If you want BS or Political Correctness you have come to the wrong place.
FAQ How can you be an atheist Jew?
An atheist is one who disbelieves in (or denies) the existence of God, Gods, and other supernatural beings.
A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew, or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.
February 16, 2006
C'mon moron; get your story straight
Nobody ever said Jew haters were very bright to begin with.
um, let's get this straight: it's open season on Christians and Muslims, but no criticism (ever / under any circumstances) for the *other* "people of the book" (i.e., the J-ws). is it because they have the option of identifying themselves as an ethnicity/race? and when they are identified as "G-d's chosen," do you - a self-professed follower of the Atheist creed - object that, as there is no God, how can He have a chosen people? or do you say, "Hitler had it wrong / we are the Master Race"? and how do you feel about the work of fellow Canadian J. Philippe Rushton? or fellow Jew Michael E. Levin? is it open season on the "darkies" as well? so long as it's dressed up as Science? (albeit hardly Dispassionate Inquiry, given the bags of money received by these Pioneer Fund "researchers")
And Barrios, I don't think you understand what "chosen people" means. I am on the side of right. It has nothing to do with God. Israel, to me, could have been in Uganda, but since 90% of the Jews in in the late 1800's believed in God and that Israel was the birthplace of Judaism, Israel made all the sense to be located where it is today. 80% of Palestine was uninhabited desert in 1900. The Arabs have cause all their own grief because they don't think ahead, and they run their lives by ego, and ego only.
Jews are pretty good liars most of the time, but they tell so many lies they are bound to trip themselves up sometimes. Their exaggerations, half-truths, and outright inventions about the so- called "Holocaust," easily the most lied-about topic ever, are a good example. Unfortunately, many patriots fail to counter the Jews' "Holocaust" lies effectively; instead they let themselves be lured into the semantic trap of "Holocaust denial." That is, they tacitly accept the Jews' rules of debate. The first of those rules is that one must either accept or reject the "Holocaust" mythology as a whole: no quibbling over details permitted. If one does not accept without question or quibble the magical number of "six million" Jews who were led into gas chambers disguised as shower houses and given a faceful of Zyklon-B instead of hot water when they turned on the faucet, for example, one is a "Holocaust denier," who believes that the "Holocaust" is entirely fictitious, and the German government treated Jews just like everyone else during the Second World War. That, of course, is an impossible position to defend. The "Holocaust" myth, as mentioned above, is a structure built of lies, exaggerations, and half- truths, and the way to discredit it is to subject these individual building blocks -- the details -- to critical scrutiny. To be specific, the August 10, 1994, issue of The Christian Science Monitor carried an article (page 12) by Jewess Linda Joffee about growing anti-Semitism in Germany and the efforts of the Jews and their collaborators to combat it. Under the heading "Growing Anti-Semitism Concerns German Jews," Ms. Joffee writes: "About 560,000 Jews lived in Germany when the Nazis came to power in 1933. Almost all died in the Holocaust. There are about 50,000 Jews in Germany today." The first sentence in Ms. Joffee's statement is true. The second sentence is a bald-faced lie. Fortunately, it can easily be shown as such by anyone with access to a library which carries books with world demographic data for the last 60 years or so. The truth of the matter is that as soon as a National Socialist government was elected in Germany in 1933, the Germans began working hard to persuade Jews to emigrate. They did this by enacting legislation which progressively excluded Jews from one sector of German life after another. Jews were not permitted to teach in Germany, except in Jewish schools; they were not permitted to publish newspapers, magazines, or books, except those published specifically for Jews; they were banned from the practice of medicine (except the treating of Jewish patients) and law; and they were excluded from many areas of trade and industry, especially from those businesses requiring a government license. This legislation was not motivated by petty spite or by economic considerations, but by a determination to free Germany from Jewish influence. When the National Socialists came to power in 1933, Jews were vastly over-represented in the media, in teaching, and in the legal and medical professions. For example, 42 per cent of the physicians practicing in Berlin in 1933 were Jews, as were 48 per cent of the attorneys. To the National Socialists this was an intolerable situation, and they set about remedying it in a typically thorough and efficient manner. The Jews screamed bloody murder about the National Socialist campaign to take Germany away from them and give it back to the German people. As early as 1934 Jews around the world declared an economic boycott of Germany in retaliation. As it became apparent to them, however, that Adolf Hitler was the most popular leader Germany had ever had, that the National Socialists could neither be bought off nor voted out of office, and that there really was no future for Jews in Germany, they began to look for easier pickings elsewhere. The great majority of them eventually emigrated. By the time the Second World War began in September 1939 there were only about 200,000 Jews left in Germany, and a number of them succeeded in leaving after that. These news items appeared in issue number 114 of National Vanguard magazine. For further information, write National Vanguard Books, PO Box 330, Hillsboro WV 24946 USA.
