Z***** for a start...and all of which they manipulate knowledge, media, govt, education..etc
Kamal, did you even READ what I wrote? My question further on was:
And are you suggesting all Germans who shared their knowledge about the holocaust are "BSers"?
Well, thank you for letting me know how you feel about those.
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven:
quote: We learned about the holocaust from our parents, grandparents, granduncles and -aunts, friends' relatives and so on and so forth. Almost everyone has relatives or predecessors who were involved or affected by the Nazi regime
you're a jew and you had fmaily in the holocaust... im sorry if I had offeneded you...:|
No, I am not Jewish, I'm simply German. And your question shows that you haven't understood anything from my last post.
Sorry, I give up. I think my English is clear to understand, I don't know why you fail to comprehend my words.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:And are you suggesting all Germans who shared their knowledge about the holocaust are "BSers"?
no not all germans(and people of the world....) only...Z***** for a start...and all of which they manipulate knowledge, media, govt, education..etc (and all over the world too)
ok the more i think about this, the more funny it gets....
whats the story with the american hitler
first the hitler were suprressin the jews (zions???) now those jews and z**** virtually rule america.... including those nazi in some corner of america...
what a funny mis-informed world we're living... a war agains evil..... yet abuse + assualts to women and children..
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: and especially in developed world, the education given are very precise, controlled...they dont have much option to see any other perspective...
it not about quantity,,,it about quality...
people who learn things from from "BS"ers... and dont question anything...will only ever know BS..
too much BS information flowing over there...pple are getting confused...
read the book, to get some quality brainwashing......click here
maybe it is all germans, maybe not, maybe some or few....
I dont know you very well to say that u seeem a bit un-intelligent..
Kamal, you know nothing about me, where I come from, my education, what books I read, what magazines I read, who I talk to, yet you're constantly suggesting I (and others, for that matter) am stupid, misinformed and not being able to make up my own mind about things (=brainwash).
I've been raised to not accept things simply because some person of authority says so; I've learned from a very early age on to always ask questions until an issue is clear to me. I've learned to be very critical of everything I read and see in the media and that it's useful to look at all sides of something and not accept things just because they seem obvious at first glance. Before I make up my mind about an controversial issue I always research it from all angles and take a look at all the different opinions.
So please refrain from further insulting me!
You know very little about my country and my country's history, yet you insult my fellow countrymen and -women by suggesting they are a bunch of "BSers".
Please stop insulting all Germans by suggesting they are brainwashed and a bunch of liars!.
You very clearly say that you know very little about the facts of the holocaust and are not interested in learning, yet you take the side of those who deny it:
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: .
I didnt ask how it is documented, and I cudnt care less how they documented...I dont care how much proof there is, nor did I say it didnt happend, or did happen. Frankly I dont care...
I just deleted a whole load of crap i wrote...im getttin kinda bored with this holocaust non-sense...
anyway what the big deal of the holocaust..
Im sure those who deny the holcuast have reasonable evidence to exaplian their denial, that is just as good as susans evidence.
...
I have noticed in other discussions that you often accept information without really analyzing it as long as it comes from a source you consider an authority. You sometimes post your opinion on something but when asked to clarify or explain the reason for your opinion it becomes clear that you haven't really thought about or researched the subject from all angles.
You have often warded off legitimate questions or criticism with the argument that, if some sheikh on Islam-qa says so, it MUST be right and no further questions should be asked, after all who are we to question an *authority*?!? You have told me and others off for NOT blindly accepting some fatwas; you haven't even been willing to look at the other side of some arguments because some *authority* has already said so and so, so you don't have to make up your mind and think for yourself.
You have entangled yourself in contradictions and made ludicrous claims, such as that women who are not circumcized might "GO CRAZY and onto the streets" and that women are "mentally unstable" during their period, all this in an attempt to justify female circumcision – not because you personally think it's necessary, but because some ultra-misogynistic scholars said so and you can't question their judgement. You have discarded all my arguments in this matter because you don't regard me as an *authority*. It never occured to you, though, that I'm a woman and as such my opinion in this matter and my perceptions might hold more weight than those of a man, be he a highly acclaimed scholar or not.
quote:Dalia, there are learned men who have studied the matter carefully, and you showing your opinion like that, looks kinda stupid...
in the internet you have organizations (some backed by academia), like the islam-qa and the avert.org.. then you have all these small little personal website, where people like you, with many conclusion and opinion are shown, without any factual evidence.
So i really think you should be careful where you pick your sources, cos it is really getttin to your head
who are Amnesty Internation Are they orginally german?
i'm in 101% disagreement, that i do think that mere muslim who only spend a few hours, if not minutes, of their day studying their religion, are given the authority to interept ayas/issues them selves, is ludicurous!
If you want to make up your own conclusion, then you might of well just make up ur own religion
but as with all them thing about women driving, and girls circumcision, they are debatable matters...
Im not sure where i read it, i dont keep refernce of everything i read...but im sure it was on an islamic website... it mentioned one reason why a women isn ot allowed to pray is cos she is not in her "normal state of mentality"
i know it alot of assumptions....but again i say [an optional FGM is only for her protection, and only for her benefit....
Really, the hadith explains it all, I shudnt need to explain anything at all..... Infact it maybe true what you said, that I am not able to explain it concisly to you.
And you want to lecture me about brainwash???
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
I didnt understand your post there, nor the purpose of it...
what's with all the insulting....
why would I even insult someone... I have no reason to insult people, so I dont know where you getting that idea from...
Do you feel insulted that I keep on saying that Z**** teach/propagate BS...
or you feel insulted when I condradict your opinion...
if you think what I say to you are BS, then your entitled to your own opinion/judgement/thoughts....so be it..
and I might think the same of some people...but it dont give them rights to start to accuse me that i insulted them
It's interesting how American Nazi thing I been saying was being ignored in the next few posts...
it makes you think doesnt it... here is the world condeming Nazi, and crying over the holocaust.... and you still get those nazi living and breeding in the states itself...
I dont know if I should laugh or cry....
=============================== What is FGM got to do with this....
I dont think I condradict my self at all... Infact I think im cleear and precise in what I think and beleive...
if Im wrong, im not afraid to admit it. if im not sure, im not afraid to ask and clarify..
even if my religion poses sumthing that may seem odd, or sumthing new, i look into it and find out further....
FGM was sumthing I wasnt familiar with, and infact did not know it was upon the sunnah at all...
after that discussion with you, you have converted me, to beleive that actaully it is very good for women.... infact I would mind any close female relations were to do it...i would be 100% for it....
i meant the islamic fgm.....
and it was you who gave up in the end on fgm... maybe you couldnt admit to the fact that there is a big differnce in islamic fgm and all other type....
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven:
quote:Originally posted by Humanized:
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: but the islamic fgm is equivalant to a mans, where just the fore-skin is cut
kimo , there is no such thing as FGM related to Islam. Mutilation is not in islam. but the problem is to name circumcision with mutilation. unless someone says that male circumcision is same as castration.
Good point, Human., or maybe to newcomer....
Dalia you gota admit, there is a major differnce in the way Islamic "fgm" is done...and all the other ways u been reading that makes you nauseous /,,,
-------------------- -- here... [url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0955020700/qid%3D1133898517/026-7853042-0414807= Recommended...![/url] Posts: 2457 | From: U | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: after that discussion with you, you have converted me, to beleive that actaully it is very good for women.... infact I would mind any close female relations were to do it...i would be 100% for it....
i meant the islamic fgm.....
and it was you who gave up in the end on fgm... maybe you couldnt admit to the fact that there is a big differnce in islamic fgm and all other type....
I gave up, Kamal, for the same reason I gave up discussing the holocaust with you – you misinterpret and misunderstand pretty much everything I write and ignore the rest.
I will not roll up the FGM debate again. I made it repeatedly clear that I believe there is no such thing as "Islamic FGM".
I explained in detail (here ) how I arrived at my conclusion and why I believe chopping off parts of women's genitalia is in no way whatsoever justified.
You chose to ignore everything and read the opposite out of my posts, plus it's very clear that you know nothing whatsoever about the female anatomy. Well, I can't help it. I just pray that you'll never have a daughter you will do this to. ...
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: what's with all the insulting....
why would I even insult someone... I have no reason to insult people, so I dont know where you getting that idea from...
I quoted several lines written by you that are clearly insulting. Are you telling me someone else wrote them? Or do I need to post them in 45 point type, so you don't overlook them?
*shake head in disbelief ...*
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The main points of an article by Adel abd al-Hamid in Al-Gumhouriya last December 12:
“Since the Second World War, [the Jews] have invested millions of dollars in publishing books and articles and in producing propaganda movies claiming that Jews were sent to gas chambers under the Nazi regime. . . . At the same time, the Jews cry ‘anti-Semitism’ every time a Western thinker or politician with a conscience condemns the Jewish slaughter of the Palestinian people. Nevertheless, . . . many intellectuals . . . have explicitly stated that they have doubts about the . . . Holocaust. . . . The Iranian president reminded the world of the doubts . . . about what happened during the Holocaust. He may have opened the gates for new thinkers who will raise the issue again and deal with it rationally. . . .”
