books cannot name a single expert who can prove beyond eye witness the exsistence of "extermination" camps. They either conclude that they were extermination camps, without documentation (i.e. easily said than demonstrated Hilberg) or they admit that they were not extermination camps at all like Sereny and Auschwitz. Unlike our simpleton poster Ausarianstein (who is now reduced to spamming funny pics, so sad lol) piles of bodies are not proof of extermination policy as Dachau etc has same scenes everyone knows are typhus victims.
All so-called "documentation" for holocaust are unverifiable eyewitness testimony of which Coker already warned us about. I feel sorry for people like you; lived your whole life and never bothered to question official propaganda. You're not alone, many still think Saddam was a threat to the world and had WMDs but moved them to Syria. Life is full of surprises. If you want you can try to prove beyond unverifiable eyewitness testimony but please be advised though that you will drown like Ausarianstein.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
^Lol @ duke's sodomo-troglodyte.
a-dolf.hitler-koben,
Coker hurt your feelings when he said this:
Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts. Instead of bothering to consult reference works or investigating directly, its advocates simply spout bogus "facts" where needed. - Rory Coker
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test. Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselvesand they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. - Rory Coker
Why your hurt feelings? - because you knew hes referring to the club you fringe loons belong to, didnt you.
In the meantime, words of advice:
try your darnest to remember this:
You are hereby officially rendered as irrelevant [as your intellectual-paralysis towards substantively answering a few task questions put before you testifies] as the unworthy low brow trolls at stormfront, whose fringe dogma is just way too ridiculously wacko to deserve any level of seriousness. As I have made the point about your capacity to deny U.S. slave history, you're very likely even capable of denying your parents exist as an odd against all reality; that's how extremely loony you are. You are what I call the 'walking corpse' -- that is, you appear to be living, but extremely dead where it countsintellect and soul.
And while at it, Charles left you this form to fill out [against me - the "Real man" in question], so you can sooth yourself of hurt feelings and stop your queer activity of chasing me from one thread to another about your lost cause in this thread:
^Answers 1 through 8 have already been filled out for you; when done, run off to your mommy and give it to her, and have some more drink...
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08 says: ''I am sorry but Answers.com is not a scholarly source.''
...and I didn't reference it as scholarly, just to give you some idea of how the distinction between the two types of camps had become blurred in the latter stages of the war.
''All those other sites and books cannot name a single expert who can prove beyond eye witness the exsistence of "extermination'' camps.''
Well it seems to me you are wearing sunglasses at midnight so that you can fly past what the links said about the camps. You are steadfast in your resolution that documentation has to be offered to prove there were extermination camps. Yet the very links you are ignoring say they were. You are a revisionist in denial... no, you are a denier, even after you posted something to the effect of not 6 million but 5.1 million. So, where is your documentation this figure doesn't exist. Better yet drag it down another million. Where is your documentation this one doesn't exist either. It's one thing to question a total amount, yet another to bog yourself down in documentation at the expense of denying the Holocaust. What exactly do you propose to say about the links besides your denial of them? Is your Holocaust revisionism changing into a ''well it didn't happen.'' Where is your documentation a Holocaust of some kind never happened?
It was also said it was mathematically impossible to kill 6 million people in the time it was said to have happened. Yet no math was offered to say ''guess what?'' I also read there were no more than 3 million Jews under Germany's umbrella at the time of this sordid business. Yet no documentation was offered to sustain this. Do you know where this piece of paper is?
''...piles of bodies are not proof of extermination policy as Dachau etc has same scenes everyone knows are typhus victims.''
...and piles of bodies are proof it was typhus? Provide documentation it was typhus specifically and not death at the hands of the executioners. You posted a reference to a military study of over 60 years ago. Is it reliable considering today's knowledge?
And Dachau was in Germany. Dachau was not an extermination camp. I told you that; reread where it says extermination camps are in Poland. Dachau isn't on the list. It is in Germany. No extermination camps were on German soil, just Polish land. I also named the six extermination camps in Poland; those links had documentation, you refused to accept this documentation because it isn't your type; but it is documentation whether you like it or not.
Germany had a huge number of concentration camps. People died in those camps as well. Some from disease, some of starvation and some from sheer brutality. Again, extermination camps were in Poland, concentration camps in Germany. Don't you know how to read straight by now.
So, give me some of that specific documentation you flailing your arms about.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Oh come now Grumann, documentation cannot be provided for something that did not exist. The six million figure I already showed is old propaganda from before WW2; the 5.1 figure is also bunk, no scientific approach on Hilberg et al. part. Not my fault you don't want to read Graf. As for scenes such as the piles of bodies our resident simpleton Ausarianstein posted, they are typical of Typhus victims, not evidence of gassing. No study says so. That you would dismiss a scientific studies at the time of the alleged crime as less reliable than one some sixty years later (where is this BTW?) is indeed baffling. Also you should know the difference between simply posting websites and referencing a specific study documenting evidence for this crime. That you fail to do this is evidence you don't even know how to support your argument for a story you've been defending your whole life! Amazing you are going by faith. You are reduced to hiding behind websites and piling bizarre lines of argument on top of each other, sure sign that panic is beginning to set in. You are now showing the first signs of drowning like Ausarianstein. Care to try again?
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony. - Coker
as painful to say as it is to hear" -- that the well-known "testimonies" are not sufficient proof of wartime homicidal gas chambers, and that it is simply not possible to prove, scientifically, that the homicidal gas chambers actually existed. - admits anti-revisionist Jacques Baynac on the lack of documentary proof of holocaust.
Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselvesand they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. - Rory Coker
No scientific study done
From Zundel trial 1988:
exchange occurred between Christie and Hilberg:
..What do you mean by a scientific report?,. asked Hilberg.
I don't usually have to define simple words, said Christie, but by scientific report. I mean a report conducted by anyone who purported to be a scientist and who examined physical evidence. Name one report of such a kind that showed the existence of gas chambers anywhere in Nazi-occupied territory.
I still don't quite understand the import of your question,. said Hilberg. Are you referring to a German, or a post-war..
I don't care who.German, post-war, Allied, Soviet.any source at all. Name one, said Christie.
To prove what?,. asked Hilberg.
To conclude that they have physically seen a gas chamber. One scientific report, repeated Christie.
I am really at a loss. I am very seldom at such a loss, but ... [...]
Judge Locke interrupted: .Doctor ... do you know of such a report?.
No,. replied Hilberg.
***All "proofs" of the "extermination camps" are from same Soviets who cooked up 4 million figure at Auschwitz.***
.The whole site, suggested Christie, was within the Soviet sphere of control, and nobody from the west was allowed into those camps to investigate, isn't that right?
.Well, I don't know of any requests made to investigate ... When you say no one was allowed, it implies some request,. said Hilberg. .... All I could say is, I know of no Western investigators early on in Auschwitz, or any of ....
Treblinka?, asked Christie.
Well, there was no more Treblinka in 1945..
Sobibor?
That was no more..
Majdanek?
Majdanek is another matter..
Was there anybody from the West that went to Majdanek?, asked Christie.
Not to my knowledge..
Belzec?
Belzec was the first camp to have been obliterated..
Chelmno or Stutthof?
No, sir..
Auschwitz or Birkenau?
No...
So there you have it. The so-called documentation for "the greatest crime agaisnt humanity"! A multi-billion dollar hoax! This world is crazy. lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
@ hitler's girly man,
It's funny that you do the very things which you falsely whine about others doing, like say:
spamming Coker scamper for Coker to sooth the wounds of your beat down AGAIN - by a-dolf.hitler-koben
^apparently annoyed by Coker's succint characterization of your ilk, but why haven't you answered this:
Why this dangerously spooky and unhealthy obsession over me, if this thread isn't really about you, and for the reasons it was opened?
Are you extremely queer or what? Fill in the damn form, I'll sign under the "Real man", and use it as your ticket to post-debate traumatic stress therapy. Lol.
Wow, look at what you have been reduced to Ausarianstein. From commie rhetoric to avoiding my challenges to spamming funny pics. lol You disappoint me, at least Grumman is trying to swim.
Next time don't swim with the adults kid.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
^ Your clown posts are not funny. You should really give it up.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ironic since this all started with Ausarianstein trying to help you out while you quietly disappeared into the background. But his empty rhetoric, lies and failure to produce sources to back up his arguments have left him at the bottom of the pool. Grummman is trying his best, but he too will suffer the same fate. I suggest you stay clear of this one kido - yet I suspected you wisely made that decision long ago. lol
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08, let's start over. How many died as a result of Hitler's policies even though you say no documentation? You and others say no to 6 million. Alright then. Now, what figure have you guys settled on? Is it still 5.1 million you mentioned earlier? Much less? After we've been running back and forth I swear I would have seen something by now that says there is no evidence of a holocaust. I ain't seen this documentation as of yet. What's up with that?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Akoben08, let's start over. How many died as a result of Hitler's policies even though you say no documentation?
Not just me, all those who have studied it for years, revisionists and anti-revisionists alike.
You and others say no to 6 million. Alright then. Now, what figure have you guys settled on?
Less than one million.
After we've been running back and forth I swear I would have seen something by now that says there is no evidence of a holocaust. I ain't seen this documentation as of yet. What's up with that?
There were mass killings of Jews on eastern front as partisans during WW2, no evidence for gassing and extermination policy.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Ironic since this all started with Ausarianstein trying to help you out while you quietly disappeared...
^ There is no irony involved pertaining to your being ignored.
Your posts are dumb, and your attempts at humor are not funny.
^ Feel free to stink your mind with ignorance and hate. I refuse to waste a second trying to beat sense into you.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Oh please, that's what you call it "being ignored". lol Negros like you reveal pathetic you are, running to the mainstream (same ones that distort AE etc) when it suits you. Your so-called "critical thinking" goes as far as your Jew masters want it to go. Like Ausarianstein, Grumman before, you now post yet another website long on rhetoric but short at specifics.
Holocaust deniers freely distort the historical record...
how, examples?
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Damn Akoben08 when I knocked on the door to that link posted by Rasol it flew wide open; damn near fell off the hinges when it banged against the wall. Conclusion: if it was that wide open then you never read it otherwise you would have seen your response ''how, examples? to this:
Auschwitz and Gas Chambers
Auschwitz "Gas Chambers" were really air raid shelters CLAIM: The gas chambers at Auschwitz were just air raid shelters equipped with gas-tight doors to protect the people sheltering inside from poison gas.
RESPONSE: However, closer examination of the materials on order and in use inside the gas chambers and the immense distance between the SS barracks and the gas chambers in Birkenau belie the claims of deniers. These were homicidal gas chambers.
"Gas Chambers" could not have been used for gassing CLAIM: Holocaust deniers argue that if there were no holes in the roofs then the structures were not gas chambers and Auschwitz was not an extermination camp. If Auschwitz was not an extermination camp, then the Holocaust did not happen.
RESPONSE: However, extensive evidence of the gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau remains. Cremas 2 and 3 had holes in the roof for the introduction of Zyklon-B into the gas chamber below. Eyewitness and photographic evidence documents these holes, and a recent study has proved their precise location.
There were holes in the roof of the gas chambers CLAIM: Brian Renk, of the deniers' Institute for Historical Review, claims that no one has been ". . . able to find physical evidence of Zyklon-induction holes at the site, or a single reference to them in the camp's voluminous design and construction records . . ."
RESPONSE: Despite the fact that the wire-mesh introduction columns can't be found today, their existence is confirmed by eyewitness accounts-both perpetrator and survivor-and by a surviving German documents that lists them in an inventory.
Auschwitz-Birkenau was not a killing center CLAIM: Auschwitz-Birkenau was not a killing center. Collections of camp death certificates (Auschwitz Death Books) list a total of only 69,000 deaths -- all from natural causes.
RESPONSE: The Auschwitz Death Books only list 69,000 deaths because they do not include the more than 900,000 men, women and children who were sent directly to the Auschwitz gas chambers from the railroad car transports without being registered.
The "Gas Chamber" in Auschwitz I is a fake for tourists CLAIM: Auschwitz Museum officials have confirmed that the alleged gas chamber in Auschwitz I (the Main Camp) is a fake.
RESPONSE: Crematorium 1 (Crema 1) in the Main Camp is not a "fake" but an authentically restored space meant to be a memorial and symbolic representation of all the gas chambers and crematoria in the Auschwitz camp complex.
Hitler never ordered the Holocaust CLAIM: No order signed by Adolf Hitler authorizing the 'Final Solution' has ever been found. Since Hitler as supreme ruler signed other orders, the absence of a "Holocaust" order proves that it never happened.
RESPONSE: Although it is true that no document signed by Hitler authorizing the entire murderous campaign we call the Holocaust has been found, historians point to the convergence of evidence from all levels of the Nazi hierarchy that demonstrate Hitler's complicity in every facet of this murderous undertaking.
Scientific tests prove the "Gas Chambers" never existed CLAIM: Objective science, represented by the Leuchter Report: The End of the Line? The First Forensic Examination of Auschwitz proves the non-existence of the Holocaust.
RESPONSE: Despite claims to objective truth, the Leuchter Report isn't "exact science." Leuchter's methods were fatally flawed and his conclusions false. The fact that even "insignificant traces" were found in the ruins of the gas chambers after all these years of being exposed to the elements is proof that there WERE gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau.