The Leuchter Report: The "myth" of the Holocaust was created solely for the financial benefit of Israel ________________________________________ • The "myth" of the Holocaust was created solely for the financial benefit of Israel Holocaust denial often asserts that the sole reason that the "Holocaust hoax" has been promulgated was that it created a financial windfall for the State of Israel. Deborah Lipstadt provides this information in "Denying the Holocaust": "Israeli officials detailed their claims against Germany in their communique of March 1951 to the Four Powers, and this document became the official basis for the reparations agreement. It contained an explanation of Israel's means of calculating the size of the reparations claim. In the communique Israeli officials explained that Nazi persecution had stimulated 'a second Jewish exodus' of close to five hundred thousand. Based on the size of this exodus, Israel determined the amount of the reparations it would request: The government of Israel is not in a position to obtain and present a complete statement of all Jewish property taken or looted by the Germans, and said to total more than $6 thousand million. It can only compute its claim on the basis of total expenditures already made and the expenditure still needed for the integration of Jewish immigrants from Nazi-dominated countries. The number of these immigrants is estimated at some 500,000, which means a total expenditure of $1.5 thousand million. It seems hardly necessary to point out that since the money the state received by based on the cost of resettling survivors, had Israel wanted to increase the amount of reparations it obtained from Germany it would have been in its interest to argue that fewer than six million had been killed and that more had managed to flee to Israel." (Lipstadt, 57)
Man, someone actually spent energy to write all that. I fell asleep in the first sentence.
That Iranian guy is scared, he's looking at Saddam neaar the end of a rope and he is freaking out cause the people round him are getting ideas. I mean it seriously. Dictatorships amp the aggression when the internal pressure for rebellion gets fierce. Sometimes it shows a point of collapse, he has to keep up the outside agression now, if he relaxes then the knives turn his way. .. It's not easy living with cockaroach cannibals!
"The Arabs have cause all their own grief because they don't think ahead, and they run their lives by ego, and ego only."
But Jews, by insisting on the establishment of their own political sovereign state, on the basis of ancient history of an ethnicity that gave rise to their religion and/or tenents of that religion itself (ie. God gave Israel to the Hebrews), in the middle of hundreds of millions of people who hate them, AREN'T excercising ego (chutzpah, irrationality....)???
Israel is not in the middle of the Middle East. Check out a map. 80% of Israel was uninhabited in 1900. The Zionist movement began as a way of escaping Anti-semitism, even Uganda was considered. But it is a fact that most people believe in the bible and Israel's location made sense, killing two birds with one stone.
It's pretty smack dab in the middle of the Arab world, and throwing some outliers out, like Indonesia, the Muslim world.
" But it is a fact that most people believe in the bible"
So? THat's irrational.
"and Israel's location made sense"
Made no sense whatsoever, for the reason I stated in my previous post.
According to stan-marc, they encountered hostility from the beginings of the Zionist immigration program. I'd say it started out slow and grew. By the early part of the 20th century there was no doubt there was significant opposition to their program. Other than that, I'm not going to get into the demographics question on this blog.
The world is irrational. 90% of human beings believe in God. It isn't irrational to them. If the Zionists decided on Greenland, there would be opposition. Albeit, not as much as in Palestine.
Israel is not geographically in the center of the Arab world. By a longshot.
"The world is irrational. 90% of human beings believe in God. It isn't irrational to them."