That same day in Al-Gumhouriya, Issam Kamel chimed in by making these points:
“The Iranian president . . . lit a great fire that will not be extinguished. The reason the world is panicking at what Ahmadinejad said is not only because the Jews rule everything that happens in Europe, but because the Western world is afraid the Jews will return to live among them. The idea to get rid of them was a stroke of genius because it got them off the map of the West . . . and at the same time turned them into the thorn in the side of the Arabs. . . . The most important aspect of Ahmadinejad's remarks was that he raised the issue of the legitimacy of the existence of the State of Israel in the region. . . .”
Two days later, again in Al-Gumhouriya, Dr. Mahmoud Wahib al-Sayyid made these points:
“It is possible that Ahmadinejad was rash and that his remarks motivate the West to support Israel , although they have no reason to do so. However, the Iranian president did recall facts which many have tried to ignore: Europe rid itself of the Jewish presence, and solved its own problem by tossing the problem to the Middle East. The issue of the Holocaust was inflated out of all proportion to increase the damage for which the Jews would [demand] to be compensated. . . . That was why Germany and Austria trembled when Ahmadinejad reminded them that someone had to compensate the Holocaust victims, if the Holocaust did [indeed] take place, and if [in fact] it was as serious and terrible [as claimed].”
And back again on December 12, in the government daily Al-Massa (as reported by MEMRI), Hisham abd al-Rauf claimed in an article called “Israel’s Lies”: “these massacres, which Israel alleges the Nazis perpetrated against the Jews, never happened. The famous execution chambers were not more than rooms for disinfecting clothing.” The Holocaust, he asserted, was a Jewish lie “to extort world solidarity.” As for Ahmadinejad, he had posed a “logical and proper question” to the Western countries “which planted Israel in the heart of the Islamic world. . . . ”
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
The argument for granting special status to classes of victims in hate crimes laws was made decades earlier in the tragically flawed historical treatment of the Holocaust as a unique crime against Jews. The Holocaust was real, vast and evil: the attempt to exterminate European Jewry was one of the vilest efforts in human history.
But the Holocaust was not a crime committed only against Jews: six million of the twelve million innocents brutally murdered by the Nazis in the camps were Christian, not Jewish. “The Final Solution to the Gypsy Question” was planned four years before Heydrich at Wannsee outlined the odious “Final Solution to the Jewish Question.”
Genocide was not peculiar to Nazism. From September 1939 to June 1941 - before a single Jew died in a Nazi death camp - the Soviets exterminated 1.5 million Poles (overwhelmingly Christians) in their half of divided Poland. Armenian Christians, not Jews, were first victims of genocide in the Twentieth Century, and Moslems were their murderers.
Genocide was not limited to Europe. Before the Holocaust, Japan had already committed the single worst genocidal episode in human history: the Rape of Nanking. Twenty years after the Holocaust ended, China would slaughter millions of Tibetans.
Hollywood ignored all these other genocides. Libraries have shelves devoted to the Holocaust, but seldom any books about Turkish genocide against Armenians or Soviet genocide against Poles. Denying Nazis genocide against Jews is a grave moral offense, but ignoring the other equally savage holocausts of other peoples is an even graver moral offense.
Selective indignation at one holocaust inspired selective indignation toward certain victims of bigoted violence in hate crimes legislation. Racially motivated violence against black Americans was all too real, but what are called “hate crimes” have been inflicted throughout the history on many groups.
America has not been immune from these crimes, but which groups in America suffered most from hate crime? Mormons, who were literally driven halfway across a continent by mob violence and arson until they reached Utah. Who, arguing for hate crimes laws, thinks about Mormons? No one: they are not a politically correct group of victims. As with The Holocaust - rather than the holocausts - it is the victim group that matters, and pointedly, Mormons are not yelling for hate crimes legislation.
But the moral problem runs deeper. Long before Hitler inflicted his mass murders upon the Jews, Gypsies and Slavs of Europe, Stalin had exterminated millions within his Evil Empire. And after the gallows at Nurenberg had hung their last Nazi war criminal, Communist regimes murdered many times as many people as died in the Nazi camps.
These murdered souls were not the victim of racial, religious or ethnic hatred; they were the victims of a general hatred of humanity. Treating these victims as “life unworthy of remembrance” is as monstrous as the Nazi position regarding “life unworthy of life.” Each human soul snuffed out by a wicked monster deserves the same respect as another human soul. Demicide has become the word used to describe the mass murder of people tortured, starved and murdered by an unbigoted mass murderer, but Demicide is a subject scarcely touched upon in books or film.
Hate crime is portrayed as small-scale genocide: only certain groups merit special concern. Other violent crime is Demicide on a small scale, but of course people - not blacks, gays, Christians or Jews - are always the victims of murder, rape and torture, and these crimes are always hate crimes. Treating six million murdered Jews in the death camps as more important than six million murdered other innocents in the Gulag has evolved into treating a murdered gay black woman as more important than a murdered straight white man.
Why does this matter today? Anti-Semitism is an ancient and terrible vice, even when it is not manifested in present deeds. Racial bigotry is real in human history. Decent people must oppose both of these sentiments. Minimizing or ignoring crimes against politically incorrect groups or against humanity in general means that the enormity of the Holocaust or racial lynching will inevitably, and unfortunately, be doubted.
Today radical Islam spews genuine anti-Semitism. Today radical Arabists engage in real racial genocide in Sudan. The connection between our enemies today and our enemies sixty years ago should make us all shudder. Persian Moslems in 1941 seriously debated whether Adolph Hitler was the Twelfth Prophet of Shiite Islam. A few years earlier, Mussolini was portraying himself as “Defender of Islam.”
Unbiased truth is the only defense against Hitler, Hussein, and Haman. The purest sibling of the young Jewish boy with raised arms in the Warsaw ghetto is the young emaciated kulak girl in Ukraine. Truth, truth and truth: that alone matters now. Persistent lies of omission will gleefully do what Hitler could not, unless we insist that truth prevails. And we must speak as one.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many "pro-Palestinian" groups condemn Israel's human rights violations and the occupation but they make absolutely no mention of the genocide in Sudan, the Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, and Turkish occupation of Kurdish lands, and until recently Syria's occupation of Lebanon or the much worse human rights violations going on elsewhere in the world. Why these groups choose to single out Israel for one-sided condemnation while ignoring many other worse human rights violations in the world? Arab states should equally condemn Sudan. Otherwise their anger over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict rings hollow. How can they protest the killing of Palestinians when their kin exterminate Africans in Sudan? The tragedy of Darfur wouldn’t be permitted if it were taking place in Europe. Only one thing is for sure, this one sided thinking of these groups has not helped the middle east conflict and has only contributed to Palestinian suffering.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: i meant the islamic fgm.....
FGM is an acronym for Female Genital Mutilation. Do you get the point? You are saying Islam condones some form of Mutilation. If you want to believe in something you need to at leas understand what it means, let alone understand the subject.
Posts: 637 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regimes radio: “Ahmadinejads comments are accordant to Islamic rule”
2005/12/12
On Sunday, December 11th the Islamic regimes radio praised Ahmadinejads anti-Semitic comments and called them “accordant with Islamic rule”.
The radio address stated that while westerners are “too retarded to grasp the depth of the concept” of the Presidents comments, this is “the only solution for resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian disputes.” The broadcast continued: “The Zionist regime along with the help of Europeans just want to exacerbate the existing disputes so that the blood of innocent Muslim Palestinians could be poured into the ‘bottle of depravity’, otherwise why is it prohibited in Europe to address the falsified reality of the Holocaust and not even consider the solution offered to the world by the Islamic regimes president?”
The Islamic regimes ended its broadcast by claiming that the international community’s protest against Ahmadinejad’s comments is nothing more than the “defilement of the divine order”. http://www.iranpressnews.com/source/009254.htmPosts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
but anyone with simple common-sense would of known what i meant...
people would learn alot more if we started to read the logic behind people post... rather than just waste time and comment on how it is written
quote:Originally posted by Automatic For The People:
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: i meant the islamic fgm.....
FGM is an acronym for Female Genital Mutilation. Do you get the point? You are saying Islam condones some form of Mutilation. If you want to believe in something you need to at leas understand what it means, let alone understand the subject.
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: people would learn alot more if we started to read the logic behind people post... rather than just waste time and comment on how it is written
It's surely not a waste of time to use correct vocabulary in a discussion in order to avoid misunderstandings.
The language of this board is English. If people don't know English well enough to understand common phrases they should either use a dictionary or join a board in their native language but not whine about others being nitpicky.
mu·ti·la·tion Disfigurement or injury by removal or destruction of a conspicuous or essential part of the body.
mu·ti·late tr.v. mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing, mu·ti·lates To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple. To disfigure by damaging irreparably: mutilate a statue. See Synonyms at batter1. To make imperfect by excising or altering parts.
[Latin mutilre, mutilt-, from mutilus, maimed.] muti·lation n. muti·lative adj. muti·lator n.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: and there is no doubt z**** control US.....it's not debatable, it is a fact...