Crematory Capacity No evidence of open-air burning pits has ever been found in Auschwitz-Birkenau CLAIM: Carlo Mattogno, an Italian Holocaust denier, used complicated calculations to allegedly 'prove' the ovens at Auschwitz-Birkenau couldn't possibly have cremated some 1.1 million bodies.
RESPONSE: Historical evidence shows that when the available ovens at Auschwitz-Birkenau couldn't handle the load, open-air pit burning was used. Photographs from the air and on the ground show the open-air pit burning process and eyewitness evidence supports them.
Breakdowns and Maintenance must have reduced the Nazi's ability to cremate bodies CLAIM: The crematory ovens at Auschwitz-Birkenau were inoperable for long periods of time due to maintenance and breakdown, thereby reducing the number of bodies that could be burned in total.
RESPONSE: the ovens did suffer breakdowns and they did need maintenance. The use of some ovens was discontinued by German decision and others were destroyed in a prisoner uprising. However, when there were more bodies than could be burned in the crematoria, the Germans used open air pits which could burn thousands of bodies at once.
No authentic contemporary documents speak about the capacity of the ovens at Birkenau CLAIM: There are no authentic, contemporary documents that speak about the capacity of the ovens at Birkenau.
RESPONSE: Holocaust deniers refuse to accept the Germans' own documentation about the capacity of the ovens. They denounce this authoritative evidence as forgeries.
The crematoria ovens at Auschwitz couldn't have disposed of the remains of the 1.1 million Jews CLAIM: A major denier theorized that since modern crematoria ovens can cremate one body in 1.25 hours, or 19.2 bodies in 24 hours that must mean it was the same at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Based on this observation and allowing for down time for maintenance and repairs, he concluded that 'only' 85,092 bodies could have been cremated.
RESPONSE: The authorities in Auschwitz were not concerned about respect for the dead and clearly did not abide by civilian laws of cremation. They burned multiple bodies at one time, continuously pushing in more to keep the fires hot.
There never was enough coke (coal) at Auschwitz-Birkenau for cremating over 1,000,000 bodies CLAIM: While questioning Robert Jan van Pelt during his slander trial against Professor Deborah Lipstadt, David Irving pointed to a plastic water bottle and asked, "Do you really, sincerely believe that you can burn one body with enough coke that you could fit into one of these waters bottles, is that what you are saying?"
RESPONSE: We will probably never know exactly how much coke was delivered to Auschwitz or how much was required in the cremation process. Furthermore, the cremation of multiple bodies at the same time, continuous usage of the ovens, the use of alternate fuels and open-air burning pits make the question irrelevant.
Your made a shambles of your rope-a-dope tactics.
You in over your head brother. Give it up.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
LOL, those answers are irrelavent.
For example, to burn more bodies, you require more fuel. Bodies aren't like a piece of wood with sustained combustion once they get started. The more bodies in the oven, the more fuel required to reduce them. For example, imagine boiling water to boil rice. Once the water starts boiling, you put in the rice, and what happens? The water stops boiling due to the introduction of the much colder and water filled rice. To regain the boil, you need to turn up the gas or electric (more fuel) to compensate for the greater volume. Bodies contain water, therefore requiring more fuel.
Also, the claim that minute amounts of some minute amount of some unspecified form of gas was detected years later in the shelters. Exactly what type of gas, and was this the same gas often used to TEST the effectiveness of standard shelters? Based on what I've read here, this conclusion is far from validated.
The rebuttal bares no FACTS and reminds me very much of the modern day Jewish rebuttals against black reparations, filled with FACTOIDS.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
hitler's girly man, you aren't off the hook...
Why this dangerously spooky and unhealthy obsession over me, if this thread isn't really about you, and for the reasons it was opened?
Are you extremely queer or what? Fill in the damn form, I'll sign under the "Real man", and use it as your ticket to post-debate traumatic stress therapy. Lol.
Also the Complete Idiots Guide to Fuel Consumption at Auschwitz can be found on the same page. It is a very lengthy article and one that deniers or minimizers should stay away from; this way denial can continue unabated for sustained periods of appalling ignorance.
meninarmer, your rice analogy fails the test; there is no body fat in rice; 'heavier' humans will provide more fuel.
Uncle Ben will be ticked off at you for lending unwanted support to his rice.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
At least Meninarmer has on his thinking cap and knows the ways of white Khazars. Grumman you are like Ausaianstein now, too predictable. I saw their so-called tutorials and I knew you would go for them, not knowing what they are actually saying! Again, this is all old stuff, Nizkor, holocausthistory.org etc already debated and debunked by Zundel et al [Ernst Zόndel replies to the 66-point "Nizkor Rebuttal" http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/debatetoc.html ]
The "Complete Idiots Guide" is just that Grumman for compelte idiots who don't understand that it's all deductive reasoning backed up with no documentary evidence at all for gassing and massive numbers! Holes on roofs, distance from barracks, and this part I love, "an authentically restored space meant to be a memorial" lol. This is not evidence Grumman, you are like Rosolowitz hurry and post websites without knowing the different sides of the debate. Shame on you for avoiding the scientific approach.
The fact that the Lipdstatt site at Emory still argues for Auschwitz even though Sereny now admits it wasn't an extermination camp (just as German camps were "proven" to be extermination but now claims abandoned) and others say no documentary evidence shows that they are old trash.
Hilberg,"Superficiality is the major disease in the field of Holocaust studies."... In regards to no quality control in holocaust studies, "That is correct, especially at several U.S. elite universities" In other words Grumman they can say any rubbish without evidence. Like religion.
Repeat no documentation, no scientific report nothing. Holocaust industry is going down and so are you Grummman. Now wait for someone to pull you out from the bottom of the pool.
Ausarianstein you sound homophobic, I didn't know you leftys were anti-gay? what happened to your stance against the divisive politics of the bourgeoisie! lol
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: meninarmer, your rice analogy fails the test; there is no body fat in rice; 'heavier' humans will provide more fuel.
Uncle Ben will be ticked off at you for lending unwanted support to his rice.
The analogy, while not the best, would still apply validating the laws of thermodynamics.
Neither rice, nor human bodies will sustain combustion without application of tremendous heat using fuel to reduce them to the basic carbon component. The more bodies, the more heat (fuel=coal) needed to be used.
If human bodies could be utilized as an effective sustainable fuel, Whites would have been utilizing coupses to heat houses, drive cars a long time ago.
As per his boxed instructions, Uncle Ben agrees.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by meninarmer: Neither rice, nor human bodies will sustain combustion without application of tremendous heat using fuel to reduce them to the basic carbon component. The more bodies, the more heat (fuel=coal) needed to be used.
If human bodies could be utilized as an effective sustainable fuel, Whites would have been utilizing coupses to heat houses, drive cars a long time ago.
^ You are trying to use reason and logic, big mistake, please keep in mind..."Superficiality is the major disease in the field of Holocaust studies."... In regards to no quality control in holocaust studies, "That is correct, especially at several U.S. elite universities" lol
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Tauber also addresses the issue of fuel usage in the burning of the bodies. His testimony is important in this respect because he shows that it was an issue and the authorities had developed methods of dealing with it. He explains:
As I have already said, there were five furnaces in Crematorium II, each with three muffles for cremating the corpses and heated by two coke-fired hearths. The fire flues of these hearths came out above the ash [collection] boxes of the two side muffles. Thus the flames went first round the two side muffles then heated the center one, from where the combustion gasses were led out below the furnace, between the two firing hearths. Thanks to this arrangement, the incineration process for the corpses in the side muffles differed from that of the center muffle. The corpses of ... wasted people with no fat burned rapidly in the side muffles and slowly in the center one. Conversely the corpses of people gassed on arrival, not being wasted, burned better in the center muffle. During the incineration of such corpses, we used the coke only to light the fire of the furnace initially, for fatty corpses burned of their own accord thanks to the combustion of the body fat. [169]
Tauber's explanation of using the body fat of fat corpses as a source of fuel was emphasized elsewhere in his testimony. Thus early on he mentioned that "[t]he process of incineration is accelerated by the combustion of human fat which thus produces additional heat." This method was used in Crematoria II and III. Later on he mentioned that when a fat body "was charged into hot furnace, fat immediately began to flow into the ash bin, where it caught fire and started the combustion of the body." [170]
Using the body fat of corpulent victims as a fuel was something that would require first hand knowledge. Tauber was a shoemaker and would not have been in a position to know this without actually observing it. The issue is how credible was this testimony. The German engineer Rudolf Jakobskotter, who Mattogno had cited as an authority on cremation ovens, wrote that body fat produces heat for burning in an oven. [171] Mattogno did not directly address the issue of using body fat in the ovens as a source of fuel. He had initially dismissed testimony about using body fat in cremation pits to accelerate the burning process. However, he subsequently withdrew his initial objection by writing that "I have discovered that such a procedure can be made to work if done in a determined fashion..." [172] Tauber had also discussed how body fat was used in the cremation pits to accelerate burning. [173]
The process of using body fat in an oven was also described by Sonderkommando Filip Mόller, who noted that the authorities had found ways to place the bodies in the ovens to maximize fuel efficiency.
In the course of these experiments corpses were selected according to different criteria and then cremated. Thus, the corpses of two Mussulmans [camp slang for emaciated prisoners] were cremated together with those of two children or the bodies of two well nourished men together with that of an emaciated woman, each load consisting of three, or sometimes four, bodies. Members of these groups [SS men and civilian visitors to the crematoria] were especially interested in the amount of coke required to burn corpses of any particular category...
Afterwards all corpses were divided into the above mentioned four categories, the criterion being the amount of coke needed to reduce them to ashes. Thus it was decreed that the most economical and fuel saving procedure would be to burn the bodies of a well-nourished man and an emaciated woman, or vice versa, together with that of a child, because, as the experiments had established, in this combination, once they had caught fire, the dead would continue to burn without further coke being required." [174]
Similarly, Auschwitz camp commandant, Rudolph Hoess testified at Nuremberg that three bodies would be burned simultaneously and that the bodies of fat people burned faster. [175] He also mentioned the burning of three bodies simultaneously in his memoirs, [176] the accuracy of which is the subject of another study on the THHP website.
The Tauber deposition was given and Mόller memoirs written years before anyone knew that coke would be an issue. Both accounts clearly show that fuel was a serious consideration in the running of the crematoria and that the authorities had found ways to deal with the problem. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
"Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" and/or who testified under duress like Hoess.
Again this is old stuff already debated and debunked. But as expected, you will resort to supporting the bizarre claims of the story as the scientific approach becomes more of a liability to you. Repeat no documents, no scientific report done at the time. Now will someone please fetch Grumman from the bottom of the pool!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
^hitler's girly man's desperateness is apparent in the fact that he's now forced to quote the very person he was weeping about only a few threads ago. Meanwhile, he quotes the very thing that characterizes him to the tee [highlighted]:
"Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence... - Rory Coker
^E.g. like he's very transparent failure to deliver on this:
lay out in detail how your holocaust figures have been reached by using a scientific procedure different from that of mainstream historians, like that of contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz, which are fully backed up by primary Nazi records of their own genocidal actions.
... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" - Rory Coker
...as demonstrated by his citing fringe holocaust-deniers who weren't even around when the event took place, and whose procedures he fails to lay out in detail, as to how they arrived at their quantitatively-specified conclusions from a purely scientific approach that is distinct from that used by mainstream historians.
^Ps - One will have to assume that a-dolf.hitler-koben understands that these procedures would have to have used a purely scientific approach that doesn't make use of *primary* Nazi records, which he dismisses as "unverifiable eyewitness testimony", as well as accounts of holocaust survivors on their first-hand experiences which he dismisses as "testified under duress".
-------
Other undelivered outstanding obligations:
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
Naming in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
^a-dolf.hitler-koben's answers must be in some netherland, as they are nowhere to be found in the living world.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Ausarianstein and his obsession with me. lol Everyone can see that you are just making an ass of yourself coming back like a stuck piglet to compensate for your comprehensive beat down in this debate. Amazing you're making demands on me to address your silly little points I already addressed yet you ignore mine even though I reduced it to one! poor chap.
But now I notice two new "demands", Jewish bankers and reliability of so-called eye witness accounts. For the latter you can read Graf (after you swallow your wounded pride ) which lays out all the absurdities of their so-called firsthand "experiences" even serious anti-revisionists don't take seriously anymore. Hence anti-revisionist Jacques Baynac painful dismissal of them as worthless. As for testifying under duress, I never said holocaust survivors did, you dufus. Again you wounds have affected your sight, I said Hoss did. Maybe in your commie jurisprudence of Stalin or neo-con Bush Gito camp such "evidence" is admissible but not in western jurisprudence. He too made absurd claims which is why serious anti-revisionists don't put much weight in the so-called "Hoss confesseions" either.