Well, then nothing is irrational, except by subjective opinion (irrational in its purest form).
And Israel is midway between Algeria and Afghanistan, pretty much straddling the connection between North Africa and the Middle East and Southwest Asia.....
"Well, then nothing is irrational, except by subjective opinion (irrational in its purest form)."
ABSOLUTE TOMMYROT! What is rational or irrational can be checked out by scientific and collaborative observation.
Also what is irrational is defined by the destructiveness or constructiveness of actions. Actions of all religions are destuctive.
ll religions put a fantasy(GOD) above the needs of reall people and that is why they all ultimately destroy the lives of human beings.
After we nuke or satan bug the goddam Islamics we won't have to we cxna call those Isalmic lands the "ruins" or the New Territoriesand you won't hav eto worry anbut Israel's exact postion with them becaue there won't be any them.
Herzl proposed Uguanda as a possible site for Jewish colonization, as he knew there would be significant political problems with establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
The Palestinians did not resist Zionism because they had animus towards Jews. They resisted because they knew that Zionism suceeding meant displacement and disposession for Palestinians, which is exactly what happened. Benny Morris, Israeli historian, makes this point.
Herzl also said that Zionists should welcome anti-semitism because it would help fulfill the Zionist dream.
But saying that the land Israel was founded on was 80% desert is way off. It reminds me of the Joan Peters' "land for a people for a people without land" myth, which was throughly debunked by Norman Finkelstein.
Herzl proposed Uguanda as a possible site for Jewish colonization, as he knew there would be significant political problems with establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine. ********************** Very selective of you. Herzl wanted to get the Jews out of Europe to escape anti-semitism. The Uganda proposal would have been an easier task perhaps, but it had more to do with the fact that Palestine was under the Ottoman Empire at the time.
The Palestinians did not resist Zionism because they had animus towards Jews. They resisted because they knew that Zionism suceeding meant displacement and disposession for Palestinians, which is exactly what happened. Benny Morris, Israeli historian, makes this point. **************************** BS. It was the surrounding Arab nations that bitched and started the war...and they didn't give a rats ass about the Palestinians.
Herzl also said that Zionists should welcome anti-semitism because it would help fulfill the Zionist dream. ************************* You are contradicting yourself. The fact is that Herzl was an agnostic.
But saying that the land Israel was founded on was 80% desert is way off. It reminds me of the Joan Peters' "land for a people for a people without land" myth, which was throughly debunked by Norman Finkelstein. ************************** It was 80% unoccupied unowned and unused in the late 1800's. That is a fact "Scottie"
As far as I know, the Ugandan angle is a tall story, I've heard it many times but have never found corroboration of it.
But Herzl's diary does mention a plan to set up shop in Argentina (probably Patagonia). I saw a quote on the blog of Canadian Jewish history student (studying for a Masters in London - David Zarnett, he used to be on my blogroll but then he deleted his blog). Paraphrasing from memory, the quote went:
"Argentina it is then, far away from prying European eyes".
You also wrote:
"BS. It was the surrounding Arab nations that bitched and started the war...and they didn't give a rats ass about the Palestinians."
That's a hopelessly simplistic assessment that negates all that went before and the context in which Arab resistance to Israel arose. It's impossible to understand that part of history without understanding the relation between the Arabs and the Brits at the end of the Ottoman empire and during the British Protectorate of Palestine. Simply put, during WW I the British convinced the Arabs to side with them (against the Turks) and in return promised them the creation of a United Arabia, to engulfe much of what is now Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. After the war the British reneged their pledge and decided to carve up the Middle East between them and the French. When later the British supported the creation of a Jewish homeland, the Arabs felt even more betrayed. In a nutshell, these are the root causes of Arab animosity towards Israel.
And Scottie's right about Benny Morris. You should read him (and many others - even those who oppose him like Karsh do not deny the basic facts Morris shows very clearly).
What a dumb fuck!