Honestly, sometimes americans worry me.... seems like they been modernizing too much... new "modernized-slaves" of the z***** .. the worst thing is that they dont even know what going on...
AS i said last time on some thread,,ill sy it again.. the only way to defeat these Z***** is the expose and have knowledge about them....
come'on peopple wake up
this is book is a good start for breakfast it was written by a Z**** everyone... come'on lets all run to te book shop now
these zions dont care about american, or european, they only care for thier people, their money, their power..
and now i dare u to read The real enemies of the Jews : zionism
muslim need to read this book, at least they will learn the differnce of zoinist and jews
you need to read the book for sure
...shows how much influence zion/jews ( these term are being used too loosely) have on Us govt, and hence on international polciy..
i bet you stil dont know the *source" of todays *terrorism* do you.... of course now why should your zionist leader's teach you, they dont wanna expose themselves do they
Thoose zionist can just brain-wash you with some crap, and give you an agenda to go to war - which you will beleive cos american like you are so gullible whilst the zionist themselves have another intenion go to war....
There is differnce between Jews and Zionist...not much, but there is, this book is good.... another thing...so you think *zionist* will tell you that they run your gullible country .....
So with its systamtic propganda zionist will always have the upperhand....
the only way to defeat zionism is to educate people about them..... i'll make that my mission once i graduate;)
Why is it that if anyone say anything about Hitler, everyones turns your heard, the world *Hitler* is almost a taboo, if your heard talking about him in the streets people will look... why? cos of the zionist systamatic propagnada
I wouldnt expect anyone to read such books, most people like to read books full of BS, written by {zionist} academia...and boast their knowlegde....
et me expplain to you one thing....
What the zionism do/have is a greater weapon than tanks, guns, etc etc... they have something called systamtic propagana....
This never existed before becuse there was just a king who ruled, ad everyone obeyed...
people are so "informed" today, especiaull westerners, they have "libraries" they went to "school" and had an "education"..
yet mainstream media, many large coperates, basically the economy would be owned/runed by zionist....
and people who influnces a nations economy will have more influence than its resident/voters... with their control over goverment, they can influence the school curricula... dont you see how the Holcoust is so much emphasized in most school as if that is the only thing that ever happened in history..
So with its systamtic propganda zionist will always have the upperhand....
the only way to defeat zionism is to educate people about them..... i'll make that my mission once i graduate;)
zionist ->control economy -> control govt -> control people's mind....
But forget history.....worry about the present, are you going to continue and let your mind blindly follow zionism, or do you want to wake up
par·a·noi·a (pr-noi) A psychotic disorder characterized by systematized delusions, especially of persecution or grandeur, in the absence of other personality disorders.
Extreme, irrational distrust of others. Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dalia: par·a·noi·a (pr-noi) A psychotic disorder characterized by systematized delusions, especially of persecution or grandeur, in the absence of other personality disorders.
Extreme, irrational distrust of others.
I know it an easy option, to start playing the insulting game.... when you have nothing to say
but when your done playing....
maybe you can contribute sumthing useful....
take your time...
maybe it just taking u some time to accept some facts...
I'll reply when you got sumthing reasonable to say against my argument of the z***ns..... "paranioa" is not a good enough, im afraid...
Posts: 2457 | From: U | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fran: That was why Germany and Austria trembled when Ahmadinejad reminded them that someone had to compensate the Holocaust victims, if the Holocaust did [indeed] take place, and if [in fact] it was as serious and terrible [as claimed].”
ROFL!
I didn't see Germany "trembling" at those news ... where did Mr Sayyid get this from?
As for reminding – we don't need Mr. Ahmadinejad "reminding" us of the Holocaust victims (neither, as some in here seem to be suggesting, do we need the US to do this), in fact we're doing a pretty good job reminding ourselves.
quote:Originally posted by Dalia: in fact we're doing a pretty good job reminding ourselves.
See how Israel made toys out of you? You'r doing the job they wanted you to do very well indeed!
I alwayes found it interesting how Europe makes a big deal out of it more than anyone else including USA and Israel itself! It's not that taboo to talk about in Israel if you had some reading in their news but it's a legal crime in your country if I heard correct?
posted
Thats an interesting comment, I am not sure how a nation makes "toys" out of someone? The holocaust is a serious subject that needs to be understood everywhere. What is disturbing now is that you hear on the arab street some of the same platitudes that Hitler and the Nazi's used. Obviously its all garbage as Isreal is doing what every nation does, looking out for her own interests. Many arabs have created a 'mythology' that is used to justify their extreme political agenda. It reminds me very much of the famous 'lost cause' theory many southerners believed in for decades after the American civil war. It is a philosophy that dooms them to defeat and condems them to continued poverty.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not talking about the whole Israli nation but those on control of its policy! Anyone who have been reading enough into Israli politics knows they have been playing with west with that guilt feeling! And there are many Israli who feel humilated because their government use this memory for financial benefits of which Europe follow blindly!
Ahmadi asked a reasonable question maybe you should answer it or Dalia, if European felt guilty why didn't they give place to jews in their land instead of taking other people land and giving it to them? Isn't this hypocrisy?
How about the Palestinian victims? Do European feel responsible for them and guilty about what happened to them too? No because they are not the one controling them...Let me know if there is another reasonable reason for this double standard.
As for arab sypmathising with Israli victims! please give us a break! none can do what you ask for when they see how this holocaust was used to minimize the rights and suffering they had, And coming from you and your likes makes it highly unlikely acceptable as eevrything for you is based on self interest same like the way western policy goes by...I like fair games! Stop trying to play with words and put too much morals into politics when you really are not up for it! We'r fed up with your shows!
Posts: 1732 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Troubles, Who said life was fair??? You hard headed Muslims seem to lose sight of that fact. You may be right, you may be wrong, it does not matter now. Isreal won the land by WHATEVER means. Now all that is left is to decide where we go from here and what is best for the Palestinian people.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: See how Israel made toys out of you? You'r doing the job they wanted you to do very well indeed!
I think you didn't read what I wrote earlier in this thread:
We learned about the holocaust from our parents, grandparents, granduncles and -aunts, friends' relatives and so on and so forth. Almost everyone has relatives or predecessors who were involved or affected by the Nazi regime
quote:It's not that taboo to talk about in Israel if you had some reading in their news but it's a legal crime in your country if I heard correct?
What is a crime in my country? Talking about the holocaust??? No, most definitely not.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
The horrible genocide committed against the Jews by Nazi Germany, with the collaboration of other Europeans, during WWII was one of the worst events of the 20th century. To be sure, the last century had many other horrible episodes of genocide: the Gypsies, the Armenians, the Hmong, the Tutsis, and others. Horrors perpetrated by the likes of Stalin, Pol Pot, and the Chinese Cultural Revolution make the 20th century a very bloody one indeed.
Meanwhile, some Muslims and other sympathizers of the Palestinian cause have taken to comparing the ongoing suffering of Palestinians to the Holocaust.
The mass killing of millions of people from the very old to newborns with industrial efficiency for the sole purpose of exterminating a whole race is beyond words in its cruelty, criminality, abhorrence and indeed in its uniqueness. The road towards peace and reconciliation does not go through denial of the suffering of Jews; understanding the narratives of the "other" is a prerequisite for any real reconciliation. Those Muslims and other supporters of the Palestinians who deny or minimize the Holocaust do major disservice to the Palestinian cause and cause more Jews and Israelis to turn a blind eye to the suffering of the Palestinians.
Indeed, Palestinian suffering is unique as well and should not be compared to anything else. The courage of ordinary Palestinians living under a brutal occupation, the non-violent Palestinians who suffer in the refugee camps generation after generation, the Palestinian families living in New Jersey or Michigan, leading their new lives but remembering ..still remembering, writing, demonstrating is unique. The ability of Palestine to remain a viable dream in the hearts of millions despite its very powerful foes is unique! For over a hundred years now, Zionism has enjoyed the backing of the world’s most powerful powers; it has captured the imagination of the world’s so-called liberals and progressives then moved on to capture the imagination and support of its conservatives and evangelicals. Throughout this time, the ordinary people of Palestine have continued to struggle, and the word Palestine is now again an accepted part of the vocabulary.
In Tibet, the suffering, destruction and colonization were brutal, yet the world's liberals, intellectuals and celebrities spoke out against China and raced for a piece of the Dali Lama. The suffering of the Tibetans is recognized by the world. In certain respects, the eradication of their culture has been more complete than that of the Palestinians. In much of the world, Tibetans are seen as peaceful and spiritual, while Palestinians are portrayed as militant double-talking terrorists.. Whose suffering is greater? Which wound is more painful? When is a killing by one brutal occupier less painful than the killing by another brutal occupier? Comparisons and more senseless comparisons lead nowhere.
For Palestinians, where else are there such overwhelming odds against a people, people who have sadly not been blessed with wise leaders but who have an abundance of courage and perseverance? The suffering of Palestinians should not be compared to the suffering of others, and in the process be belittled by those who support them.
Let's not compare, all suffering is unique, and the suffering of the Palestinian people is no different. Let us today join the Germans, the Russians, the French and pray for the souls of the countless Jews who perished in the horrible ovens of Auschwitz—let's honor and respect their memory, and please, let us not compare!