For Jewish capitalists who financed the Bolsheviks, I will not spoon feed your sorry ass on Jacob Schiff and Kuhn & Loeb. You read up yourself. It is common knowledge at the time:
Sooner or later the Jews will destroy Germany as they destroyed Russia. They did not so much destroy Russia from within as from without, and Hitler is driving the Jews to a more perfect organization from without Germany. Jewish finance is a powerful world factor. It can destroy men, organizations and nations. When the Jewish capitalists get together they will strike back at Germany and the fire of Communism will be lighted and Hitler and his gang will disappear as they have disappeared in Russia . . . If Hitler will not act sensibly then Germany must pay the price as Russia did. - Marcus Garvey
Shame on you being a commie for so long and never knew how your band of Bolshevik terrorists got to power without support of the Russian people. Now go fetch your buddy Grumman from the bottom of the pool, he's been there for almost a day now. lol
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
^What level of formal education did Garvey have to form these asute observations?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Like J.A. Rogers he was largely self taught.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Well he certainly had his PhD in clear observations and concise analysis.
Sooner or later the Jews will destroy Germany as they destroyed Russia. They did not so much destroy Russia from within as from without, and Hitler is driving the Jews to a more perfect organization from without Germany. Jewish finance is a powerful world factor. It can destroy men, organizations and nations. When the Jewish capitalists get together they will strike back at Germany and the fire of Communism will be lighted and Hitler and his gang will disappear as they have disappeared in Russia . . . If Hitler will not act sensibly then Germany must pay the price as Russia did. - Marcus Garvey
His overview and prediction was right on the money and much more precise then even today's advanced degreed!
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Are you two sanctioning murder?
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Sanctioning murder? Is that what Ausarianstein pulled you from the bottom of the pool to do? ask stupid questions? Come on Grumman, you say I am in over my head please show me.
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
You haven't shown documentation to even remotely persuade me to feel as you do. Your side says one thing the other says another. One side rebutts the other the other side rebutts the other. Again, Einstein, even if the 6 million figure is too high show me something other than bullshit. I believe you said recently one million. That's somebody's documentation but not yours. A lot of people died and you are minimizing it. Yet Treblinka itself claims 900,000 thousand murdered. So this means all the other extermination camps' population in Poland, five more, were lying around in limbo, maybe playing cards until the allies happened to come to their rescue.
You asked if I say you are sanctioning murder.
If Hitler will not act sensibly then Germany must pay the price as Russia did. - Marcus Garvey
You posted that initially. Can you mangle that one enough to say Hitler loved the Jews?
I found you out, plain and simple.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: Are you two sanctioning murder?
I'm no Zionist. I believe people should be capable of living together without violent conflict.
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: You haven't shown documentation to even remotely persuade me to feel as you do. Your side says one thing the other says another. One side rebutts the other the other side rebutts the other. Again, Einstein, even if the 6 million figure is too high show me something other than bullshit. I believe you said recently one million. That's somebody's documentation but not yours. A lot of people died and you are minimizing it. Yet Treblinka itself claims 900,000 thousand murdered. So this means all the other extermination camps' population in Poland, five more, were lying around in limbo, maybe playing cards until the allies happened to come to their rescue.
You asked if I say you are sanctioning murder.
If Hitler will not act sensibly then Germany must pay the price as Russia did. - Marcus Garvey
You posted that initially. Can you mangle that one enough to say Hitler loved the Jews?
I found you out, plain and simple.
The only thing you found out is the story has far more holes in it than you thought. Thus the typical jackass response when confront with too much reading material. lol Too lazy to read the links to research yourself so you take out your frustrations on me. I had always said it was less than one million, not recently. Learn to read brother. And of course it's someone else's documentation, just as yours. I am not minimising anything I said suffering is suffering; the numbers game came up when Ausarianstein said no other Euros suffered as Jews. Again, learn to read the threads instead of emotional responses.
Ausarianstein is unaware that the extermination story and alleged uniqueness of Jewish suffering was invented after WW2 which is why Le Pen said the holocaust was merely a foot note in history, a truth backed up of course by the historians of the time but you're too lazy to research yourself. You keep talking about Treblinka and other "extermination camps" without a scrap of evidence to support it. Isn't that pathetic? Only cut and paste warp debunked theories about bodies being used as fuel by "eye witnesses" even the anti-revisionists are embarrassed about, hide behind Deborah Lipstadt's (of all people!) blog and Emory website. My god why don't you think!
The Garvey quote was in no way sanctioning murder but warning Hitler not to push Jews too far with his anti-Jewish policies (i.e. Nuremburg laws, a model for Zionist laws in Israel today), policies which were supported by the Zionist organisations. Your interpretation is typical of your deductive reasoning and general laziness. Now please don't go back in the pool you still can't swim, and from looks of it don't want to.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
hitler's girly man,
Stop pussying around, and deliver on:
lay out in detail how your holocaust figures have been reached by using a scientific procedure different from that of mainstream historians, like that of contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz, which are fully backed up by primary Nazi records of their own genocidal actions.
... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" - Rory Coker
...as demonstrated by his citing fringe holocaust-deniers who weren't even around when the event took place, and whose procedures he fails to lay out in detail, as to how they arrived at their quantitatively-specified conclusions from a purely scientific approach that is distinct from that used by mainstream historians.
^Ps - One will have to assume that a-dolf.hitler-koben understands that these procedures would have to have used a purely scientific approach that doesn't make use of *primary* Nazi records, which he dismisses as "unverifiable eyewitness testimony", as well as accounts of holocaust survivors on their first-hand experiences which he dismisses as "testified under duress".
-------
Other undelivered outstanding obligations:
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
Naming in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
^a-dolf.hitler-koben's answers must be in some netherland, as they are nowhere to be found in the living world.
Come on now; stop being such a brain-deprived pussy of david duke's and lay out the specifics requested of you.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ The reason you can't see my answers is quite obvious to everyone. You have become completely deranged as a result of the comprehensive beat down you suffered in this debate. Get over it kid. You're only going through the shock of it all. I only hope one day you will finally read the flood of sources I posted during our entertaining exchange. Not holding my breath though. lol
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
hitler's girly man,
Stop being a pussy, and deliver on:
lay out in detail how your holocaust figures have been reached by using a scientific procedure different from that of mainstream historians, like that of contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz, which are fully backed up by primary Nazi records of their own genocidal actions.
... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" - Rory Coker
...as demonstrated by his citing fringe holocaust-deniers who weren't even around when the event took place, and whose procedures he fails to lay out in detail, as to how they arrived at their quantitatively-specified conclusions from a purely scientific approach that is distinct from that used by mainstream historians.
^Ps - One will have to assume that a-dolf.hitler-koben understands that these procedures would have to have used a purely scientific approach that doesn't make use of *primary* Nazi records, which he dismisses as "unverifiable eyewitness testimony", as well as accounts of holocaust survivors on their first-hand experiences which he dismisses as "testified under duress".
-------
Other undelivered outstanding obligations:
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
Naming in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
^a-dolf.hitler-koben's answers must be in some netherland, as they are nowhere to be found in the living world.
Come on now; stop being such a brain-deprived pussy of david duke's and lay out the specifics requested of you.
hitler's girly man says,
The reason you can't see my answers is quite obvious...
Yes, because they don't exist.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ In delaying acceptance of reality Ausarianstein you only make if difficult for yourself. lol
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
I can't help myself, have to thrash you some more
quote: lay out in detail how your holocaust figures have been reached by using a scientific procedure different from that of mainstream historians, like that of contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz, which are fully backed up by primary Nazi records of their own genocidal actions.
Did this. Your being contrary for obvious reasons.
quote: accounts of holocaust survivors on their first-hand experiences which he dismisses as "testified under duress".
Another lie, youre a desparate Talmud Jew-loving negro. lol
quote: Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
No need to, they produced no evidence that white racist imposter Ashkenazi are related to "Levantine Jewry".
quote: Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Already quoted him saying holocaust industry's numbers are going down. Like the Hammer study you can spin it to your hearts content. LOL
quote: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Moving goal post again. No matter, fact is other Euros still suffered more under Marxism than the "holocaust" of less than one million Jews during WW2. Get over it commie.
quote: Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
Straw man, like your lies, a sign of desperation.
quote: Naming in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
Delivered. Not my fault you are being contrary here too.
quote: Come on now; stop being such a brain-deprived pussy of david duke's and lay out the specifics requested of you.
Profanity is another sign of running out of other options.
quote:hitler's girly man says,
Shame on your for turning your back on progressive politics and promoting gay bashing. your lefty San Fransisco friends must be ashamed. lol
Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
It is important to distinguish political ideology, power dynamics and atually self hatred with this process because all skin, is in itself, devoid of human attributes. It is as it!
It becomes ideology when someone assigns an emotional quality to an inanimate object and that becomes the ideology and power dynamcs rooted NOT in skin attribution but ignorance but it is propped by POWER and corresponding structure (de jure mechanics) and social constructs not far behind!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote: duke's pussy writes:
I can't help myself, have to thrash you some more
Well, let's watch...
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: lay out in detail how your holocaust figures have been reached by using a scientific procedure different from that of mainstream historians, like that of contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz, which are fully backed up by primary Nazi records of their own genocidal actions.
Did this. Your being contrary for obvious reasons.
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: accounts of holocaust survivors on their first-hand experiences which he dismisses as "testified under duress".
Another lie, youre a desparate Talmud Jew-loving negro. lol
Your words:
"Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" and/or who testified under duress like Hoess. - a-dolf.hilter-koben
^Shows you're a desparate duke's dick-loving craker. Lol.
quote: duke's pussy writes:
quote: Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
No need to, they produced no evidence that white racist imposter Ashkenazi are related to "Levantine Jewry".
Busted! Lazy couch-potato denial of a concept [i.e. genetics] you barely understand is not counter evidence. Rory diagnosed you properly:
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence. The emphasis is not on meaningful, controlled, repeatable scientific experiments.Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony, stories and tall tales, hearsay, rumor, and dubious anecdotes. Genuine scientific literature is either ignored or misinterpreted. - Rory Coker
Still at large - presented scientific consensus: Nebel et al. 2001, Hammer et al., Thomas et al.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Already quoted him saying holocaust industry's numbers are going down. Like the Hammer study you can spin it to your hearts content. LOL
Repost Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Moving goal post again.
The goal post has to be moved towards you, because you kept cowering away from the challenge each time it was put to you. I'm moving the goal post towards you, and yet, you still can't shoot straight [in]. Lol.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
No matter, fact is other Euros still suffered more under Marxism than the "holocaust" of less than one million Jews during WW2. Get over it commie.
I'll get over it, once requested obligation is produced, duke's toy girly man.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: Cite Hitler, your god, professing admiration for Jews, and hence, backtracking later.
Straw man, like your lies, a sign of desperation.
It's your idea that the man backtracked vis-a-vis his reaction to Jews in Mein Kempf. Just man up and produce it, hitler's girly man.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: Naming in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
Delivered.
Repost the requested *specifics* [per highlighted].
duke's pussy has reacted to his undelivered obligations with more of the same: emotional non-answers. Telling, indeed.
I'll be back for more answers, or should I more appropriately say, your "non-answers".
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used
Mary, mary, quite contrary. LOL
quote:"Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" and/or who testified under duress like Hoess. - a-dolf.hilter-koben ^Shows you're a desparate duke's dick-loving craker. Lol.
Wow, this shows how incredibly dumb you are. Hoess was no "holocaust survivor" but camp commandant. LOL
quote:Busted! Lazy couch-potato denial of a concept [i.e. genetics] you barely understand is not counter evidence. Still at large - presented scientific consensus: Nebel et al. 2001, Hammer et al., Thomas et al.
LOL Nothing outstanding Ausarianstein. None of these Micky Mouse studies (according to one Jewish critic) prove that your white Talmudic masters are Semitic.
quote:Repost Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
You sly Jew lover, never quoted him "stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million".
quote:The goal post has to be moved towards you, because you kept cowering away from the challenge each time it was put to you. I'm moving the goal post towards you, and yet, you still can't shoot straight [in]. Lol.
Did this like three pages ago. Already said other Euros suffered under Marxism before and after WW2. All numbers, mainstream and other wise, higher than fabled six million Jews. Simple research, but Im not going to spoon feed you. Your "dictatorship of the proletariat" was much worse than Hitler, get over it.
quote:It's your idea that the man backtracked vis-a-vis his reaction to Jews in Mein Kempf. Just man up and produce it, hitler's girly man.
Not idea, fact of history. Posted numerous sources on his Zionist collaboration, you're embarrassing yourself again. Though at this point I think the shock of this beat down has left you immune to it. LOL
quote:Repost the requested *specifics* [per highlighted].
Jewish bankers and institutions? Did this. Not spoon feeding your sorry ass again though. Like Grumman get off your lazy ass and read the flood of sources I posted.
quote: duke's pussy has reacted to his undelivered obligations with more of the same: emotional non-answers. Telling, indeed.
Apart from the fact that I never knew you to be so foul mouth, the only telling thing here is your unwillingness to research anything that goes against your masters fables. Lost in all your chutzpah too is the fact that you are yet to address my questions gave some BS excuse about not dignifying a debate on holocaust, yet what are you doing now?!! LOL You're no match for me Ausarianstein. LOL
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
We Khazar loving propagandists will say things like:
The request required you to produce mass murder of any European ethnic group, *not nationalities*, on the basis of race-baiting--not international conflicts--on the scale of the Jewish holocaust, transcending European national borders. You mystified the request, and answered with a strawman about 'uniqueness of suffering'.
that you'd stoop to even outright denying U.S. slavery,
accounts of holocaust survivors on their first-hand experiences which he dismisses as "testified under duress".