ReplyDeleteum, let's get this straight: it's open season on Christians and Muslims, but no criticism (ever / under any circumstances) for the *other* "people of the book" (i.e., the J-ws). is it because they have the option of identifying themselves as an ethnicity/race? and when they are identified as "G-d's chosen," do you - a self-professed follower of the Atheist creed - object that, as there is no God, how can He have a chosen people? or do you say, "Hitler had it wrong / we are the Master Race"? and how do you feel about the work of fellow Canadian J. Philippe Rushton? or fellow Jew Michael E. Levin? is it open season on the "darkies" as well? so long as it's dressed up as Science? (albeit hardly Dispassionate Inquiry, given the bags of money received by these Pioneer Fund "researchers")
ReplyDeletein short, which side are you on?
Are you kidding me? Read more of my posts and cartoons. I'm equally harsh on the Jewish "god."
ReplyDeleteYou obviously don't have enough information about my stance, especially to put words in my mouth.
And Barrios, I don't think you understand what "chosen people" means.
ReplyDeleteI am on the side of right. It has nothing to do with God. Israel, to me, could have been in Uganda, but since 90% of the Jews in in the late 1800's believed in God and that Israel was the birthplace of Judaism, Israel made all the sense to be located where it is today.
80% of Palestine was uninhabited desert in 1900. The Arabs have cause all their own grief because they don't think ahead, and they run their lives by ego, and ego only.
Jews are pretty good liars most of the time, but they tell so many lies they are bound to trip themselves up sometimes. Their exaggerations, half-truths, and outright inventions about the so- called "Holocaust," easily the most lied-about topic ever, are a good example.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, many patriots fail to counter the Jews' "Holocaust" lies effectively; instead they let themselves be lured into the semantic trap of "Holocaust denial." That is, they tacitly accept the Jews' rules of debate. The first of those rules is that one must either accept or reject the "Holocaust" mythology as a whole: no quibbling over details permitted. If one does not accept without question or quibble the magical number of "six million" Jews who were led into gas chambers disguised as shower houses and given a faceful of Zyklon-B instead of hot water when they turned on the faucet, for example, one is a "Holocaust denier," who believes that the "Holocaust" is entirely fictitious, and the German government treated Jews just like everyone else during the Second World War. That, of course, is an impossible position to defend.
The "Holocaust" myth, as mentioned above, is a structure built of lies, exaggerations, and half- truths, and the way to discredit it is to subject these individual building blocks -- the details -- to critical scrutiny.
To be specific, the August 10, 1994, issue of The Christian Science Monitor carried an article (page 12) by Jewess Linda Joffee about growing anti-Semitism in Germany and the efforts of the Jews and their collaborators to combat it. Under the heading "Growing Anti-Semitism Concerns German Jews," Ms. Joffee writes:
"About 560,000 Jews lived in Germany when the Nazis came to power in 1933. Almost all died in the Holocaust. There are about 50,000 Jews in Germany today."
The first sentence in Ms. Joffee's statement is true. The second sentence is a bald-faced lie. Fortunately, it can easily be shown as such by anyone with access to a library which carries books with world demographic data for the last 60 years or so.
The truth of the matter is that as soon as a National Socialist government was elected in Germany in 1933, the Germans began working hard to persuade Jews to emigrate. They did this by enacting legislation which progressively excluded Jews from one sector of German life after another. Jews were not permitted to teach in Germany, except in Jewish schools; they were not permitted to publish newspapers, magazines, or books, except those published specifically for Jews; they were banned from the practice of medicine (except the treating of Jewish patients) and law; and they were excluded from many areas of trade and industry, especially from those businesses requiring a government license.
This legislation was not motivated by petty spite or by economic considerations, but by a determination to free Germany from Jewish influence. When the National Socialists came to power in 1933, Jews were vastly over-represented in the media, in teaching, and in the legal and medical professions. For example, 42 per cent of the physicians practicing in Berlin in 1933 were Jews, as were 48 per cent of the attorneys. To the National Socialists this was an intolerable situation, and they set about remedying it in a typically thorough and efficient manner.
The Jews screamed bloody murder about the National Socialist campaign to take Germany away from them and give it back to the German people. As early as 1934 Jews around the world declared an economic boycott of Germany in retaliation. As it became apparent to them, however, that Adolf Hitler was the most popular leader Germany had ever had, that the National Socialists could neither be bought off nor voted out of office, and that there really was no future for Jews in Germany, they began to look for easier pickings elsewhere. The great majority of them eventually emigrated.