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Troubles, Who said life was fair??? You hard headed Muslims seem to lose sight of that fact. You may be right, you may be wrong, it does not matter now. Isreal won the land by WHATEVER means. Now all that is left is to decide where we go from here and what is best for the Palestinian people.
Did I call you a confused idiot before?
in one breathe you remind us of holocaust and on another you tell us life is not fair when I speak of Palestinian suffering. You certainly don't know what you are talking about And you're an Idiot if I missed telling you that before.
quote:Originally posted by Dalia: What is a crime in my country? Talking about the holocaust??? No, most definitely not. [/QB]
By talking I meant questioning it! Questioning the historical context and critcizing it as people question that of Palestinians and others! Why that significant mighty picture of the Israeli suffering and no one else? If it was your parents influnce then don't try to impose it on people who are not germans and haven't got any hand on what happened there! The world doesn't have to treat the Jewish victims different just because it was your country that feels guiltyabout it! and you don't have to spread this HOlocaust phobia all over Europe.
Question is, Do arab find anything amusing in questioning something they didn't witness? No but they simply have seen how this holocaust memory was used to influnce European politics towards Palestinians and this started from early begning when their land was taken because other suffered and untill now many countries in Europ can't show fair treatment because of that old guilt feeling and fear of antisemetism which Israel deepened in them.
If you respect the palestinian sufefring and be fair to them they wont even think about questioning anyone's else suffering! This how it should go not vice versa
Posts: 1732 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And speaking of Education, what did they teach you in school about Palestine in Europe? Did they mention anything about the palestinian suffering? did they teach you that Europe made it worse by giving other people's land to those other European countries persecuted? did they mention some of the massacres happened to palestinians? I"M CURIOUS!
Posts: 1732 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: And speaking of Education, what did they teach you in school about Palestine in Europe? Did they mention anything about the palestinian suffering? did they teach you that Europe made it worse by giving other people's land to those other European countries persecuted? did they mention some of the massacres happened to palestinians? I"M CURIOUS!
It's taught in American schools, at least it was when I was in high school.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: And speaking of Education, what did they teach you in school about Palestine in Europe? Did they mention anything about the palestinian suffering? did they teach you that Europe made it worse by giving other people's land to those other European countries persecuted? did they mention some of the massacres happened to palestinians? I"M CURIOUS!
It's taught in American schools, at least it was when I was in high school.
What's taught in American school?care to give detailes?
Also I wish to hear about schools in Europe!
Posts: 1732 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the US, I was taught that Palestinians who live in Israel are treated as second class citizens. That public school is separate, like we had for whites and blacks until the 1950s. That Palestinians cannot hold certain elected offices, cannot have certain businesses/jobs, face tons of job discrimination, are subject to nightly curfews that non-Arabs don't have to abide by. Another way it made getting or holding a job difficult -- limiting availability of work hours.
In my World History courses, it was compared to South Africa's Apartheid system. Which the U.S. in theory did not support. However, both Carter and Reagan were reluctant to impose economic sanctions that were being called for by the UN (I think), and the American people. The late 80s, when I was in college, saw many American city streets and most college campuses filled with protests against Apartheid and against the U.S. Policy toward the separatist South African government.
I personally boycotted Coca Cola products because that company supported the Apartheid regime. Not a big step by any means, but I'm trying to understand why American public opinion about Palestine is so different from its opinion about South Africa's apartheid system, when I was taught they were quite similar.
Which is one reason I posted the thread on here, asking people to specify *why* the US should support Palestine. American opinion was able to help turn US foreign policy toward South Africa at the time. Even if our government is 100% pro-Israeli, seems to me if Americans cared or protested against Israeli treatment of Palestinians, we could actually *do* something.
I'm not trying to be arrogant saying that what the U.S. does is all that matters. It's just that right now, what the US does actually *does* matter. Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't forget that Media has greater influnce on people than anything else...Look at how US government can't stand Aljazeera for example because it gives the other side views!
This year Aljazeera will release an international English channel, hopefully this can make some difference.
Posts: 1732 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: Don't forget that Media has greater influnce on people than anything else...Look at how US government can't stand Aljazeera for example because it gives the other side views!
This year Aljazeera will release an international English channel, hopefully this can make some difference.
Yeah, I know! Did you see the documentary *Control Room?* That conservative military public relations officer that was featured prominently, who was anti-Al Jazeera, is actually going to work for them! Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In europre i dont remember anything about palestine being mentioned...
all i remember is the holacaust....and we use to do all sort of project on it... and that Ann Frank lady, who so miracalusly, wrote a diary whilst hiding no one else but her, done that....
infact, i use to feel kinda sorry for the Jews back then.... thats some serious brain washing to those young minds....
but when you break away from main stream education system, and learn and analysis stiff your self... the world suddenly gets bigger, and it not as simple and safe as you were once taught...
unfortunaly i gave up history....cos of the BS... i realised that as you take history up in higher-education....key event in history cannot be hidden, as they can be in lower-school..
other than that... we were taught how maths and science only came from the latin, and europoean. vary rarely indian,asian and arab were mentioned Posts: 2457 | From: U | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: By talking I meant questioning it! Questioning the historical context and critcizing it as people question that of Palestinians and others!
See my reply to Kamal earlier on – do you speak German and have access to German media? If not, I wonder where your statements are coming from ...
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: Why that significant mighty picture of the Israeli suffering and no one else?
First of all, many who died in the Holocaust were Germans, not Israelis!
Second – see my reply above. I don't know how you get this idea that all Germans talk about is the Holocaust while ignoring other sufferings. Come and take a look in our media to see whether your assumption is right!
I don't know where your opinions regarding this matter are coming from but they seem to be based on a lot of preconceptions.
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: If it was your parents influnce then don't try to impose it on people who are not germans and haven't got any hand on what happened there!
This thread was about how the holocaust is being downplayed and abused by certain personalities, particularly in the Arab world. I am speaking my mind and I refuse to have someone with absolutely no knowledge about my country, someone who calls the Nazis "decent and honest", trying to impose his conspiration theories on me.
What would your reaction be if I joined a discussion about Palestine and then said "I'm getting kinda bored with this Palestinian nonsense. I don't care whether they are right or wrong. What's the big deal with the Palestinians anyway? And I think Sharon is a decent guy, btw." I can imagine the criticism I would (rightfully) receive. Yet I don't see you getting bothered by a statement like the following:
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: I didnt ask how it is documented, and I cudnt care less how they documented...I dont care how much proof there is, nor did I say it didnt happend, or did happen. Frankly I dont care....
I just deleted a whole load of crap i wrote...im getttin kinda bored with this holocaust non-sense...
anyway what the big deal of the holocaust..
...
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: The world doesn't have to treat the Jewish victims different just because it was your country that feels guiltyabout it! and you don't have to spread this HOlocaust phobia all over Europe.
I haven't said anywhere that the world has to treat the Jewish victims differently and if you had read my posts carefully you might have noticed that that's certainly not what I think.
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: If you respect the palestinian sufefring and be fair to them they wont even think about questioning anyone's else suffering! This how it should go not vice versa
I don't get your point. It's not the Palestinians who keep publicly denying the holocaust, it's others who use it for their own political agenda. Or are you trying to tell me Mr. Ahmadinejad, for example, has so much sympathy for the Palestinians? LOL!
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: and that Ann Frank lady, who so miracalusly, wrote a diary whilst hiding no one else but her, done that
She hasn't written it herself. In fact, Anne Frank never existed, the Zionists invented her. I'm surprised you didn't know that ...
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
if you had said the Z media propagnada machine, maginfied such a thing, 1000 times over than necceasry. that wud be reasonable...
what about little girl in iraq getting abused by american....
any one willing to offer to take their story and magnify it globally?
i didnt think so.....
===========================
after alll we are discussing...what ur opinion on zionist
i know what im saying is not sumthing that you hear everyday.... but if you think about zions and the current situation of the world... take out all the BS u see in the media, etc etc...about peace...
and ask you self what is goign on the world..and why...
is that book zionist: enemy of the jews, even avaible in Germany.
-------------------- -- here... [url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0955020700/qid%3D1133898517/026-7853042-0414807= Recommended...![/url] Posts: 2457 | From: U | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: if you had said the Z media propagnada machine, maginfied such a thing, 1000 times over than necceasry. that wud be reasonable...
Since you seem to have so much in-depth knowledge of the subject would you care to explain what exactly the "Zionist media propaganda machine" is, how it relates to Anne Frank's diary and how it operated in the 50's and 60's. Thank you.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Living in the West we are told that the news media (television, newspapers, radio) are free. It is certainly true that there are few government conspiracies to censor. Unlike in totalitarian countries, the media is not generally state run or controlled.
However this is not the full story. Because the media is part of the global economy, there are certain properties that deny readers, viewers and listeners a balanced view of world events.