Repost Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used
Mary, mary, quite contrary. LOL
Can't deliver. Okay then, to the next...
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:"Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence... Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony" and/or who testified under duress like Hoess. - a-dolf.hilter-koben ^Shows you're a desparate duke's dick-loving craker. Lol.
Wow, this shows how incredibly dumb you are. Hoess was no "holocaust survivor" but camp commandant. LOL
To say you are dumb by any measure, would imply *some* intelligence: rather, your dismissal of both Nazi archives and recounts of first-hand holocaust victims as "unverifiable eyewitness testimonies" and/or "testified under duress", when there's more than enough material evidence out there about the fact, is indictive of total paralysis from stone-dead brain cells.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:Busted! Lazy couch-potato denial of a concept [i.e. genetics] you barely understand is not counter evidence. Still at large - presented scientific consensus: Nebel et al. 2001, Hammer et al., Thomas et al.
LOL Nothing outstanding Ausarianstein.
...but your complete paralysis in conjuring up a material-laden counteraction is outstanding.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
None of these Micky Mouse studies (according to one Jewish critic) prove that your white Talmudic masters are Semitic.
Re above - These micky mouse studies have obviously put quite a number on your capacity to think, as they've rendered you totally [intellectually] paralyzed to find fault with them at any level, other than just weeping about them.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:Repost Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
You sly Jew lover, never quoted him "stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million".
duke's pussy must have duke's piss for brains, that he can't even read his own posts...even when shown to him multiple times:
You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie! - adolf-hitler-koben08
^Can run, but can't hide from your lies.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:The goal post has to be moved towards you, because you kept cowering away from the challenge each time it was put to you. I'm moving the goal post towards you, and yet, you still can't shoot straight [in]. Lol.
Did this like three pages ago. Already said other Euros suffered under Marxism before and after WW2. All numbers, mainstream and other wise, higher than fabled six million Jews. Simple research, but Im not going to spoon feed you. Your "dictatorship of the proletariat" was much worse than Hitler, get over it.
In other words, I cannot impart meaning to some meaningless bold-faced lies, when asked to:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:It's your idea that the man backtracked vis-a-vis his reaction to Jews in Mein Kempf. Just man up and produce it, hitler's girly man.
Not idea, fact of history.
"fact of history" that has no citations to keep it standing.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Posted numerous sources on his Zionist collaboration, you're embarrassing yourself again.
duke's girly man,
Hate to be the bearer of common sense, but Zionist collaboration is not "backtracking". Ever heard of temporarily working with people one doesn't necessary like, dumbass? Apparently not.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:Repost the requested *specifics* [per highlighted].
Jewish bankers and institutions? Did this. Not spoon feeding your sorry ass again though. Like Grumman get off your lazy ass and read the flood of sources I posted.
Tranlation: I'm a petty liar, who's not good at it. E.g.: my incapacity to use the basic common sense of not mixing anti-thesis [and ahistoric] situations ~ apples and oranges, makes absolute uneducated ass out of me.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote: duke's pussy has reacted to his undelivered obligations with more of the same: emotional non-answers. Telling, indeed.
Apart from the fact that I never knew you to be so foul mouth, the only telling thing here is your unwillingness to research anything that goes against your masters fables. Lost in all your chutzpah too is the fact that you are yet to address my questions gave some BS excuse about not dignifying a debate on holocaust, yet what are you doing now?!! LOL You're no match for me Ausarianstein. LOL
As I reckoned earlier, about coming back to find that:
duke's pussy has reacted to his pressing obligations with more of the same: emotional non-answers.
hitler's girly man is so predictable!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:To say you are dumb by any measure, would imply *some* intelligence: rather, your dismissal of both Nazi archives and recounts of first-hand holocaust victims as "unverifiable eyewitness testimonies" and/or "testified under duress", when there's more than enough material evidence out there about the fact, is indictive of total paralysis from stone-dead brain cells.
You lack basic comprehension skills,"and/or who testified under duress like Hoess." As for the bizarre stories of your "first-hand holocaust victims" nobody but desperate Jewish housewives like you give them any credence. LOL
quote:...but your complete paralysis in conjuring up a material-laden counteraction is outstanding. Re above - These micky mouse studies have obviously put quite a number on your capacity to think, as they've rendered you totally [intellectually] paralyzed to find fault with them at any level, other than just weeping about them.
Again, studies don't prove they are Semites Ausarianstein, anything else is simply your spin.
quote:duke's pussy must have duke's piss for brains, that he can't even read his own posts...even when shown to him multiple times:You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie!
Don't lie OReilly, never said they were Finkelstein's words. His quote again:"the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers." and yes the implications are astounding indeed! LOL
quote:In other words, I cannot impart meaning to some meaningless bold-faced lies, when asked to: .
Negro please. I'm just not spoon feeding your dumbass on figures any google search can provide. And where ever you want to move the goal post you suit your spins, dates, objective and "full context" blah blah blah, Marxism in Europe (don't mention outside wow!) claimed more victims than less than one million.
quote:"fact of history" that has no citations to keep it standing. Hate to be the bearer of common sense, but Zionist collaboration is not "backtracking". Ever heard of temporarily working with people one doesn't necessary like, dumbass? Apparently not.
No sources? Lying Khazar lover. And as for "temporarily working with people one doesn't necessary like"? LMAO! You're right, helping a people you want to exterminate leave to far away lands is evidence of his genocidal intentions from the start. LOL
quote:Tranlation: I'm a petty liar, who's not good at it. E.g.: my incapacity to use the basic common sense of not mixing anti-thesis [and ahistoric] situations ~ apples and oranges, makes absolute uneducated ass out of me.
Petty liar? I think they call this projecting. You are buried in sources and sites kido. You're as lazy as Grumman, but more pathetic. A wounded soul limping back in here time and again because you can't admit you were trounced in this debate. LOL
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Present your, so far, mythical documentation and make it stick. Akoben08, you are destined to present your case on the internet forever. No one is listening to you to the tune of your understanding. You are definitely long on rebuttal yet the other side can say your figures are bogus too. You have still to show that Treblinka itself didn't murder 800,000 itself. Yes, yes, I know I said 900,000 the other day. My bad.
If all the original figures are skewed then why can't you present the definitive opposition's figures and quell this argument once and for all. You cain't do it. Again, let me tell you I read your link above on Zundel, and he, same as you, didn't show a mfin' thing on his numbers. In other words make your total one million figure stick and justify it with documentation so that the original numbers which are in dispute can be kicked to the curb even by the believers. So far you haven't produced and this is disturbing. Yet judging by your lack of actual and final figures you've reduced yourself to a smoldering wreck. The only thing left is the firemen standing around to see what flares up next.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: Present your, so far, mythical documentation and make it stick. Akoben08, you are destined to present your case on the internet forever. No one is listening to you to the tune of your understanding. You are definitely long on rebuttal yet the other side can say your figures are bogus too. You have still to show that Treblinka itself didn't murder 800,000 itself. Yes, yes, I know I said 900,000 the other day. My bad.
If all the original figures are skewed then why can't you present the definitive opposition's figures and quell this argument once and for all. You cain't do it. Again, let me tell you I read your link above on Zundel, and he, same as you, didn't show a mfin' thing on his numbers. In other words make your total one million figure stick and justify it with documentation so that the original numbers which are in dispute can be kicked to the curb even by the believers. So far you haven't produced and this is disturbing. Yet judging by your lack of actual and final figures you've reduced yourself to a smoldering wreck. The only thing left is the firemen standing around to see what flares up next.
What is disturbing is your incredible unwillingness to read my sources. But what is even more hilarious is that you assume you're dealing with someone who has not read all the relevant materials on this subject. Therefore I am going to call you a LIAR when you say you read Zundel's website and didn't find anything. Both he and Graf provided ample documentation that Hilberg's magic figures are grossly inflated. Get off your lazy ass and go read them.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:To say you are dumb by any measure, would imply *some* intelligence: rather, your dismissal of both Nazi archives and recounts of first-hand holocaust victims as "unverifiable eyewitness testimonies" and/or "testified under duress", when there's more than enough material evidence out there about the fact, is indictive of total paralysis from stone-dead brain cells.
You lack basic comprehension skills,"and/or who testified under duress like Hoess."
Learn English, knucklehead: "Like Hoess" ~ "for example", not necessarily the "only one".
And you vindicated my point you're quoting, by this intellectually-paralyzed scribble:
As for the bizarre stories of your "first-hand holocaust victims" nobody but desperate Jewish housewives like you give them any credence. LOL - a-dolf.hitler-koben
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:...but your complete paralysis in conjuring up a material-laden counteraction is outstanding. Re above - These micky mouse studies have obviously put quite a number on your capacity to think, as they've rendered you totally [intellectually] paralyzed to find fault with them at any level, other than just weeping about them.
Again, studies don't prove they are Semites Ausarianstein, anything else is simply your spin.
Ever crossed your feeble mind that weeping about scientific consensus [reached via a concept (genetics) you know nothing about] doesn't actually refute it? Just *try* to *think* about it, even if it sets your brian cells on fire. Lol.
quote:duke's pussy posts:
duke's pussy loves to post pics of his sex idols, whom he fantasizes about and whom beyond coincidence, are very shady characters: now, a sex offender.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Don't lie OReilly, never said they were Finkelstein's words. His quote again:"the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers." and yes the implications are astounding indeed! LOL
Learn prep-English; it'll help you absorb what *you* write:
You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie! - a-dolf.hitler-koben
Remember: You can run, but can't hide from your tall tales.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:In other words, I cannot impart meaning to some meaningless bold-faced lies, when asked to: .
Negro please...
...spare you from working your ass off in materializing spurious garble? - like addressing:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
No can do. The remedy to your fear, is confronting it.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:"fact of history" that has no citations to keep it standing. Hate to be the bearer of common sense, but Zionist collaboration is not "backtracking". Ever heard of temporarily working with people one doesn't necessary like, dumbass? Apparently not.
No sources? Lying Khazar lover.
Sources to rescue *your* lie; why? Don't have the smarts to dig your dick-loving ass out of your own lie?
Any way, to press the point into your blockhead:
Zionists doesn't = all Jews
Zionists were = a section of Jews
Zionism = leaving to a "Jewish homeland" [hence, not just any land]
Collaborating with Zionists, therefore = politics.
Apparently, being new to the concept of politics, you've never heard of the idea of "strange bed fellows"; if you did, then it would be apparent that the so-called "Zionist collaboration":
Doesn't in any way support or prove "backtracking" from Mein Kampf's literally-expressed disdain for Jews. assy mcgee, use your butt to think, since you obviously don't have a head. Lol.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:Tranlation: I'm a petty liar, who's not good at it. E.g.: my incapacity to use the basic common sense of not mixing anti-thesis [and ahistoric] situations ~ apples and oranges, makes absolute uneducated ass out of me.
Petty liar?
Don't know the meaning? No problem; it means you are all hot air, and low in substance.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
You're as lazy as Grumman
...and yet an "energetic" dick-taker like you, only cites sources you've apparently never read, and which even discredit you.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Let's do this, since apparently your feeble brain [ which is a vestigial organ in your case] can't chew more than what it can process, and work your ass off in fulfilling this pressing obligation first:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
then work your ass off in delivering the rest, shall we.
And oh, again, I'll be back for more of the same: your emotional non-answers. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Learn English, knucklehead: "Like Hoess" ~ "for example", not necessarily the "only one".And you vindicated my point you're quoting, by this intellectually-paralyzed scribble:As for the bizarre stories of your "first-hand holocaust victims" nobody but desperate Jewish housewives like you give them any credence. LOL - a-dolf.hitler-koben
Jesus Christ! You really are a f**king retard! LMAO!
quote:Ever crossed your feeble mind that weeping about scientific consensus [reached via a concept (genetics) you know nothing about] doesn't actually refute it? Just *try* to *think* about it, even if it sets your brian cells on fire. Lol.
Only consensus is among desperate whites using Mickey Mouse science to steal land. LOL
quote:Learn prep-English; it'll help you absorb what *you* write:You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie! - a-dolf.hitler-kobenRemember: You can run, but can't hide from your tall tales
And I repeat, you fail to grasp the implications of his quote, but now I fully understand why. LOL
quote:...spare you from working your ass off in materializing spurious garble? - like addressing: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.No can do. The remedy to your fear, is confronting it.
Only one affraid is you over your disappearing 6 million Jewish holocaust story compared to the nightmare that was Bolshevism(your side). Jew terror squad Cheka + Stalin years = far more than -1 million. You can cry till your eyes drop out you stupid Trotskyite. LOL
quote:Sources to rescue *your* lie; why? Don't have the smarts to dig your dick-loving ass out of your own lie?Any way, to press the point into your blockhead:Zionists doesn't = all JewsZionists were = a section of JewsZionism = leaving to a "Jewish homeland" [hence, not just any land]Collaborating with Zionists, therefore = politics.Apparently, being new to the concept of politics, you've never heard of the idea of "strange bed fellows"; if you did, then it would be apparent that the so-called "Zionist collaboration":Doesn't in any way support or prove "backtracking" from Mein Kampf's literally-expressed disdain for Jews. assy mcgee, use your butt to think, since you obviously don't have a head. Lol.