By the time the Second World War began in September 1939 there were only about 200,000 Jews left in Germany, and a number of them succeeded in leaving after that.
These news items appeared in issue number 114 of National Vanguard magazine. For further information, write National Vanguard Books, PO Box 330, Hillsboro WV 24946 USA.
The Leuchter Report:
ReplyDeleteThe "myth" of the Holocaust was created solely for the financial benefit of Israel
________________________________________
• The "myth" of the Holocaust was created solely for the financial benefit of Israel
Holocaust denial often asserts that the sole reason that the "Holocaust hoax" has been promulgated was that it created a financial windfall for the State of Israel. Deborah Lipstadt provides this information in "Denying the Holocaust":
"Israeli officials detailed their claims against Germany in their communique of March 1951 to the Four Powers, and this document became the official basis for the reparations agreement. It contained an explanation of Israel's means of calculating the size of the reparations claim. In the communique Israeli officials explained that Nazi persecution had stimulated 'a second Jewish exodus' of close to five hundred thousand. Based on the size of this exodus, Israel determined the amount of the reparations it would request:
The government of Israel is not in a position to obtain and present a complete statement of all Jewish property taken or looted by the Germans, and said to total more than $6 thousand million. It can only compute its claim on the basis of total expenditures already made and the expenditure still needed for the integration of Jewish immigrants from Nazi-dominated countries. The number of these immigrants is estimated at some 500,000, which means a total expenditure of $1.5 thousand million.
It seems hardly necessary to point out that since the money the state received by based on the cost of resettling survivors, had Israel wanted to increase the amount of reparations it obtained from Germany it would have been in its interest to argue that fewer than six million had been killed and that more had managed to flee to Israel." (Lipstadt, 57)
Oh great, I got me Holocaust denying retarded assmonkeys grazing my board. Aint it special.
ReplyDeleteBacon: You are attracting some sick motherfuckers here.
ReplyDeleteMan, someone actually spent energy to write all that. I fell asleep in the first sentence.
ReplyDeleteThat Iranian guy is scared, he's looking at Saddam neaar the end of a rope and he is freaking out cause the people round him are getting ideas.
I mean it seriously. Dictatorships amp the aggression when the internal pressure for rebellion gets fierce. Sometimes it shows a point of collapse, he has to keep up the outside agression now, if he relaxes then the knives turn his way.
..
It's not easy living with cockaroach cannibals!
"The Arabs have cause all their own grief because they don't think ahead, and they run their lives by ego, and ego only."
ReplyDeleteBut Jews, by insisting on the establishment of their own political sovereign state, on the basis of ancient history of an ethnicity that gave rise to their religion and/or tenents of that religion itself (ie. God gave Israel to the Hebrews), in the middle of hundreds of millions of people who hate them, AREN'T excercising ego (chutzpah, irrationality....)???
Ummmm, OK......
Israel is not in the middle of the Middle East. Check out a map. 80% of Israel was uninhabited in 1900. The Zionist movement began as a way of escaping Anti-semitism, even Uganda was considered. But it is a fact that most people believe in the bible and Israel's location made sense, killing two birds with one stone.
ReplyDelete"Israel is not in the middle of the Middle East."
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty smack dab in the middle of the Arab world, and throwing some outliers out, like Indonesia, the Muslim world.
" But it is a fact that most people believe in the bible"
So? THat's irrational.
"and Israel's location made sense"
Made no sense whatsoever, for the reason I stated in my previous post.
According to stan-marc, they encountered hostility from the beginings of the Zionist immigration program. I'd say it started out slow and grew. By the early part of the 20th century there was no doubt there was significant opposition to their program. Other than that, I'm not going to get into the demographics question on this blog.
The world is irrational. 90% of human beings believe in God. It isn't irrational to them.
ReplyDeleteIf the Zionists decided on Greenland, there would be opposition. Albeit, not as much as in Palestine.
Israel is not geographically in the center of the Arab world. By a longshot.