The are five reasons why a balanced view of world events is not generally received in the Western media:
1 Media Ownership Most newspapers, television and radio stations are owned by large and powerful multi-national companies. In the USA, NBC and CBS (two television companies) are owned by corporations involved in arms manufacture and nuclear power (General Electric and Westinghouse). Several oil companies (Exxon, Texaco and Mobil) have seats on the boards of these news organisations. Time-Warner and CNN merged in the late 1990s to form one of the largest news and media monopolies in the world. Rupert Murdoch is the largest owner of television stations in the USA. Originally an Australian citizen, his American citizenship was "fast-tracked" by the Reagan administration to allow him to own television stations in the country.
Stories that highlight problems with nuclear power or waste, stories about oil companies involved with governments that violate human rights and stories about conflicts armed by Western companies are unlikely to be given much coverage. Stories that help the interests of the media owners are given prominence.
One man, John Malone, owns 23% of the world's cable stations. His Discovery Channel commissions programs after "market approval" and avoids "controversial subjects". The phrase "dumbing down" has entered the language as television concentrates on gossip and celebrity stories rather than serious issues.
In Australia Rupert Murdoch owns 7 out of the 12 national daily newspapers and 7 out of 10 Sunday newspapers. In one city, Adelaide, Murdoch owns all the newspapers. This cannot be good for pluralism.
In 1975, one of Murdoch's newspapers, The Australian, ran a campaign that helped remove the country's democratically elected government by the UK appointed Governor-General.
In the UK, News International (a company mostly owned by Rupert Murdoch) owns several newspapers (including The Times and The Sun), Sky Television (a major European satellite operator), Star Television (covering Asia) and publishers like Harper Collins.
In 1998, Rupert Murdoch owned 34% of the daily newspapers and 37% of the Sunday newspapers in the UK. He often uses the large resources of his multinational companies to lower the price of his newspapers in an attempt to put rival newspapers out of business. Successive UK governments have allowed his empire to grow in return for his media's support.
53% of UK newspaper and magazine distribution is controlled by just two companies, WH Smith and John Menzies. Smaller magazines (like the political and satirical Private Eye) can have (and have had) their distribution curtailed at the whim of these companies.
Europe often has more pluralistic laws than the English speaking world. In France, there are laws prohibiting any single organisation from controlling newspapers with more than 30% of the combined national and regional readership. In addition, all publications have a legal right of distribution. In Germany, minority shareholders can veto editorial decisions. In Sweden small independent newspapers are supported and financed by law. European aversion to monopolies is one reason why Murdoch's media are consistently anti-Europe.
Rupert Murdoch has used his media ownership to influence what information is made available to the public in order to protect his business interests (especially in Malaysia and China):
Articles had been written in The Times exposing the British (UK) government offering aid to Malaysia in return for them buying arms from the UK. The Times' editor was sacked after being told by Murdoch "the public are bored with Malaysia".
Murdoch removed the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) World Service Television from the Star Television package of television channels broadcast in China. The Chinese government had complained about the BBC's coverage of human rights in China. Shortly afterwards Murdoch signed a deal with the government's mouthpiece newspaper, the Peoples' Daily. He produced a documentary on his Star TV eulogising the Chinese ruler, Deng Xiaoping who had been in charge when Chinese troops killed thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators in Beijing's Tienanmen Square.
The last UK governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, was due to have a book published by the Murdoch owned Harper Collins. This book was critical of the Chinese government. Publication was stopped. Instead a biography of Deng Xiaoping (written by his daughter) was published.
The Sun and The Times newspapers are frequently publishing articles critical of the BBC (the UK's major television channels) and praising Sky Television (which he also owns). These newspapers are also very anti-Europe. Closer ties between the UK and Europe could affect the small amount of taxes that Murdoch's companies pay.
In 2004, the USA documentary film maker, Michael Moore, had problems with having his film distributed in the USA. The distributer was Miramax, owned by Disney. The latter did not want a controversial film criticising the USA president in an election year.
Cross-media ownership and the fact that a small number of people own so many of our means of obtaining information is a threat to a pluralistic society.
2 Advertising and Ratings When the media depends on advertising, the advertisers can exert pressure. A large media conglomerate may be able to absorb the loss of advertisers but a smaller, alternative newspaper or radio station may be pushed out of business. Advertisers frequently use their influence to stop stories detrimental to their interests. In a 1992 survey in the UK, 150 newspaper editors stated that 90% of their advertisers had interfered with stories; 70% of the advertisers had tried to stop stories. 40% of the editors had succumbed to pressure from advertisers and made the changes requested.
In the UK in 1990, new laws meant that TV news had to make a profit. This has led to a decline in serious news items and more emphasis on "human interest" stories and celebrity "news". Advertisers want viewers; ratings become more important than giving information; the news companies abandon investigative journalism to "give the public what it wants".
Deregulation has meant that requirements to produce in-depth public affairs programming were removed. On most Western TV channels, only 4% of prime time programming is about the majority of the world's population. Programs that cover "controversial" subjects are screened at late hours. For example, in September 2002, the UK commercial television channel, ITV, broadcast a program by journalist John Pilger about the effects of the occupation of Palestine on the population. It was shown at 11:05pm.
Most people fail to be exposed to programs covering subjects like Western companies using local slave labour in poorer countries, trade practices that keep developing countries poor, wars armed by Western companies, action by the West's secret services, and studies of Western backed dictatorships.
In the UK, one of the better current affairs programs on the BBC, Panorama, which for many years on Mondays at 9:00pm (after the news), was moved to Sunday at 10:30pm. Programs and news reports that have recently been dropped include sweatshops in China producing toys for the UK Christmas market, the Chinese occupation of Tibet, and many programs about the problems in Northern Ireland.
As the number of commerical radio stations increases, the output becomes more bland and more predictable.
3 News Sources News is often given out by government sources. Statements, statistics and new policies are introduced in controlled press conferences. Journalists who consistently question the official line too rigorously may be excluded from access. This is bad for a newspaper which relies on fast and fresh news.
In a war situation, a process called pooling is used to control what information is given out. A small number of journalists (sometimes only one) are taken by the military to observe and the news is then shared with other journalists. Journalists who attempt to obtain news independently can be excluded from future events.
Press conferences allow the military to put out their version of events, sometimes using edited video tape. This information cannot be verified independently.
In the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the USA and UK, this was taken one stage further. Reporters were embedded. This meant they travelled with the military, being housed, fed and protected by them. Obviously, it then becomes difficult to cover the conflict from the other side. Only a few Western journalists who valued their independence refused to be embedded; some of these were arrested by USA soldiers. Independent Arab journalists fared even worse as their offices were bombed and their members killed. In 2004, Iraqi newspapers calling for the end of the occupation were closed by the USA military.
90% of the world's news comes from just three agencies: Associated Press (USA), Reuters (UK) and Agence France Presse (France). Associated Press (AP) and Reuters make large profits selling financial and corporate information. The "free market" view of the world is thus very profitable. Alternate views can lose the companies money so are rarely aired. AP devotes most of its coverage to the USA since the majority of its clients are there.
Africa accounts for less than 5% of all news coverage, most of it news of disasters. Countries that attempt to run economic systems for their own people outside the mainstream are given virtually zero coverage. The achievements of the governments of Nicaragua (in the 1980s) and Cuba in health and education are completely ignored.
In television, news is supplied by four main agencies: Reuters and the BBC (from the UK) and World Television Network (WTN) and CNN (from the USA). Reuters supplies over 400 broadcasters in 85 countries and reaches an audience of 500 million people. WTN supplies news to 3,000 million people.
Independent Arabic television stations (like Al-Jazeera) have recently appeared. These were seen as a threat by the West, eager to keep control of all news. The USA has put pressure on Arabic governments to curtail these stations. Their offices were bombed in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. One of their cameramen has been detained at Guantanamo Bay.
Some of the USA pressure has worked as Al-Jazeera financial journalists have lost their acreditaion for the New York Stock Exchange. In addition the station has had problems in Bahrain (where it was banned), Spain (arrested reporter), Algeria (journalists stopped from working), Iraq (offices closed), Canada, Jordan, Kuwait, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia. Its website has been hacked with users redirected to pronography or USA patriot sites. The station has also had problems in Iran which were not Western induced.
Although the internet is a good source of alternative news, most people in the world do not own a computer or a telephone. Most internet users are in the rich Western countries.
4 Negative Responses Multinational corporations who are attacked by the media can use Public Relations (PR) firms, legal redress, libel laws and front organisations to get their side of the story across. Governments can put their policies across by using briefings, interviews and publications.
In 2001, the Israeli embassy in the UK attempted to have its assassinations of Palestinian leaders labelled as "targeted killings" in the British media.
Nuclear power companies spend a lot of money on glossy advertising campaigns to show themselves as providers of modern and clean energy. Problems with nuclear waste and radiation are glossed over. Oil companies advertise with scenes of pristine natural wilderness while at the same time polluting the environment and often violating the rights of people living in the drilling areas.
The Global Climate Coalition, the American Petroleum Institute (in the USA) and EuropaBio (in Europe) are examples of industry controlled PR companies. These have been responsible for lobbying news media to suppress stories about global warming, biotechnology, pollution or to discredit research about these issues.
Max Clifford, a PR expert in the UK, has stated that PR is now "filling the role investigative reporters should fill but no longer can because cost cutting has hit journalism badly." PR generated material comprises about 50% of a broadsheet (serious) newspaper in every section apart from sport; the figure is higher for tabloid (less serious) and regional newspapers.