^^And what the hell was all that spur-of-the-moment, incoherent, mumbo jumbo - only to compensate for the fact that emigrant Jews are not subject to extermination. LMAO @ u boy!!!
Again Jew slave, your anger is getting the better of you. No wonder you can't settle down and read my sources. Your defeated ass has been reduced to pussy, pussy, pussy, dick, dick, dick. LMAO @ Ausarianstein!
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Jesus Christ! You really are a f**king retard! LMAO!
And you really are a dick-loving sex toy of david duke and...?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Only consensus is among desperate whites using Mickey Mouse science to steal land. LOL
So when do you intend to stop weeping and start refuting?
Ever considered learning what "DNA" means first? Just a thought.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
quote:Learn prep-English; it'll help you absorb what *you* write:You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie! - a-dolf.hitler-kobenRemember: You can run, but can't hide from your tall tales
And I repeat, you fail to grasp the implications of his quote, but now I fully understand why. LOL
You're damn right; I don't buy into uncorroborated incoherent tall tales:
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Only one affraid is you over your disappearing 6 million Jewish holocaust story compared to the nightmare that was Bolshevism(your side). Jew terror squad Cheka + Stalin years = far more than -1 million. You can cry till your eyes drop out you stupid Trotskyite. LOL
Come on dick-loving hitlerite, drop the evasive caterwauling and deliver this:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
Remember: The remedy to your fear, is confronting it.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
^^And what the hell was all that spur-of-the-moment, incoherent, mumbo jumbo - only to compensate for the fact that emigrant Jews are not subject to extermination. LMAO @ u boy!!!
This speechlessness illustrates my point you were citing: The concept of politics is totally alien to you.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
No wonder you can't settle down and read my sources.
Shouldn't you be more concerned about reading your sources first and understanding them, before recommending them to others?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Your defeated ass has been reduced to pussy, pussy, pussy, dick, dick, dick. LMAO @ Ausarianstein!
Hey, I just call it as it is: you simply are a dick-loving pussy. In other words, you are just a sex slave placed on this planet to suck on david duke & co's dicks; nothing more or less. Thinking is not your suit. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Here's a nice portrait of a-dolf.hitler-koben:
^Remember: "Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:What is disturbing is your incredible unwillingness to read my sources
^ That doesn't disturb *me*. What I *would* find disturbing is anyone who would take you or anything you post seriously.
But you make it easy to dismiss your rantings as those of a misguided racist moron, so, no one does take you seriously.
Therefore, there is really -nothing- to be disturbed about.
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
From Zundelsite, Akoben08's link.
Is it not good news, rather than bad news, that millions didn't die at Auschwitz? Is that not reason to rejoice?
Will we ever really know what happened and how many victims there were? Not if we cannot ask questions!
After an intensive write-in campaign initiated by the Zόndel Team and directed to Mr. Gorbachev a few years ago, the Soviets finally released the remaining Death Books of Auschwitz, which they had captured in 1945.
Surprise! Guess what?
The so-called "four million", revised to "1.5 million,"have shrunk to 74,000 proven deaths!
Yet the omission of Akoben08's precious documentation from his posted link is glaringly absent. Can I get a link to this Death Books of Auschwitz from... well... someplace? Will it offer peer-review from revisionists and Holocaust supporters alike?
All meticulously recorded - name, date, nationality, religion, time, reason and cause of death!
German researcher Tjudar Rudolf, who is fluent in German, English, French, Yiddish and Polish and understands most slavic names and languages, has painstakingly gone over all these Soviet/Auschwitz death register books and totaled the number of Jewish deaths according to name and religion - even allowing for slavicized names.
The end result?
Slightly over 30,000 Jewish dead in Auschwitz.
Say what! Can't these guys get this right! They study this stuff and bump heads; obviously not in the same room though.
That is what "Holocaust" Revisionism has achieved!
Yes, I see.
From all we know as of today, according to this man's educated analysis, some 30,000 Jews thus lost their lives, mainly to diseases and overcrowding, in Auschwitz and surrounding work camps affiliated with the main Auschwitz complex.
A less than critical reading of the bolded type gives me pause right away. Where is the certainty, Akoben08, with documentation? Why didn't you cite this material to attempt to prove your case earlier? You settled on a 1.5 million figure at Auschwitz. Do you consider these other figures to be bullshit, even for you? Is this 74,000 figure much to low for you? What does the 30,000 figure mean?
You say I haven't read Zundel's site. Actually I have been reading a little everytime I get a chance and I knew it was just a matter of time before I came across some uncertainty on this guy's site. But what is a fact is you didn't read any of this, above, yourself. I'm thinking you don't know what to believe with your own sources and that you've dug yourself a deep enough hole that you can't climb out of.
Finally, I'm hoping there is testimony from Zundel on the other death camps in Poland. He has a fixation on Auschwitz to the exclusion of others. Maybe he's hoping to divert attention so they won't have to be addressed. Speaking of which you, Akoben08, asked me a page or two back why I lingered on Treblinka. The rest of the story won't go away will it.
Posted by meninarmer (Member # 12654) on :
Chaim Weizmann, the first president of Israel, made this Zionist policy very explicit: The hopes of Europes six million Jews are centered on emigration. I was asked: Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine? I replied, No. ... From the depths of the tragedy I want to save ... young people [for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They are dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world ... Only the branch of the young shall survive. They have to accept it.
Chaim Weizmann reporting to the Zionist Congress in 1937 on his testimony before the Peel Commission in London, July 1937. Cited in Yahya, p. 55.
Ben Gurion informed a meeting of Labor Zionists in Great Britain in 1938: "If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Israel, then I opt for the second alternative." Ibid., p.149.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:So when do you intend to stop weeping and start refuting?Ever considered learning what "DNA" means first? Just a thought.
DNA studies=science, Hammer et al.=Jew spin
quote: produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
Lie #6 million. LOL like your alter ego-->
quote:Come on dick-loving hitlerite, drop the evasive caterwauling and deliver this: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.Remember: The remedy to your fear, is confronting it.
Crying over your disappearing precious mythical 6 million dead Jews. LOL
quote:This speechlessness illustrates my point you were citing: The concept of politics is totally alien to you.
You just aren't going to read those sources are you? LOL
quote:Shouldn't you be more concerned about reading your sources first and understanding them, before recommending them to others?
Let's just say I'm a humanist, deeply concerned about your fixation on me as opposed to my sources. This debate has gone way past history, I can only conclude therefore your homophobia (surprising for a lefty) is evidence of projecting. LMAO @ you Hanna Ausarianstein!
quote:^ That doesn't disturb *me*. What I *would* find disturbing is anyone who would take you or anything you post seriously.But you make it easy to dismiss your rantings as those of a misguided racist moron, so, no one does take you seriously.Therefore, there is really -nothing- to be disturbed about.
Little Rasolowitz is back, but still confined to the sidelines watching his buddy getting beat down after beat down.
quote:You say I haven't read Zundel's site. Actually I have been reading a little everytime I get a chance and I knew it was just a matter of time before I came across some uncertainty on this guy's site. But what is a fact is you didn't read any of this, above, yourself. I'm thinking you don't know what to believe with your own sources and that you've dug yourself a deep enough hole that you can't climb out of.
Grumman, you're confusion stems from your constantly looking for my achilles heel. Good god man all you have to do is read my posts. I never said less than one million for Auschwitz, that's an overall approximation. I posted sources books and all for what my position is. The 74,000 Auschwitz figure is from German historian (no holocaust denier) Hoffmann, Rudolf is a revisionist in mode of Zundel so its understandable his figures would be lower. I don't stick to any "hard" figures where this story is concerned, they keep going down as more comes to light, I even posted an anti-revisionist saying this! Don't be like Hanna, in need of constant spoon feeding. Treblinka was a transit camp, get over it.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Rasol is back, but still confined to the sidelines
^ True, and laughing at you while you wallow in NAZI excrement, and pretend to take loony pride in the resulting foul stench.
You're right though, the smell being so bad, I am staying as far away from you as possible.
LMAO @ you Rasolowitz! Despite your claim you want to come in and help, but you're a couple threads too late. Already addressed Lipstadt's outdated fallacies. No documentation, no scientific report done at the time, Auschwitz was no extermination camp - Sereny. Grumman is now down to debating numbers.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Despite your claim you want to come in and help.
Nah, not necessary in your case. Holocaust deniers such as yourself have already been reduced to a laughing stock, ranking with 'flat earth society' and 'area 51 UFO' crowd.
There is no rant you can invent that has not been already exposed as almost unfathomably stupid.
You are wasting your time.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Couple threads too late for debate on Lipstadt's outdated fallacies, and even more behind on those pictures of typhus victims and general conditions in the camps after WW2. Again, you hide behind this because you're ignorant of the issues being debated plus who Sereny is. Scientific evidence please Rasolowitz, not pictures with companying music appealing to emotions. Suggest you quit now while you still have your sanity. Check out your buddy Ausarianstein when he loses an argument: dick, dick, dick, pussy, pussy, pussy...
Dachau?!! LMAO @ poor little Rasolowitz and his hiding behind one website after another!!! Your present hiding place is outdated rubbish. Even Grumman is ahead of you here! I warned you don't go any further if you want to avoid Ausarianstein's fate! LOL
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Jewish Hollywood
Ausarianstein, Rasolowitz, Grumman
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:duke's pussy writes:
DNA studies=science, Hammer et al.=Jew spin
Did your virgin kkk "monks" teach you dateless internet freak virgins that "weeping" challenges science?
quote:akobenladen writes:
quote: produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
Lie #6 million. LOL like your alter ego--> [IMG]
hitlerdyke is speechless. Posting pics of your idol sex clients is no answer.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Crying over your disappearing precious mythical 6 million dead Jews. LOL
hitlerdyke try again, without failure:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
Remember: The remedy to your fear, is confronting it.
quote:akobenladen writes:
You just aren't going to read those sources are you? LOL
What incentive do others and I have for reading your one-header so-called "sources" that you've never read, eh, assy mcgee?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Let's just say I'm a humanist
Yeah, a "humanist" which gloats over mass murder and idolizes the mass murderers. Certainly, you aren't from earth; what planet do you come from?
quote:akobenladen writes:
deeply concerned about your fixation on me as opposed to my sources.
Actually, quite the contrary; I'm concerned about your having ever read your "sources", and therefore capable of delivering these for starters:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you ttributed to him.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
This debate has gone way past history
No doubt, this is no debate. This is now about rendering you irrelevant and making a clown ass out of you.
quote:akobenladen writes:
, I can only conclude therefore your homophobia (surprising for a lefty) is evidence of projecting. LMAO @ you Hanna Ausarianstein!
The *conclusion* to your failure, is to go weep some more on david duke's lap, and sexually screw him later on.
And remember:
^"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
Hey akobenladen,
I'll dumben down the point about the so-called "Zionist collaboration" for you even further to pre-prep-school level, with this interesting example:
Remember how Yonis joined you in your crackscience fest here.
Now this interesting moment in itself doesn't in any way prove his like or dislike for you and vice versa; it does however show that you've come together, at least temporarily, for political expediency [because certainly neither of you were driven by science or facts]
Yet this lovely companionship itself doesn't in any way amount to "backtracking" of the vile things you've literally expressed against Yonis in other threads and vice versa...because it is obvioulsy based on political expediency. To show evidence of backtracking, one will have to have evidence *citing* you on expressions that directly contradict the aforementioned vile expression.
Now hitlerdyke, go off to learn the concept of politics. Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
^^LOL, funny stuff.
If this [Beck]
is one of your sex idols (let alone an idol of yours at all) , your in need of serious help dude.
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08 says: ''I never said less than one million for Auschwitz, that's an overall approximation.'
And I do stand corrected on this one. That one slipped by me as I do recall you saying it was an overall figure.
So Treblinka was a transit station? To where? I'm sure you intended to say the afterlife.
You do realize your overall Holocaust figure says nothing about the 800,000 Jews murdered at Treblinka?. So if 1.5 million were murdered at Auschwitz and 800,000 at Treblinka, and none of the other four, maybe five, extermination camps aren't mentioned here then your overall figure is in serious jeopardy right up front. And I haven't even mentioned the concentration camps at all; no doubt from all that typhus you be hypin'.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Did your virgin kkk "monks" teach you dateless internet freak virgins that "weeping" challenges science?
What science?
quote: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
No spoon feeding the monkey.
quote:What incentive do others and I have for reading your one-header so-called "sources" that you've never read, eh, assy mcgee?
You cant read them because as I said you are not interested in facts, only obsession with me. So you stalk me in here to save face after your beatdown.
quote: Yeah, a "humanist" which gloats over mass murder and idolizes the mass murderers. Certainly, you aren't from earth; what planet do you come from?
Was waiting for this particular lie. Please don't forget Talmudic Jew-lover, it was you who introduced numbers game "Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?"
quote:Actually, quite the contrary; I'm concerned about your having ever read your "sources", and therefore capable of delivering these for starters: produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
Please be a good lefty and recycle paper and the like, not lies Hanna.
quote:No doubt, this is no debate.