"The world is irrational. 90% of human beings believe in God. It isn't irrational to them."
ReplyDeleteWell, then nothing is irrational, except by subjective opinion (irrational in its purest form).
And Israel is midway between Algeria and Afghanistan, pretty much straddling the connection between North Africa and the Middle East and Southwest Asia.....
So yah, I'd say it's smack dab in the middle.
"Well, then nothing is irrational, except by subjective opinion (irrational in its purest form)."
ReplyDeleteABSOLUTE TOMMYROT! What is rational or irrational can be checked out by scientific and collaborative observation.
Also what is irrational is defined by the destructiveness or constructiveness of actions.
Actions of all religions are destuctive.
ll religions put a fantasy(GOD) above the needs of reall people and that is why they all ultimately destroy the lives of human beings.
After we nuke or satan bug the goddam Islamics we won't have to we cxna call those Isalmic lands the "ruins" or the New Territoriesand you won't hav eto worry anbut Israel's exact postion with them becaue there won't be any them.
Herzl proposed Uguanda as a possible site for Jewish colonization, as he knew there would be significant political problems with establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
ReplyDeleteThe Palestinians did not resist Zionism because they had animus towards Jews. They resisted because they knew that Zionism suceeding meant displacement and disposession for Palestinians, which is exactly what happened. Benny Morris, Israeli historian, makes this point.
Herzl also said that Zionists should welcome anti-semitism because it would help fulfill the Zionist dream.
But saying that the land Israel was founded on was 80% desert is way off. It reminds me of the Joan Peters' "land for a people for a people without land" myth, which was throughly debunked by Norman Finkelstein.
Herzl proposed Uguanda as a possible site for Jewish colonization, as he knew there would be significant political problems with establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.
ReplyDelete**********************
Very selective of you. Herzl wanted to get the Jews out of Europe to escape anti-semitism. The Uganda proposal would have been an easier task perhaps, but it had more to do with the fact that Palestine was under the Ottoman Empire at the time.
The Palestinians did not resist Zionism because they had animus towards Jews. They resisted because they knew that Zionism suceeding meant displacement and disposession for Palestinians, which is exactly what happened. Benny Morris, Israeli historian, makes this point.
****************************
BS. It was the surrounding Arab nations that bitched and started the war...and they didn't give a rats ass about the Palestinians.
Herzl also said that Zionists should welcome anti-semitism because it would help fulfill the Zionist dream.
*************************
You are contradicting yourself. The fact is that Herzl was an agnostic.
But saying that the land Israel was founded on was 80% desert is way off. It reminds me of the Joan Peters' "land for a people for a people without land" myth, which was throughly debunked by Norman Finkelstein.
**************************
It was 80% unoccupied unowned and unused in the late 1800's. That is a fact "Scottie"
As far as I know, the Ugandan angle is a tall story, I've heard it many times but have never found corroboration of it.
ReplyDeleteBut Herzl's diary does mention a plan to set up shop in Argentina (probably Patagonia). I saw a quote on the blog of Canadian Jewish history student (studying for a Masters in London - David Zarnett, he used to be on my blogroll but then he deleted his blog). Paraphrasing from memory, the quote went:
"Argentina it is then, far away from prying European eyes".
You also wrote:
"BS. It was the surrounding Arab nations that bitched and started the war...and they didn't give a rats ass about the Palestinians."
That's a hopelessly simplistic assessment that negates all that went before and the context in which Arab resistance to Israel arose. It's impossible to understand that part of history without understanding the relation between the Arabs and the Brits at the end of the Ottoman empire and during the British Protectorate of Palestine. Simply put, during WW I the British convinced the Arabs to side with them (against the Turks) and in return promised them the creation of a United Arabia, to engulfe much of what is now Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. After the war the British reneged their pledge and decided to carve up the Middle East between them and the French. When later the British supported the creation of a Jewish homeland, the Arabs felt even more betrayed. In a nutshell, these are the root causes of Arab animosity towards Israel.
And Scottie's right about Benny Morris. You should read him (and many others - even those who oppose him like Karsh do not deny the basic facts Morris shows very clearly).