Western journalism is shamed by the courage shown by writers in many countries where they can be arrested, imprisoned or even killed for daring to tell the truth.
Indonesia has imprisoned Ahmad Taufik (Independence) who had criticised the government.
In Turkey any journalist who writes about human rights or the Kurds could "have their human rights suspended". Metin Goktepe (Evrensel) was beaten to death in police custody in 1996. Ocak Isik Yurtcu (editor of Ozgur Gundem) was imprisoned for 15 years: "because I tried to learn the truth and relay this truth to the public - in other words, to do my job - in the belief that is impossible to have other freedoms in a country where there is no freedom of the press."
The Philippines has one of the highest death rates amongst journalists in the world. In Russia 50 journalists were killed in 1996. In the 1990s 60 journalists have been killed in Algeria. Other countries where journalists have been in danger include Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Chile (under Pinochet), South Africa (under Apartheid) and much of Central America during the 1980s.
5 Demonisation and Use of Language Dissident views are undermined by demonising the people or organisations that have these views. In the UK during the 1980s, the transport policies of London's elected leader, Ken Livingston, were devalued by a smear campaign describing Livingston as "Red Ken" or referring to his hobby of keeping newts. At the same time, Prince Charles spoke often about the architecture of London and how the skyline was being ruined by tall buildings. His views were undermined by depicting him as an eccentric who spoke to his plants!
Certain phrases are used to hide or distort dissident views. Disident views are described as extreme (or ideological) and those who hold these views as extremists. Others are labelled as marxists, communists, liberals (in the USA), conspiracy theorists, lefties, new agers, militants, the usual suspects or other dispariging names. Their views are meant to be ignored and are rarely argued against coherently.
In the 1980s, anti-Nicaraguan militants (financed by the USA) were referred to as freedom fighters. So were the Western backed Afgans fighting the Russians. Palestinians fighting against the occupation of their land by (USA backed) Israel are called terrorists.
Whole countries can be classified: Syria is a non-democratic country which supports Palestinians and is not pro-West. It is often described as a state that supports terrorism, a rogue state or an extremist state. Sauda Arabia is a non-democratic country, where non-Islamic religions, cinema and democracy are all banned; women are not allowed to drive. Because the country is pro-West, it is called a moderate state or a moderate regime in Western media.
Attempts by the African National Congress to force South Africa to give democracy to all its citizens were described as terrorism; attempts by the USA to get a good deal for the handover of the Panama Canal to Panama were described as coercive diplomacy.
In Northern Ireland (UK), over 3400 people died in terrorist attacks between 1969 and 2001. Slightly less than half (48%) of these were by Republican groups like the IRA; the other half by Loyalist groups. The reportage in the mainstream media in the UK tends to highlight Republican killings. The IRA are demonised as the major cause of the problems while the forces responsible for 52% of the deaths are under-reported. During the IRA ceasefire between 1994 and 1996, 100 rubber bullets were fired at Republicans by the Loyalist dominated Royal Ulster Constabulary. This was unreported in the rest of the UK.
In the Middle East roughly twice as many Palestinians are killed by Israeli military and settlers as Israelis killed by Palestinian "terrorism" (or "resistance to Israeli occupation"). Western media tend to concentrate on Israeli victims and humanise Israeli deaths by naming the victims and interviewing their relatives. Palestinian victims are usually numbered and given demeaning labels like gunmen, terrorists, demonstrators or militants.
More subtly the clever use of verb voice is also used to mold opinion. The Active Voice is used for Israeli victims: "Palestinian militants killed three Israeli settlers" while the Passive Voice is used for Palestinian victims: "Three Palestinians died when their village was hit by Israeli shells". In the above example emotive words are also used. The word settler is prefered to colonist and militant is prefered to resister.
Another favoured word is clashes as in "four Palestinians died in clashes with the Israelis". Palestinian suicide bombers who kill civilians are (correctly) descibed as terrorists whereas Israeli missile attacks on residential areas are described as retaliation or action to stop terrorism. Israeli massacres of Palestinians are often called a disproportionate response.
These techniques help obscure the fact that Israel is occupying Palestine and building illegal colonies (which are labelled settlements or neighbourhoods) on their land while the Palestinians are resisting this occupation.
According to figures from the Israel Defence Force and the Palestinian Monitor, 587 Palestinian and 111 Israeli children were killed in the region between 2000 and 2004. The following table shows the causes of death for all non-military deaths for the same period.
Cause of Death Israelis Palestinians Live Ammunition 366 1,816 Rubber / Plastic Coated Bullets 0 3 Shelling / Bombing 108 650 Suicide Bombing 450 0 Tear Gas 0 20 Prevention of Medical Treatment 0 87 Assassination 1 308+ Bystanders During Assassinations 0 152+ Miscellaneous 45 446
For virtually every cause of death, many more Palestinians die than Israelis. The only cause of death that affects Israelis more than Palestinians is suicide bombings. The vast majority of the media coverage in the West covers these suicide bombings. They are endlessly discussed while the other sources of death are virtually ignored. Each event is given major coverage including views of victims and their families. In contrast, Palestinian deaths by, say, missile attacks are only briefly shown, if at all.
In television interviews, Palestinian leaders are constantly asked when the suicide bombings will stop. In contrast, Israeli leaders are rarely asked why so many Palestinians are killed by live ammunition (the biggest cause of death in the table above). Indeed, Israeli leaders are never asked the fundamental question of when the 37 year long occupation will end; or why people die because of being denied medical treatment (a violation of the Geneva Conventions).
Sometimes news is distorted by ommission. In the 2001 war against Afghanistan, the country was bombed between October and December by USA forces. Reliable estimates of 4000 civilians killed by the bombing were simply ignored by the mainstream media. It was not deemed important that the number of innocent civilians killed by USA bombs had exceeded the number of Americans killed by the terrorist attack of 11 September 2001. In a similiar way, the 200,000 dead civilians after the 1990 Gulf War against Iraq are not in the public consciousness because this figure is rarely mentioned by the media.
Clashes in Algeria are described as being between Islamic militants and the government. What is often omitted is the fact that when elections occurred in the mid 1990s, the Islamic parties actually won a huge majority. They were denied power by the military government. The situation is very similar to that in Burma, where a decisive election result was also ignored by the military government. The two countries get reported very differently. For example, in the UK newspaper, The Independent, on 20 June 2003, the Burma story was on the front page with a photograph of the Burmese opposition leader, while the Algeria story was a single paragraph on page 14.
In the Pakistan elections of 2002, the military leader changed the constitution to allow him to remove the elected government at his discression. The media described this as moves towards democracy. Maps of Palestinian territory dotted with Israeli settlements are never published or broadcast even though the settlements are the central issue in the conflict.
The Vietnam War is often depicted as an American tragedy or described as American involvement (or intervention) in Vietnam. The word invasion is rarely used. Little mention is made of the 3 million people killed by bombing and chemical weapons (such as napalm) used for a decade in the region. The fact that half a million children in Vietnam have been born with deformaties due to the dioxin sprayed over the forests is hardly mentioned. In early 2003 the USA and UK governments were accusing Iraq of being the only country to have used chemical weapons. No USA or UK journalist mentioned chemical weapons use in Vietnam by the USA.
In fact even the term Vietnam War looks at the conflict through American eyes. The Vietnamese have fought wars against Japan (during World War II), France (1945 to 1954), the USA (1954 to 1975), Cambodia (1979) and China. We should really refer to the Vietnam-USA War.
Stories can be slanted or distorted by the emphasis given. Strikes are often described from the point of view of the inconvenience caused rather than the underlying causes. In the UK, a majority of union members must vote for a strike to be legal, yet the media will often demonise the union leader with headlines like "Blame **** for this chaos".
When military action is taken by The West or countries backed by the West, the opponents are demonised and the action justified by using various phrases:
War on Communism USA against Vietnam USA against Cambodia USA against Cuba UK against Malaysia France against Algeria South Africa against Mozambique South Africa against Angola Chile against its own people El Salvador against its own people Guatemala against its own people War on Drugs USA against Colombia USA against Panama War on Terrorism USA against Afganistan USA against Iraq USA against Libya Turkey against the Kurds Israel against the Palestinians War on Fundamentalism USA against Iran Self Defence Israel against Lebanon Indonesia against East Timor For Democracy and Freedom USA against Nicaragua USA against Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction USA against Iraq
War is subject to distortion by language with the use of euphamisms. The West uses smart bombs (of which only 7% hit their intended targets) or surgical strikes. Civilian casualties (if they are discussed at all) are covered by phrases like collateral damage. Killing is described as taking out, lighting up, mopping up or neutralising. A bomb is often called a device. Words like outrage and carnage are rarely used in these reports unless the victims are Westerners. Attacks on civilians by USA or UK forces will often have words allegedly or claim put in front of the story.
Film of the USA attacks on Iraq or Afghanistan or of Israeli soldiers beating Palestinian detainees are not shown on mainstream news but may be seen on documentaries broadcast in the late hours months after they are shot.