Ofcourse it isn't, you were trounced like three pages ago! Grumman is getting his fear share, and I hope your buddy Rasolowitz comes back so I can demolish him too. He seems to be a lot smarter than you though, only drops websites and then run away. LOL
quote: I'll dumben down the point about the so-called "Zionist collaboration" for you even further to pre-prep-school level, with this interesting example:Remember how Yonis joined you in your crackscience fest here. Now this interesting moment in itself doesn't in any way prove his like or dislike for you and vice versa; it does however show that you've come together, at least temporarily, for political expediency [because certainly neither of you were driven by science or facts]Yet this lovely companionship itself doesn't in any way amount to "backtracking" of the vile things you've literally expressed against Yonis in other threads and vice versa...because it is obvioulsy based on political expediency. To show evidence of backtracking, one will have to have evidence *citing* you on expressions that directly contradict the aforementioned vile expression. Now hitlerdyke, go off to learn the concept of politics.
What in gods name....?!?!?!... pure, unadulterated, bullcrap to cover for your ignorance of that particular episode in history and implications for your argument, that's why you can't read my sources Ausarianstein.
Look, as long as your anger consumes you, because of the drubbing you received in this debate, I own your ass! LMAO!!!
Pussy, pussy, pussy, dick, dick, dick I have no more arguments, but must come back to save face pussy, pussy, pussy, dick, dick, dick...
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: So Treblinka was a transit station? To where? I'm sure you intended to say the afterlife.
To other labor camps.
quote:So if 1.5 million were murdered at Auschwitz and 800,000 at Treblinka, and none of the other four, maybe five, extermination camps aren't mentioned here then your overall figure is in serious jeopardy right up front.
And if pigs could fly that would be something wouldn't it? No evidence for 1.5 Jewish deaths at Auschwitz.
quote:And I haven't even mentioned the concentration camps at all; no doubt from all that typhus you be hypin'.
Come on Grumman, even you must see through the rubbish. They died of typhus out break due to breakdown of conditions during WW2, no evidence for an extermination policy. German camps were dropped long ago, Auschwitz was abandoned only recently. Holocaust Industry is allergic to scientific enquiry, hence criminalisation of revisionism in Europe.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:akobenladen writes:
quote:Did your virgin kkk "monks" teach you dateless internet freak virgins that "weeping" challenges science?
What science?
Precisely, you dateless internet-freak virgins have no concept of science. Your virgin kkk "elders" are pissing on your heads (ass in your case). Lol.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
No spoon feeding the monkey.
Crying like a little bitch that just wet herself, is no solution to:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
Remember: Remedy to your fear, is confronting it...not peeing in your pants. Not cool
quote:akobenladen posts:
Lovely pic of your mama. What kind of razor does she use to shave? Men's Gillette?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
You cant read them because as I said you are not interested in facts, only obsession with me.
Ever considered looking up the meaning of "fact"?
I'm "obsessed" to see you read your one-header "sources" before posting them, and delivering this, for one:
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
So you stalk me in here to save face after your beatdown.
Where hitlerdyke? Remember; you first addressed me, not vice versa.
Easy; I can actually demonstrate your other queer mouth-drooling after me from thread to thread; to name a few:
Now, produce *your* links to where I've chased your dick-loving ass.
quote:akobenladen posts:
Can't stop thinking of your number 1 sex idol? Need to carry his pic around in every post. No problem.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Was waiting for this particular lie.
Like this:
You insist on playing the number game because you fail to grasp the implications of the Finkelstien quote! Do you know what rapidly approaching number of holocaust deniers mean?! Considerably less than one million, you stupid commie! - adolf-hitler-koben08
Why voluntarily make a fool of yourself over again?
quote:akobenladen writes:
Please don't forget Talmudic Jew-lover, it was you who introduced numbers game "Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?"
Dateless internet virgin, I "remember" telling you to deliver this:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
And I remember you never having the balls to answer it. What now?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Please be a good lefty and recycle paper and the like, not lies Hanna.
little school girly cauterwauling doesn't make this go away:
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
quote:akobenladen writes:
quote:No doubt, this is no debate.
Ofcourse it isn't,
Never said it were, you did. Now that is what's called "backtracking", you lap dancing male-chasing punk. Now, go back to your virgin kkk monks to wipe tears off your freakin face (ass). Lol.
quote:duke's pussy is flabbergasted:
What in gods name....?!?!?!
...is this?
Why, it is you, oh dumb one.
Now, why wouldn't limbaugh not be enticed to screw that. He'd be insane not to. Lol.
And remember, in the meantime:
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Now, peace. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: Precisely, you dateless internet-freak virgins have no concept of science.
In closing: there is no evidence that those whites calling themselves Jews are Semites. Get over it.
quote: Lovely pic of your mama. What kind of razor does she use to shave? Men's Gillette?
Yet another sign that you have reached your end. So sad.
quote: produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
You cant keep blaming me for your lack of basic comprehension skills Ausarianstein. LOL
quote: Where hitlerdyke? Remember; you first addressed me, not vice versa.
Oh please Ausarianstein, it was you who jumped out of nowhere to address my post making passing reference to Hitler. As history would have it, you got your ass kicked, surprised yes? LOL
quote: Now, produce *your* links to where I've chased your dick-loving ass.
You're doing it right now you stupid commie! LOL You only keep crawling back in here to save face. You are finished, done, beat down, out of ammo, buried in sources and links you refuse to read, but you will come back to ask same questions for obvious reasons. You're like Hillary Clinton, can't accpet defeat. LOL
quote: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.And I remember you never having the balls to answer it. What now?
Nope, sorry, still no spoon feeding for the monkey on figures for Cheka victims, Stalin years, Ukraine genocide, fate of Germans after WW2 all higher than less than one million Jews. Simple google search, then just allow it to sink in...
Wow, Ausarianstein you really have gone through an extreme makeover. From an articulate (albeit woefully unread) lefty poster on ES to a pathetic foul mouth commie. This is the best evidence of your defeat. This is why your buddy Rasolowitz only drops websites and run, stupid drive-by negro. LOL He will never get into specifics to actually prove his arguments because he has seen what has happened to you and Grummman.
Posted by Ausarian (Member # 13266) on :
quote:akobenladen writes:
there is no evidence .
You dateless virgin internet freaks should strive at learning the concept of science, not weep at it. Tell your virgin kkk "elders" to screw themselves for misguiding you.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
You cant keep blaming me for your lack of basic comprehension skills Ausarianstein. LOL
Weeping at this...
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
^...is incomprehensible. Remember: The remedy to your fear, is confronting it.
quote:akobenladen writes:
quote: Where hitlerdyke? Remember; you first addressed me, not vice versa.
Oh please Ausarianstein, it was you who jumped out of nowhere to address my post making passing reference to Hitler.
Well hitlerdyke, easy: simply cite *evidence* for it. Here's mine:
^Where's your name or post in my *first* post there? From the link, here's mine in yours:
hitlerdyke posted:
quote:
" Reactionary ethno-centric patriotism has proven to be quite an effective tool at dividing the broad layers of working people!
This is Marxist gibberish.
policy of Jewish ethnic cleansing was "racist".
It was no more "racist" than German hatred of Poles, Pole hatred of Germans, British hatred of Germans, Russians...
^Already provided links of your male-chasing [after me] escapade in *multiple threads*, when you can't find any vice versa. Telling, no?
quote:duke's pussy writes:
You're doing it right now you stupid commie!
So, your dick-loving ass is saying that my confronting you here for taking me on in the first place, is evidence of chasing you? You really had it very hard in the butt by duke last night, didn't ya? Lol.
quote:akobenladen writes:
hitlerdyke is now admiring Clinton, for being a woman yet having more man-in-her than he does. If balls could be bought in a market today, hitlerdyke would be the first to yearn buying one.
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Nope, sorry, still no spoon feeding for the monkey on figures for Cheka victims, Stalin years, Ukraine genocide, fate of Germans after WW2 all higher than less than one million Jews. Simple google search, then just allow it to sink in...
hitlerdykie chick, please try to grow at *least* a tinnie winnie and deliver:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
This is the "no hitlerdykie chick caterwauling" zone.
And remember:
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
limbaugh would love to tear you apart. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Oh please. Ausarinstein now wants to pretend he wasn't coming to aid his buddy Rasolowitz by addressing the issues brought up in my post with his long, colourful (yet archaic) Marxist rhetoric, which is now reduced to dick, dick, dick, pussy, pussy, pussy because he got trounced!
But "confronting" me Ausarianstein? LMAO!!!Confront me with what? Dick, dick, dick , pussy, pussy, pussy I refuse to read your sources because they undermine my dogma dick, dick, dick ,pussy, pussy, pussy ...LMAO @ Hanna being reduced to this! All your arguments have been demolished, you unread commie.
No six million Jews, no evidence Hitler planned to extermination "all Jews" based on race, white Jews aren't Semites,Cheka victims, Stalin years, Ukraine genocide, fate of Germans after WW2 all higher than less than one million Jews and you have been reduced to cursing and projecting. Please call your buddy so I can beat him down too.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
quote:duke's pussy writes:
Oh please. Ausarinstein now wants to pretend he wasn't coming to aid his buddy Rasolowitz
hitlerdyke, so you admit you first addressed me, since you can't cite me first quoting you as I've done vice versa. Matter is settled then, male-chaser.
quote:akobenladen writes:
No six million Jews, no evidence Hitler planned to extermination "all Jews" based on race, white Jews aren't Semites,Cheka victims, Stalin years, Ukraine genocide, fate of Germans after WW2 all higher than less than one million Jews and you have been reduced to cursing and projecting. Please call your buddy so I can beat him down too.
Please try to grow at *least* a tinnie winnie and deliver:
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
This is the "no hitlerdykie chick caterwauling" zone.
And remember:
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
limbaugh would love to tear you apart. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ See what I mean, you have to come back to save face. lol
so you admit you first addressed me
No you did, you just can't admit it. You are a defeated Khazar apologist Ausarienstein. Enough of you.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
quote: akobenladen writes:
No you did,
Easy hitlerdyke, cite it.
This is the "no hitlerdykie chick caterwauling" zone.
Stop chasing after dicks for a minute; grow one, and deliver:
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, the specific objective and subjective forces at hand, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, and the settings at hand on Bolshevik genocide.
produce Finkelstein's quote stating that the holocaust toll is under 1 million, as you attributed to him.
Remember:
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
limbaugh is drooling over you. I mean look at you; you are all ass. Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08, I ask about Treblinka and the other camps in Poland and what is your response: Treblinka was a transit station. Poppycock. You are big on producing sources, even though those sources haven't produced the asked for specifics, just rebuttals, to anyone's satisfaction except yours and you expect some here to believe it when you you say, ''he has seen what has happened to you and Grummman.''
Now you may have a closet sympathizer or two lurking around behind the keyboard and maybe they haven't surfaced in your defense for two reasons, maybe more: 1)they don't want to get into trouble because of comraderie with other posters, or 2) they don't have a clue about what's being talked about here, maybe not even caring, and in the process they will linger long enough to see if you can pull off a miracle by pulling yourself up by your shredded bootstraps. So far you have number 2 working right nice; not the miracle part though.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
LMAO @ Ausarianstein's chutzpah! Please keep things in perspective shall we? It was you who ran from my points, even though I reduced it to one, giving some sorry excuse about not "dignifying" a debate. You should be the last person talking about not addressing arguments. I demolished all yours, I'm just not going to chase your mobile goal posts and spoon feed your monkey ass. LOL
Grumman I think it's the later. They don't know the issues and wisely stay away, unlike dumbbell over here, who jumped on my post making passing reference to Hitler and is now getting the s**t kicked out of him. I too find is subject boring, but Hanna keeps coming back so I have to put him in his place.
But come on now, the sources contain more than mere rebuttals. But you will never be satisfied because you keep looking for evidence against something that didn't happen! The onus is on your people. If they were all death camps, surely more than unverifiable eyewitness can be produced. Where is it? It's a god damn war propaganda, Grumman, atrocity stories no different from ones re WW1, Gulf War 1 and 2. Difference is it's a multi-billion dollar industry, so there's more at stake. So despite anti-revisionists Baynac et al. it will keep on going.
I sorry to disappoint you I don't perform miracles, I just go with the facts.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Babbling duke's pussy:
Please keep things in perspective shall we?
Absolutely. You're an anti-humanistic dick-loving crackpot, who is apparently mentally paralyzed to deliver:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
That's putting things into perspective, osama akobenladen!
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Poor thing. You are projecting again. By going around in circles like a stuck piglet, being unable to challenge/or even address my arguments, you have rendered yourself mentally paralyzed. LMAO @ the loser Ausarianstein!
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
If I humor you again Ausarianstein, will you stop filling ES threads with obscene pics? It brings down the good name of the forum.
quote:lay out in detail how your holocaust figures have been reached by using a scientific procedure different from that of mainstream historians,
Did this.
quote:like that of contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz, which are fully backed up by primary Nazi records of their own genocidal actions.
As for your favorite source Dawidowicz even Hilberg didn't have much faith in her,"The problem was that, as Hilberg brutally demonstrates in his memoir, she got the most elementary facts wrong". And since Graf in turn trashes both her and Hilberg, so much for your sources. LOL
quote: Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Nah nah nah, still not Semites...
quote: Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Change the wording still makes you a recycling liar. LOL
quote: Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Moving the gold post from"Where is your "fact" that other segments of European populations had experienced any holocaust as that on the scale of European Jews?"to explain away pre-Stalin Bolshevik crimes still can't escape the fact that other Euros suffered more under Marxism than - 1 million precious Jews.
quote: Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
Never said they funded Jewish Marxist labor movements you sly little commie. I said they funded Bolsheviks to overthrow Czar.
Now when are you address my points you slimy, cowardly little commie hypocrite? LOL
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
Babbling klan sect dick-rider,
Since you had no balls to actually answer *any* of these [other than just weeping back at them], I forward:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Now, deliver without failure, babbling coal burner. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Wow, now you throw your favorite source Dawidowicz under the bus! LMAO @ poor little Ausarianstein! What happened to "produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz."?
Changing the wording still wont detract from the fact that you project your inability to read your own sources on me. LOL
But still, Hammer et al. has no evidence of Semites, and no feeding the big baby on Bolshevik figures. Even you must now realise that your amazing descent into the sewer and general sore loser attitude has cost you your ratings on ES. LOL
The rest of your post is same ole exercise in projecting and tired s**t rhetoric.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
dick-riding Jamaican hustler,
Don't they teach you dateless loons at your virgin kkk elders' neophyte cocoon how to answer...
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
hahaha Ausarianstein finally threw his remaining source Dawidowicz under the bus after another one of his favorites Hilberg threw her secondary sourced backed, fairy tale book to the fire! His only recourse is wallowing in the excrement his wife just stepped in, LMAO @ the jackass Ausarianstein has become. Please call you buddy Rasolowitz, I have unfinished business with him.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
@ Jamaican blowjobbing bitch.
I hear that your mama's clit is so much bigger than that of your pappy's winnie, such that it felt like she was the one getting it into your pappy rather than vice versa; get my dift. It was this traumatic event that has rendered you too mentally paralyzed for life to do a simple thing, such as answer an obligation...like say this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
osama akobenladen,
You've lost your squirrel buckteeth and all your frontal teeth to all that cock-sucking that you do almost non-stop, leaving you with little to no intellectual integrity and energy to do anything meaningful in life...including the need to deliver:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: little to no intellectual integrity
Oh please Jew boy, you are projecting again. Why have you thrown your last remaining source Dawidowicz under the bus? Is it because you finally read her and realised she was not "primary document-backed"? LMAO! No longer shall we read from you, "produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz." So which source are you now using since Hilberg trashed her and Graf trashed them both!
And btw show where I said Jewish bankers financed "Jewish Marxist labor movements"? But damn Ausarianstein stop clogging up ES with all your vulgarities to compensate for your ignorance.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
osama akobenladen,
Come on, leave your grand daddy's false teeth alone a pathetic attempt to remedy that toothless numb gum from all that non-stop cock-sucking when you could be delivering:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Oh my god, you really are throwing her under the bus aren't you?! So now, who are these phantom primary document-backed mainstream scientific researchers? You burnt Hilberg, Reitlinger and now poor Dawidowicz suffers the same fate! My guess is you took a glance at my Graf quote and finally read the Finkelstein article and realised you have no more sources to hide behind! Now that you've burnt your last bridge you might as well pour the gasoline on yourself as you have noone to base your magic numbers on! LMAO @ Ausarianstein destroying himself!
Cursing and projecting is all you are left with, Jew boy, having failed to explain your strawmen.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
osama ,
Stop humping your underaged cracker's dick and deliver:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
How can I? You've burnt all your sources and in turn destroyed yourself. Your obscenities, straws and lies need nothing but pity. Whatever reputation you had as poster in here has gone up in flames. Your buddies are just too shocked to tell you.
btw would you please call Rasolowitz, its his turn and I'm getting impatient here.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
osama,
What did your mama tell you about wearing her wacky dirty thongs?
In the meantime, you should be busy with this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
You can run, but you can't hide from your greatest fears. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
"produce hard figures of the holocaust, and lay out in *detail* how they've been reached *outside* of the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz." - Ausarianstein
Like I said ages ago, my sources and yours already delivered, "Lucy Dawidowicz's The War Against the Jews (1975) builds "largely on secondary sources and conveying nothing whatever that could be called new...To be sure, Dawidowicz has not been taken all that seriously by historians"(pp. 145-47). - Hilberg
Like I said, you are nomore...
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
osama,
I hear that you use semen as toothpaste. Explains the bad breath; backbiting says that the stink is so bad, that it actually makes your ass funk seem like some delightful perfume.
Anyway, instead of being reduced to parroting me out-of-context, here's what you should be doing:
In the meantime, you should be busy with this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
You can run, but you can't hide from your greatest fears. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Anyway, instead of being reduced to parroting me out-of-context,
Translation: I threw mamma Dawidowicz, my last source, under the bus and that's why you don't see her name in my posts anymore. LOL
Does this look familiar?
Dawidowicz Fiasco diagnosis:
pseudoscientists rarely revise...Failures are ignored, excused, hidden, lied about, discounted, explained away, rationalized, forgotten, avoided at all costs. - Rory Coker, Ph.D.
Example -
Lie:
the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz." - Ausarianstein
And now,
Fact:
"Lucy Dawidowicz's The War Against the Jews (1975) builds "largely on secondary sources and conveying nothing whatever that could be called new...To be sure, Dawidowicz has not been taken all that seriously by historians"(pp. 145-47). Hilberg
Lie 2:
between 5 and 5 1/2 million Jews were exterminated during World War 2 [The Destruction of the European Jews, Hilberg]
And now,
Fact 2:
In his (Carl Nordling) study based exclusively on Jewish and Allied statistics, W. Sanning comes to the conclusion that not more than 3.5 million Jews were subject to German power, meaning that that they lived in the German area of influence at the time when the Holocaust was supposedly transpiring.
In order to prove this mass murder, Hilberg has had to invert the long-standing hierarchy of evidence and make witness testimony take precedence over physical and documentary evidence. Graf
Incredible shrinking numbers.
Holocaust Industry Auschwitz figures: revised figure 1 million and falling . Pressac (1st report) 928.000, Pressac (2nd report) 470.000, Hoffmann 74.000.
Not only does the '6 Million' figure become more untenable but the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers Finkelstein
"Bungling, exaggerations, omissions and lies are the signpost of most reports of that ιpoque ... It is inevitable that new documents will come to light which will shatter more and more the official Auschwitz story. The present, seemingly triumphant portrayal of the universe of concentration camps (Auschwitz), is destined to be doomed. What can be saved of it? Very little!" - Pressac
Takes one to know one aint that right Ausarianstein? No wonder you squeal about taking you "out of context". Baloney. Unlike you, jew boy, I stand by my Finkelstein quote referring to the holocaust Industry. You on the other hand, killed mama and yourself.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
osama,
You have two choices: you can either go back to your virgin kkk monk (click to view) at your nazi cocoon, so that he can help you lay your cockroach egg-case or...you could be doing this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Akoben08, before you can do the beatdown (your post on the ''isn't it interesting'' topic),
''you should be busy with this'':
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million.
When you can silence the above in the specified manner then I will entertain your beatdown. Until that is accomplished you are still flailing your arms in perpetual agitation at those sources who rebutt you at every turn because your sources haven't produced the required information to sustain your beatdown of anything... just as I told you.
By the way, what was Chelmno? I know what you said about Treblinka, and your answer was stark in its simplistic denial.
So, stop with the stalling tactics and show this evidence (I know you don't have).
Finally, you have my permission to hook up with the recent revisionist/denial symposium in Iran to muster up those figures so that you can prove beyond a doubt what you've been talking about all along.
But wait! Silly me, why would you show figures that are suspect anyway considering the location of the symposium.
P.S. You told me awhile back I was searching for your Achilles heel. Then you are admitting in an oblique way you do in fact have bad feet? Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Wow, with no more arguments you coattale a loser. How pathetic is that?! LMAO! Your problem, like Ausarianstein, is not science, but something deeper. Which is why you ask for Chelmno, even though my sources dealt with that at least three pages ago. Man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still... Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
beaten-down ku klux slave,
Our "problem" is that you refuse to let go off those male-nuts in your mouth, and instead attend to this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Your problem is you're playing dumb not to see this:
quote:In his (Carl Nordling) study based exclusively on Jewish and Allied statistics, W. Sanning comes to the conclusion that not more than 3.5 million Jews were subject to German power, meaning that that they lived in the German area of influence at the time when the Holocaust was supposedly transpiring.
Because you are dumb enough not to read your sources and post this:
quote: the scientific approach and primary document-backed figures reached by contemporaries of the Holocaust era, like Lucy Dawidowicz."
But the reality is this:
quote: "Lucy Dawidowicz's The War Against the Jews (1975) builds "largely on secondary sources and conveying nothing whatever that could be called new...To be sure, Dawidowicz has not been taken all that seriously by historians"(pp. 145-47). Hilberg
Then this:
quote: In order to prove this mass murder, Hilberg has had to invert the long-standing hierarchy of evidence and make witness testimony take precedence over physical and documentary evidence.
And this:
quote: Not only does the '6 Million' figure become more untenable but the numbers of the Holocaust industry are rapidly approaching those of Holocaust deniers Finkelstein
Paralysis, Jew boy, is what you are reduced to. Posting pages and pages of the same refuted posts. LOL
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
"proofs" of the "extermination camps" are from same Soviets who cooked up 4 million figure at Auschwitz.***
This one doesn't need to be rehashed because the plaque at Auschwitz reduces this figure. Fine.
.The whole site, suggested Christie, was within the Soviet sphere of control, and nobody from the west was allowed into those camps to investigate, isn't that right?
.Well, I don't know of any requests made to investigate ... When you say no one was allowed, it implies some request,. said Hilberg. .... All I could say is, I know of no Western investigators early on in Auschwitz, or any of ....
Treblinka?, asked Christie.
Well, there was no more Treblinka in 1945..
Sobibor?
That was no more..
Majdanek?
Majdanek is another matter..
Was there anybody from the West that went to Majdanek?, asked Christie.
Not to my knowledge..
Belzec?
Belzec was the first camp to have been obliterated..
Chelmno or Stutthof?
No, sir..
Auschwitz or Birkenau?
No...
Akenoben says with smugness: ''So there you have it. The so-called documentation for "the greatest crime agaisnt humanity"! A multi-billion dollar hoax! This world is crazy. lol''
Akoben08, I'm not surprised you would lay claim to these camps being summarily dealt with considering how your animosity towards another specific group of human being casts a pall over your thinking. Did you read what was implied by the questioning about the camps mentioned above? If you didn't look at it closely I could see why you speed-read the f..k out of it and came to the conclusion the camps didn't exist at all. Take yo' ass right back up there and look at it again. It says no such thing about a non-existence which you foolishly cling to. Something called murder/extermination took place in all those camps and you say it didn't all because Hilberg couldn't put his finger on a westerner getting into the camps. Poppycock!
I am objective about a total figure of 6 million, not so at all about the implied non-existence of any death camps when a multitude of survivors and camp guards and in some cases witnesses ''from outside the fence'' say killing went on in those places. In your haste to denounce this you have suspended everything a thinking person should have in their possession which is critical thinking. It doesn't matter whether the evidence goes against you, you ignore it; it doesn't matter that some say it can't be 6 million; it doesn't matter that some websites say the nazis didn't actually keep a total number of victims led to the slaughter. What does matter is willful suspension of noted evidence, evidence that in its totality is in dispute yet not the measure of it. You and your understanding can nitpick this figure or that figure and in the process invite more rebuttals but it will not wash away the painful truth that genocide did occur.
Akoben08, there is or was eyewitness testimony from all sides that say the nazis committed genocide on a massive scale. How you can dispute this is baffling to me. I don't know how many times you have to be told this.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: This one doesn't need to be rehashed because the plaque at Auschwitz reduces this figure. Fine.
Oh come on Grumman, this is only your wishful thinking. Figures on a plaque, appealing to emotions, doesn't make it correct. How did they reach that figure? Those figures, like the amazing six million, are not from primary documents but ideology.
Now let's get certain things straight before you lapse into the same tactics as Ausarianstein.
1) I never denied killings of Jews during WW2 or that it was a horrible event. Remember how all this got started and stop being the forum hypocrite!!!
2) I never said the camps did not exist, although there is one however that Hoess mentions (after being tortured) that didnt exist. But the questioning centered around destroyed camps and whether or not any scientific investigation was done to come to the conclusion that they were established for the specific purposes claimed. That you casually dismiss the importance of scientific investigations (as evidence for a claim such as this!) is indicative of the mentality when it comes to this story. Suspension of reason and logic for faith in "evidence" from "eye witnesses" and tortured victims which is not taken seriously by even anti-revisionists. I have said this over and over. Like Ausarianstein, you keep coming back with stupid questions and ignorant statements which indicate you have read JACKS**T as far as my sources are concerned. Hence this is pointless. Until you swallow your pride and read we cannot have an informed discussion/debate. So until then stop embarrassing yourself, you might end up like Jew boy over here.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
You got it wrong, beaten-down ku klux slave:
Our "problem" is and remains this:
That you are the beaten slave of Jews and "Whites", reduced to nut-suckling, and who refuses to let go off those male-nuts in your mouth, and instead attend to this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
As it regards the plaque figures, this statement from you: ''How did they reach that figure?'' is a real curiosity from you. So, how did they, the revisionists, reach any figure? We are talking how those extermination figures, even if reduced, came to be, and to make it stick, within the revisionist camp so as not to give the rebuttals, even from revisionists, any chance of a comeback; rebuttals that will continue to come until the revisionists camp can offer unequivocable, stamped approval from the Holocaust side. And I say this because the information has to be so totally convincing that no one can deny, not even Jews.
Again, from Akoben08: So there you have it. The so-called documentation for "the greatest crime agaisnt humanity"!
You could have left that one by itself as it would seem to bolster your support for the non-existence of camps in terms of documentation but you added this in the same paragraph:
''A multi-billion dollar hoax! This world is crazy. lol''
How do you reconcile those two contradictory statements with each other?
So you and they are saying the documentation doesn't exist with the specific reason of killing peopleyet you say the camps did exist. So again, where is the power of absent documentation if the testimony from the unfortunate people themselves who made it out alive say the camps existed to murder people, notwithstanding the fact of testimony from participants themselves. You are basing your argument on papers that may not exist on a national government level and that this lack indicates no systematic murder, from within that same government, but tacitly, maybe, and that this absence of documentation really means that those camps weren't set up for that reason. If the camps were there, and you do agree to this, and your total figure of murder victims at the hands of the nazis reaches 1,000,000, or thereabout, and you also may, may, agree to that earlier figure of 74,000 at Auschwitz, then your total figure of murdered Jews will have to be divied up between the rest of those not-murder-but-transit camp/s. Now this still says nothing for the concentration camps' victims in Germany that were horribly treated and brutalized and murdered on a whim; what do the revisionist say about this? All typhus no doubt.
Now that you've gotten me ''somewhat interested'' in this sordid affair I will poke around some revisionists sights, again, just to see if there is information that I can say, well kiss my butt only 100,000 Jews died at the hands of the nazi government.
Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: So, how did they, the revisionists, reach any figure... rebuttals that will continue to come until the revisionists camp can offer unequivocable, stamped approval from the Holocaust side. And I say this because the information has to be so totally convincing that no one can deny, not even Jews.
From your reply, I'm taking it that 1) you have no clue as to how they reach the figure for the plaque, 2) still refuse to read my sources, even after I gave you a quote, 3) you are incredibly naive to think that the Holocaust industry is going to shoot itself in the foot. If Eurocentrists don't do it re AE, why should the Holocaust Industry?
quote: How do you reconcile those two contradictory statements with each other?
The story is a hoax. What is contradictory about that?
But still you go around in circles asking same questions re eye witnesses and making assumptions and simplifications about what went on in the camps with absolutely no evidence other than discredited eye witnesses. Note: if being "horribly treated and brutalized" is evidence of a "death camp" then America and Britain had such camps, then and now!
quote: Now that you've gotten me ''somewhat interested'' in this sordid affair I will poke around some revisionists sights
I don't care whether you are interested in WW2 history or not, but if youre going to say something without evidence other than sentiment for white Jews, then I will respond. Hence this ongoing "debate", now minus one. LOL So if you want to continue this discussion please continue to read before hand, because remember what happens when you become intellectually paralysed... see Jew boy below
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
Beaten-down ku klux negro slave,
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the whinin' nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote:Where are the hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
I don't mean to interrupt your paralysis but who are you referring to here? Who used primary Nazi documents to reach the 5.1 million figure? Since you can't use "recounts" of eye witnesses to count 5.1 million deaths, and no material evidence for any extermination policy, we can disregard that piece of imbecility. LOL
But the source for my figures, and how they have been reached, can be found in Graf. However, which scholar are you referring to here in your paralysis...sorry, quote? Help me out please. Thanks in advance.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
Beaten-down ku klux negro slave kiddo,
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are your hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Jesus H. Christ!!! LMAO @ the twists and turns Ausarianstein is reduced to!!! Is that your last straw, boy? Where are my figures? I never claimed to do any primary search Ausarianstein, but since you don't read I can understand how you might have thought so. But come now, please, take a break from your frozen posts (everyone's laughing at you boy lol) and tell us which scholars you are referring to used primary Nazi documents to reach the 5.1 million figure? Where is your point of reference? Don't play dumb like my seven, five, four, one point you were too afriad to answer years ago.
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
Beaten-down ku klux nigger slave ,
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are your hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
^ Yep, just as I thought, paralysis. I can't believe you are that much of a p***y Ausarianstein! LMAO!
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
The joke's on you beaten-down ku klux nigger slave, because...
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are your hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
quote: instead attend to this:
Unfortunately for you I already did Ausarianstein. LMAO @ the Jew boy when he is forced into a defensive position, like my seven, five, one point he cleverly avoided years ago!
quote: In his (Carl Nordling) study based exclusively on Jewish and Allied statistics, W. Sanning comes to the conclusion that not more than 3.5 million Jews were subject to German power, meaning that that they lived in the German area of influence at the time when the Holocaust was supposedly transpiring.
Your problem now, same as years ago, is to stop trolling and attend to this
quote: which scholars you are referring to used primary Nazi documents to reach the 5.1 million figure? Where is your point of reference?
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
Sissy beaten-down ku klux nigger slave, stop running away...
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are your hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging and being a sissy is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
you can only hide the fact of your inability to refute an argument by trolling. LOL
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
cunt-punked beaten-down ku klux nigger slave, stop running away...
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are your hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging and being a sissy is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
LOL See Ausarianstein I had long suspected your problem:
quote:Evidence that Jews are carriers of schizophrenia is disclosed in a paper prepared for the American Journal of Psychiatry by Dr. Arnold A. Hutschnecker, the New York psychiatrist who once treated President Nixon. In a study entitled "Mental Illness: The Jewish Disease" Dr. Hutschnecker said that although all Jews are not mentally ill, mental illness is highly contagious and Jews are the principal sources of infection.
Dr. Hutschnecker stated that every Jew is born with the seeds of schizophrenia and it is this fact that accounts for the world-wide persecution of Jews.
"The world would be more compassionate toward the Jews if it was generally realized that Jews are not responsible for their condition." Dr. Hutschnecker said. "Schizophrenia is the fact that creates in Jews a compulsive desire for persecution."
Dr. Hutschnecker pointed out that mental illness peculiar to Jews is manifested by their inability to differentiate between right and wrong. He said that, although Jewish canonical law recognizes the virtues of patience, humility and integrity, Jews are aggressive, vindictive and dishonest.
"While Jews attack non-Jewish Americans for racism, Israel is the most racist country in the world," Dr. Hutschnecker said.
Jews, according to Dr. Hutschnecker, display their mental illness through their paranoia. He explained that the paranoiac not only imagines that he is being persecuted but deliberately creates situations which will make persecution a reality.
Dr. Hutschnecker said that all a person need do to see Jewish paranoia in action is to ride on the New York subway. Nine times out of ten, he said, the one who pushes you out of the way will be a Jew.
"The Jew hopes you will retaliate in kind and when you do he can tell himself you are anti-Semitic."
During World War II, Dr. Hutschnecker said, Jewish leaders in England and the United States knew about the terrible massacre of the Jews by the Nazis. But, he stated, when State Department officials wanted to speak out against the massacre, they were silenced by organized Jewry. Organized Jewry, he said, wanted the massacre to continue in order to arouse the world's sympathy.
Dr. Hutschnecker likened the Jewish need to be persecuted to the kind of insanity where the afflicted person mutilates himself. He said that those who mutilate themselves do so because they want sympathy for themselves. But, he added, such persons reveal their insanity by disfiguring themselves in such a way as to arouse revulsion rather than sympathy.
Dr. Hutschnecker noted that the incidence of mental illness has increased in the United States in direct proportion to the increase in the Jewish population.
"The great Jewish migration to the United States began at the end of the nineteenth century," Dr. Hutschnecker said. "In 1900 there were 1,058,135 Jews in the United States; in 1970 there were 5,868,555; an increase of 454.8%. In 1900 there were 62,112 persons confined in public mental hospitals in the United States; in 1970 there were 339,027, in increase of 445.7%. In the same period the U.S. population rose from 76,212,368 to 203,211,926, an increase of 166.6%. Prior to the influx of Jews from Europe the United States was a mentally healthy nation. But this is no longer true."
Dr. Hutschnecker substantiated his claim that the United States was no longer a mentally healthy nation by quoting Dr. David Rosenthal, chief of the laboratory of psychology at the National Institute of Mental Health, who recently estimated that more than 60,000,000 people in the United States suffer from some form of "schizophrenic spectrum disorder." Noting that Dr. Rosenthal is Jewish, Dr. Hutschnecker said that Jews seem to take a perverse pride in the spread of mental illness.
Dr. Hutschnecker said that the word "schizophrenia" was given to mental disease by dr. Eugen Blueler, a Swiss psychiatrist, in 1911. Prior to that time it had been known as "dementia praecox," the name used by its discoverer, Dr. Emil Kraepelin. Later, according to Dr. Hutschnecker, the same disease was given the name "neurosis" by Dr. Sigmund Freud.
"The symptoms of schizophrenia were recognized almost simultaneously by Bleuler, Kraepelin and Freud at a time when Jews were moving into the affluent middle class," Dr. Hutschnecker said. "Previously they had been ignored as a social and racial entity by the physicians of that era. They became clinically important when they began to intermingle with non-Jews."
Dr. Hutschnecker said that research by Dr. Jacques S. Gottlieb of Wayne State University indicates that schizophrenia is caused by deformity in the alpha-two-globulin protein, which in schizophrenics is corkscrew-shaped. The deformed protein is apparently caused by a virus which, Dr. Hutschnecker believes, Jews transmit to non-Jews with whom they come in contact. He said that because those descended from Western European peoples have not built up an immunity to the virus they are particularly vulnerable to the disease.
"There is no doubt in my mind," Dr. Hutschnecker said, "that Jews have infected the American people with schizophrenia. Jews are carriers of the disease and it will reach epidemic proportions unless science develops a vaccine to counteract it."
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
stop being a fake doctor, cunt-punked beaten-down ku klux nigger slave, and confront...
Our "problem" is and remains this:
Stop being the nutsuckling slave of the "White Man", and instead attend to this:
Where are your hard figures; how have they been reached from a purely scientific approach, *without* having to use the mainstream scientific procedure of using primary Nazi archives, recounts by first-hand holocaust victims, and material evidence of the repressive and destructive tools used?
Counter genetic evidences to Hammer, Nebel, Thomas et al.
Cite Finkelstein to back up your lie about his understanding of the holocaust toll under 1 million
Cite and lay out the full context, including dates, specific and concrete figures involved, the socio-economic situations at play, settings and political specifics on Bolshevik genocide.
Name in detail the big banks and financial institutions, along with their "Jewish" execs, that supposedly funded the "Jewish Marxist" labor movements; an effort that would undoubtedly be a suicidal one to be undertaken by "Jewish capitalists", since "Marxism" is the anti-thesis of "capitalism".
"Thinking" doesn't suit you...as one can tell by your face.
Dodging and being a sissy is futile. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
better confront your illness before it's too late lol
Posted by Ausarian. (Member # 14778) on :
Better file that ruff neanderthal corny pussy of yours, and man up. Your ruff corny pussy is already cutting holes into and tearing apart that beast hide thong that you call underpanties. Posted by akoben08 (Member # 15244) on :
Come jew boy stop trolling (your so-called "extreme methods" lol) and answer the question.
quote: which scholars you are referring to used primary Nazi documents to reach the 5.1 million figure? Where is your point of reference?
You want to "neutralize" me (LMAO!) well here's your chance: remember wise words from The Bass "staying on topic and neutralizing attacks with facts".
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ up.
Hey, Jew boy! Go back to the original place where you lost your innocence. Only here can you reclaim your sanity! Prove your holocaust myth Jew boy and redeem yourself!
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
quote:Originally posted by akoben:
^ up.
Hey, Jew boy! Go back to the original place where you lost your innocence.
I told y'al that there's no gay ass modafucka like this clown. Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
Oh come now Jew boy. I only want whats best for you. Why are you so afraid to go into the light Jew boy? lol
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ So when did a thread on the definition of black skin become about 'Jews'? Better yet why is there even a thread about 'black skin define' let alone one that has gone on about 8 pages?
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ So when did a thread on the definition of black skin become about 'Jews'? Better yet why is there even a thread about 'black skin define' let alone one that has gone on about 8 pages?
Because this is all gaykobens limited intellect allows him to discuss.
Posted by The Explorer (Member # 14778) on :
Indeed, with OpenAss around, does anyone have to ask how every thread becomes about Jews or about Sforza and Bowcock?
Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ because jew boy jumped in to save rasolowitz and instead got his ass whipped. lol
Have you finally found those six million gassed Jews Ausarianstein?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ I did find one of those who gassed them
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Indeed, with OpenAss around, does anyone have to ask how every thread becomes about Jews or about Sforza and Bowcock?
Figures. Posted by akoben (Member # 15244) on :
^ Democrats gassed Jews? Arent they the biggest recipients of Jewish money? Then again, it makes sense to accuse those who were in bed with the Zionists of "gassing Jews", they did it to Hitler. lol
).
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I never said arab was a race ... 
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
The irony is I actually wanted you to try prove your case. When you have decided to deal with materials then we can start another round of beat down for you. 
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Warning!: Graphic images!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
LMAO!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