During the USA and UK invasion of Iraq in 2003, forces resisting the invasion were described as irregulars, militia, Bathists and even terrorists. The phrase Iraqis was never used as this would indicate a general resistance to the invasion and occupation.
Another method of obscuring what is happening is to represent a country by its leader. When the USA and UK were bombing Iraq between 1991 and 2003, the 22 million people of the country were ignored in reports like "Once again, the durable despot Sadaam Hussein has emerged from the bomb rubble spitting defiance and claiming victory after surviving four days of US and British air strikes" (from the USA newspaper, the San Fransisco Chronicle). No mention of the civilian casualties is made in these types of reports. During the 2003 and 2004 occupation phrases like Saddam remnants, Saddam loyalists, Sadr supporters or Zaqawi followers (Sadr was a Shia Muslim cleric, Zaqawi is a Jordanian) were used.
The USA-appointed government of Iyad Allawi was always referred to as The Iraqi Interim Government. This gives it a legitimacy that few Iraqis felt for it. Its members are constantly interviewed and they generally tow the USA line. Very few interviews are shown with people like Abu Freedom who, when asked in Fallujah by a UPI reporter why he was fighting, answered: "I don't want to see Americans in charge of my country".
Sometimes a news story is hidden in the early hours of the morning. In June 2003, an extradition treaty between the USA and UK came into force. In this treaty, UK citizens could be extradited to the USA without any evidence being presented to a court of law. Suspicion would be enough. USA citizens, however, cannot be extradited to the UK without evidence coming before a court. This story appeared on the UK television station, BBC News 24, at 3:30 in the morning. It was also mentioned on a radio interview. None of the daytime television news broadcasts and none of the UK newspapers mentioned this story.
In 2004, there was an intersting contrast in the UK media coverage of two events that each killed over 100,000 people. One was the invasion and occupation of Iraq by mainly USA forces. The other was an earthquake and tsunami that killed over 150,000 people in Asia.
All the media were providing accurate figures for the victims of the tsunami. The number of people killed was being updated almost on an hourly basis. Where there was doubt, estimates were made and given. Survivors were interviewed and allowed to talk about the loss of their homes, their livelihoods and members of their families. The coverage encouraged so much compassion in the UK, that public donations to the disaster exceeded those pledged by the UK government. Bloated and disfigured bodies were shown on prime time television (after an appropriate warning).
In contrast, the number of people killed in Iraq during the year long military assult and occupation by USA forces was never given. No guesses or comments were made. Figures of 100,000 dead by the UK medical journal, The Lancet, which were probably under-estimates, were covered from the view of government ministers discrediting the research.
Very few of the residents of Iraq were interviewed about the loss of homes after being hit by 500 pound bombs or sprayed with artillery. The loss of livelihoods was rarely mentioned. Very little was shown about family members blown to pieces. When mention was made of Iraqi victims, the word "claim" was often used to induce doubt. A television reporter would say something like "this woman claimed seven members of her family were killed". The word "claim" was never used in the tsunami reports.
There were no bodies shown in the coverage of the month long invasion of the city of Fallujah, even though photographs existed on the internet. The BBC has stated that it did not show bodies because of reasons of "sensitivity".
The suspicion remained that victims of a tsunami could be shown but not the victims of USA military power. The Western media then went on to give the USA very positive coverage over its (very welcome) financial donation to the tsunami disaster even if it was not usually the biggest donor country. At the beginning of January 2005, the BBC stated that "The USA has donated $ 160 million" adding that "only Japan has given more" where a more balanced report would have said something like "Japan is the largest donor followed by the USA". At the same time, the BBC broadcast the views of dissident groups in Iraq stating that "several major parties refused to recognise elections under what THEY CALL an American occupation". In other words, ignore their views.
Euphamisms are also used to obscure what is actually happening in the world of economics:
Open up the economy to competition: allow Western companies access to a country's resources.
Competitiveness: low labour costs and taxes; lax safety laws.
State subsidy for business: giving tax payers' money to corporations.
Export Credits: the tax payer underwriting a company's activities in other countries so that the public takes the risks and the company takes the profits.
Free Trade: trade that is favourable to the richer countries.
Stability: conditions favourable to trade for the benefit of the West.
Developing Nations: the poorer countries.
Structural Adjustment Programs: World Bank and International Monetary Fund conditions imposed on countries seeking loans. These normally require the economy to be opened up to competition and public services to be reduced.
Free Market Reforms: economic system that has pushed 60 million Russians below the poverty line by devaluing their pensions and forces children in Mongolia to live in the sewers.
Capital Market Liberalisation: allows the free flow of money - usually from poorer countries to rich countries.
Conclusion Real journalism should give the user the facts so that a decision can be made. Journalism should be informed, critical, and pluralistic.
Try to get the big picture. Ask WHY. Emotive words like mindless, terrorism, terrorist, rebels, subversives, reform, evil, enemy of civilisation, enemy of democracy, fundamentalist, hardliners should make you suspicious.
Consider alternative sources of information. Some sources may have an inbuilt bias or a hidden agenda. Most stories have two sides. Events have reasons and causes.
Be skeptical. It is healthier to doubt and check rather than to accept blindly. This also applies to everything you read on these web pages.
Check your sources. Find out about the interests and allegiances of the organisation giving you information.
Don't believe what politicians say during a crisis. Watch for spurious arguments, overuse of statistics, evasion and emotional blackmail. Often the real information comes out long after an event.
Watch for distractions from the main story. In the UK during 2003, the news concentrated on "who said what to whom" rather than "why did the UK go to war in Iraq".
Logical Falacies Used During arguments and debates, several logical falacies are used to obscure the point, hide the facts or distract from the issues. Some of these falacies are listed below.
Unqualified Generalisation (Dicto Simpliciter) This is a generalisation that is too general. It needs to be qualified to be useful.
Muslims are fundamentalists. Not all Muslims are fundamentalists. Religious and political fundamentalism is also found in other religions and political systems (Christianity in parts of the USA where abortion doctors are killed, Hinduism in parts of India where they want to demolish mosques, Judaism in parts of Israel where they want to ethnically cleanse all Palestinians, Communism in North Korea where the cult of the leader is ever-present).
Democracies do not violate human rights. Many do. The USA is violating human rights in its treatement of people captured during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and in prisons in Iraq in 2003 - 2004. Turkey has for many years banned any expression of Kurdish culture. Israel practices collective punishment on the Palestinians by demolishing thousands of homes.
Hasty Generalisation This is a generalisation based on limited experience or knowledge.
All Arabs are Muslim. Many Arabs in Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Iraq and Egypt are Christian.
All Muslims are Arabs. Turkey, Pakistan and Indonesia are examples of Muslim countries that are not populated by Arabs. Many people in the West confuse the words Muslim (a religious term) with Arab (an ethnic and linguistic term).
Post Hoc This is the falacy of linking unrelated terms and conditions together.
All Muslim Countries are dictatorships. There is no link between the religion of a country and its political system. Turkey is a secular country with a Muslim population that has elections. Pakistan is a Muslim country that has had democratic governments. Many of the totalitarian governments of the Middle East are supported by the West (like Saudi Arabia). The people there would like a more representitive government.
Communist states are totalitarian. This was a popular statement before 1991 when the USSR broke up. Totalitarian states can be Islamic (Saudi Arabia), Fascist (Italy in the 1930s, Chile in the 1970s) or Communist (Poland before 1990). Communism is an economic system. In Kerala state in India, Communist governments have been elected on several occasions.
Contradictory Premises This is a starting position that is contradictory.
The USA wants United Nations resolutions obeyed. Only when it is in USA interests. Countries that disagree with the USA (called "rogue states") must obey all UN resolutions; countries that are allies to the USA may flout them with impunity and USA support.
Oil companies are ecological. Drilling for oil in pristine areas and transporting it by sea in tankers is not ecologically sound, however necessary.
Ad Misericordiam This is the falacy of using an irrelevant argument.
Sadam Hussein must be deposed because he gassed a Kurdish town in 1988. Why was he not deposed in 1988? The reason given is actually not relevant as the West was supporting him in 1988 and actually increased arms sales to him after the gassing. The USA decided to depose him and then used his human rights record to justify the action.
Israel must not be criticised over Palestine because of what the Jews suffered in Europe in the 1930s. This is an irrelevant argument using emotional blackmail. What happened to the Jews in Europe must be criticised on its own merits as a terrible hollocaust. However Israeli actions against the Palestinians must also be judged on their own merits.
False Analogy This is a comparison that does not make sense.
Iraq will attack the USA because it has already attacked Iran. Iraq did not have the ability to attack a country thousands of kilometers away - in fact it could barely defend itself when being invaded. Also, when it attacked Iran it did so with USA encouragement and help.
Palestine should not have a state of its own because of Palestinian "terrorist" activity. The State of Israel began with "terrorist" acts in its fight against the UK government. Many nations have become independent after a war against foreign occupation or rule (Mexico, Cyprus, Malaysia, Croatia). Violent resistance by a section of the population does not remove the need for a just solution to an injustice.
Hypothesis Contrary To Fact This is a premise that is not necessarilly accurate.
Iraq was a danger to the Middle East in 2003. The 1991 conflict destroyed most of Iraq's weapons. This was followed by 12 years of sanctions during which the USA and UK were bombing the country with impunity. When these two countries invaded Iraq, there was very little this "threat to the whole world" could do about it.
Agusto Pinochet saved democracy in Chile. Pinochet staged a coup against the democratically elected governmnet of Chile in 1973. His rule was authoritarian and violent.
Poisoning The Well Using language to discredit the person or organisation putting forward an argument.
Do-gooders, liberals, Communists, militants, extremists. The use of these words is to discredit the speaker and their argument (which is usually ignored). Watch out for this one as it is used a lot on television interviews. A new one from 2003 is Ba'athists in Iraq.
Ba'athism (which pre-dates Saddam Hussein and occurs in other Middle Eastern countries) is Socialism (free health care and schools; the economy in local or government hands) combined with Arab Nationalism, but this is never explained in the media where it is used as a term of abuse.
Muslim, Islamic. Used to discredit concerns about Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.
In a 2004 news report, a group of students in Iran demonstarting against the USA treatment of prisoners in Iraq was described as Islamic students. In a country whos population is 98% Muslim the use of the word Islamic serves to poison the well. Demonstartors in Thailand are never described as Buddhist or in Nicaragua as Catholic, etc.
Quotes "It is a tribute to the humanity of ordinary people that horrible acts must be camouflaged [with words] like security, peace, freedom, democracy, the 'national interest'." Howard Zinn, Boston University professor and former Second World War bomber pilot, USA. "At a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell, UK writer.
"The 20th century has been characterised by three developments of great political importance. The growth of democracy; the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda against democracy." Alex Carey, Australian social scientist.
"The danger is that the media of the future, the channels of mass communication, will be dominated locally and world wide by the values - social, cultural and political - of a few individuals and their huge corporations. Democrats ought to fight to the last ditch against what Murdoch and the other media giants represent." David Bowman, Australian journalists.
"We paid $3 billion for these television stations. We will decide what the news is. The news is what we tell you it is." David Boylan, Station Manager WTVT, Tampa, Florida (A Fox Network station) .
"There are certain facts and stories from Korea that editors and publishers have printed which were pure fabrication... Many of us who sent the stories knew they were false, but we had to write them because they were official releases from responsible military headquarters and were released for publication even though the people responsible knew they were untrue." Robert C Miller, United Press correspondent during the Korean War.
"We have relationships with reporters that have helped us turn some intelligence failure stories into intelligence success stories. Some responses to the media can be handled in a ... phone call." CIA Report
"[In the West] unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without any need for an official ban." George Orwell, UK writer.
"Genuine objective journalism not only gets the facts right, it gets the meaning of events right. Objective journalism is compelling not only today. It stands the test of time. It is validated not only by 'reliable sources' but by the unfolding of history. It is reporting that which not only seems right the day it was published. It is journalism that ten, twenty, fifty years after the fact still holds up a true and intelligent mirror to events." T D Allman, USA journalist.
"First they came for the Jews; and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the communists; and I did not speak out because I was not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists; and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me; and there was no one left to speak out for me." Pastor Niemöller
"The price in blood that has already been paid for America's war against terror is only now starting to become clear. Not by Britain or the US, nor even so far by the al-Qaida and Taliban leaders held responsible for the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington. It has instead been paid by ordinary Afghans, who had nothing whatever to do with the atrocities, didn't elect the Taliban theocrats who ruled over them and had no say in the decision to give house room to Bin Laden and his friends... At least 3,767 civilians were killed by US bombs between October 7 and December 10 ... an average of 62 innocent deaths a day." Seamus Milne from a report in the UK newspaper, The Guardian on 20 December.
"When people decry civilian deaths caused by the U.S government, they're aiding propaganda efforts. In sharp contrast, when civilian deaths are caused by bombers who hate America, the perpetrators are evil and those deaths are tragedies. When they put bombs in cars and kill people, they're uncivilized killers. When we put bombs on missiles and kill people, we're upholding civilized values. When they kill, they're terrorists. When we kill, we're striking against terror." Norman Solomon from "Orwellian Logic 101 - A Few Simple Lessons".
"They're missing so much and getting such a biased picture, but they get this shopping list from America every morning. For instance, I was asked to find some people for the 'Why do they all hate us?' story. So I went and got a section of academics, politicians and high profile commentators. The sort of people you'd expect if you were doing it in America. And they said 'No, no, no. What we want is a really angry mullah with a turban and a beard who looks like he hates us.'" Pakistani Jornalist working for USA news TV station CNN in Pakistan during the 2001 bombing of Afghanistan.
"[Terrorists] have no specific ideological reason program or demands. Rather, they are driven by a generalised hatred of the USA, Israel and other supposed enemies of Islam." Thomas Friedman writing for the USA newspaper the New York Times about why the USA is so often a target of terrorism.
"Is there a more loathsome phenomenon than newspapers owned by right-wing tax-dodging billionaires trying to convince ordinary British people that the greatest problem confronting us comes from the wretched and the helpless?" Johann Hari writing for the UK newspaper the Independent about the demonisation of asylum seekers by the press.
Posts: 817 | From: Egypt | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dalia: See my reply to Kamal earlier on – do you speak German and have access to German media? If not, I wonder where your statements are coming from ...
You mean anyone in your country can make a claim like that of Ahmadinajad and go with it without being legally responsible for anything?
What are those Holocaust denial laws are about then? If I remember correct they exist in 7 European countries! Is this a hoax? and are those people who were prosecuted for minimizing the amount of holocaust and some were jailed for it just some meda invention?
quote:Second – see my reply above. I don't know how you get this idea that all Germans talk about is the Holocaust while ignoring other sufferings. Come and take a look in our media to see whether your assumption is right!
I don't know where your opinions regarding this matter are coming from but they seem to be based on a lot of preconceptions.
Actions speak louder! many times European countries had to submit to the will of Israel due to the fear of antisemitism charges!
Wasn't the EU going to make holocaust laws which Britain opposed recently all over Europe union? Now why only holocaust that laws are made for? how about Palestinian, Armenian, Indian and other victims, and where is the freedom of speech in all this which the west like to speak about? Historians can question anything in the world history but when it comes to the holocaust charges start to flow all over!
quote:This thread was about how the holocaust is being downplayed and abused by certain personalities, particularly in the Arab world. I am speaking my mind and I refuse to have someone with absolutely no knowledge about my country, someone who calls the Nazis "decent and honest", trying to impose his conspiration theories on me.
There are Germans and western writers who downplayed holocaust and minimized it as well and they can speak your language! This has got nothing to do with language but history!
I want to know why the holocaust is that big deal compared to any other thing! And if you really can't see how Europe treat this subject very different then certainly your world is not ours!
quote:What would your reaction be if I joined a discussion about Palestine and then said "I'm getting kinda bored with this Palestinian nonsense. I don't care whether they are right or wrong. What's the big deal with the Palestinians anyway? And I think Sharon is a decent guy, btw." I can imagine the criticism I would (rightfully) receive. Yet I don't see you getting bothered by a statement like the following:
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: I didnt ask how it is documented, and I cudnt care less how they documented...I dont care how much proof there is, nor did I say it didnt happend, or did happen. Frankly I dont care....
I just deleted a whole load of crap i wrote...im getttin kinda bored with this holocaust non-sense...
anyway what the big deal of the holocaust..
...
I don't have to explain what Kamal said! He can explain himself as his words can tell many different things but if he said somewhere that Hitler was a good guy then he needs a history lesson!
What you seem to be missing is that questioning the suffering of Palestinians is not that big deal! you can see it everywhere without a world condemnation from US and Europ presidents and people! How many times Israeli presidents minimized the suffering of Palestinians and none even commented on it in Europe? So many! But Look what happened with Ahmadi Najad! and then tell me why should I believe that the west isn't brainwashed by the Zionist media.
Personally I believe in freedom of speech! Everyone has the right to question history and interpretate it the way they like and that include the holocaust and Palestinians suffering deniers! Can we see that in Europe?
quote:Originally posted by Troubles101: If you respect the palestinian sufefring and be fair to them they wont even think about questioning anyone's else suffering! This how it should go not vice versa
I don't get your point. It's not the Palestinians who keep publicly denying the holocaust, it's others who use it for their own political agenda. Or are you trying to tell me Mr. Ahmadinejad, for example, has so much sympathy for the Palestinians? LOL! [/QB]
Why can't Ahmadi Najad tal about holocaust without all that condemnation like how the Israeli official speak about Palestinians everyday with no comment?
Palestinians do react similarly to what Ahmadi said but their officials can't voice it because of the western reaction!
Finally, I have question, how many died from the jews in the holocaust? 6 millions or 4 or 2 or 1? and how do you define it Posts: 1732 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: if you had said the Z media propagnada machine, maginfied such a thing, 1000 times over than necceasry. that wud be reasonable...
Since you seem to have so much in-depth knowledge of the subject would you care to explain what exactly the "Zionist media propaganda machine" is, how it relates to Anne Frank's diary and how it operated in the 50's and 60's. .
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic