9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom

In the meantime, I will leave you with disturbing evidence that the lure of the far right has even transcended the human species.

lol and I thought it was dogs he was/had cloned or himself

Does anyone else feel the way I do about this: It is very, very, very boring! Can we discuss 9/11. It seems to be a platform for one and only one poster!

What Will I be Allowed to Say, in 2010?

Stelios Wrote:

Better be careful because i too believe we have been lied to.
Soon thinking will be a crime too.

Is being careful the right reaction? That’s exactly what they want. If we knuckle under to them now, how long do you think it will take for Israel’s atrocities against the Palestinians to be lumped into what we are not allowed to write, talk or think about?

Getting back to why I started this thread: it was a warning that biased history teaching in schools is not a good thing, and I thought I made a reasonable, though apparently, not a watertight case for my concerns.

To me, much of what has followed has been taken up with stuff that’s almost akin to:

Anthony: Hey! Watch out, a bus is about to run you over!

Response: Would you mind telling me it’s number? And, by the way, are you a Nazi sympathiser, or are you sympathetic to Nazi sympathisers?

‘Mein Kampf’ was disregarded, and look what happened. If you (the reader) want to disregard the Knesset’s Global Holocaust-Deniers Bill, that is your right. It is also your right not to do anything about similar bills which are in the U.S. and E.U. legislative pipelines. It is your right not to look any further than the end of your nose, but don’t be surprised if you get run over by the metaphorical bus. If you do, you’ll end up in prison, rather than in a hospital. Then you might end up in the prison hospital, suffering from AIDS.

So, ‘denying’ the Holocaust could result in a death sentence. Farfetched? I have read of it happening, to an innocent man who died shortly after his conviction for murder had been quashed. He’d contracted the disease after being raped in prison.

And here is an example of the kind of accusation which could lead up to a conviction.

Dogsmilk wrote:

There is other stuff on Weber floating around, such as,

Quote:
At 2:55pm on Friday, February 12, 1993, a man identifying
himself as Mark Weber called the number, requested a copy of The
Right Way, and left his P.O.B. address for mailing. The Center's
graphics department sent him a colorful subscription application
for the non-existent periodical, instead. This was apparently
enough to satisfy Mr. Weber's curiosity because he soon acceded
to Ron's request for a meeting.

That meeting took place on February 27, 1993 at the Cafe
Westminster in Westminster, California. It was filmed by a CBS
camera crew stationed in a van outside. Mr. Furey spoke to Mark
Weber at length about the "state of the movement" in Germany. To
help establish his credibility, he showed Weber several photos
picturing him and several German neo-Nazis together. Weber
correctly identified them all.
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/w/ ... /weber.swc

What is suspicious about this? Let me tell you.

The anonymous writer begins by stating that a man ‘identifying’ himself as Mark Weber called…. The next time Mark Weber’s name is mentioned, there is no qualification, it is, verily, Mark Weber. Then, at the alleged meeting this is re-confirmed: ‘Mr Furey spoke to Mark Weber, at length…’ not the man who identified himself as Mark Webber, you will note.

But why does this anonymous storyteller not hammer the final nail into his Gotcha! piece? Where is the clip of the alleged ‘film’ shot by CBS, which would positively identify whom Mr. Furey was speaking to? And, presumably, if the crew had stationed themselves in a van, across the street, there would have been a radio-mic. disguised as a daisy, sitting in a vase on the table where Mr Furey and the alleged Mark Weber were sitting, in order to get it right from the horse’s mouth, so to speak, about his neo-Nazi leanings.

A search, from the Nizcor Project’s Home page, lead to two items; the first seems to be the original source, an article headed: ‘Willis Carto and the IHR’, the second is the same as the link you supplied, Dogsmilk. Neither has a link to a video of the scene described. Linking CBS with Mark Weber didn’t turn up any reference to secret ‘film’, either. (It would not have been filmed, it would have been videotaped, in 1993, so I included ‘video’ in my search. These people never seem to get this right.)

Nizcor, although it sports a logo stating: ‘This site supports FREE SPEECH ON LINE’ has no ‘Contact Us’ button.

I wonder if unsubstantiated evidence such as the above would be allowed in the Israel Supreme Court, Holocaust Denier Section. Would the video be required, or would they just take the accuser's word for it that Mark Weber was in the video, and had said those things? And what about a letter of mine, or yours, being published in a dodgy, right-wing publication, even though it had not been addressed to that publication. Would that stand against me—or you. Would it be enough, I wonder, for the accuser to just say that he'd seen the letter in the, said, offensive publication, or would a copy of the original have to be produced?

I also wonder when the day will come that being accused of being a Zionist sympathiser will carry the same stigma as being called a Nazi sympathiser does today.

Surprisingly Simple Remedy: Those not interested in this, or any other thread, are not obliged to visit the 'offending' pages. They don't have to go out and buy the Sunday Times, either, if they think they might be bored by its content.

Check your Private Messages, Anthony.

Does anyone else feel the way I do about this: It is very, very, very boring! Can we discuss 9/11. It seems to be a platform for one and only one poster!

What is boring is coming to a thread you find interesting and reading pap like that. The clue is in the title. What idiot clicks on a thread they think is boring and then reads it. You are like the Mary Whitehouse brigade - a group of housewives dedicated to collecting televisions which do not possess an "off" switch.

For me this thread was very interesting.
I am glad that a growing number of people are waking up to the fact that alot of what we are indoctrinated into believing as history is in fact brainwashing.
America's role leading up to world war2 is always brushed under the carpet - their financial and physical support for hitler who in 1938 was time magazine man of the year.
Zionist support and collaboration is also neatly excluded from history even though it is well documented and confirmed by jewish scolars.
America's deliberate denial of visas for jews wishing to flee Germany.

However what does this revisionism of history achieve?
Well the grossly exaggerated figure of 6 million has achieved large cash payments from Swiss and German banks and companies.

Not for the victims but for New York law firms and Zionist organisations.
I know a number of Germans who actually state that today a percentage of their income tax goes towards paying these billions.

And the news is the German people today are angry and anti jewish sentiment is rife. As you know we have many poles in London today. Feel free to ask any of them their views on jews. They are also very anti jewish.
So what i see the revision of history and the propaganda might have the british public brainwashed but in other areas it has created a backlash against jews.
The zionists actually are harming the jewish public. And the greedy New York lawyers are creating anti jewish feelings in Germany, Swizerland, Poland etc. These are indisputable facts. Which is why many jewish scolars and rabbinical leaders are campaigning against the commercialisation of the holocaust and are campaigning against zionism.
Hopefully more people wake up to the truth.

This discussion has certainly taught me things i didnt know.

stelios wrote:America's role leading up to world war2 is always brushed under the carpet - their financial and physical support for hitler who in 1938 was time magazine man of the year.
Zionist support and collaboration is also neatly excluded from history even though it is well documented and confirmed by jewish scolars.
America's deliberate denial of visas for jews wishing to flee Germany.

Your post stellios perfectly explains why revisiting the holocaust is the last place to start in trying to draw the true lessons from WW2.

There are many ways to look at ww2 I will give just 3

1) the accepted version of history. Hitler was crazed tyrrant and german people collectively responsible for supporting him, his propaganda against the jews was hated filed nonsense without substance and 6000000 of them died at nazi hands. Britain and America (with considerable support from the likes of Russia, Poland and Serbia, which is repeatedly under recognised) saved the day, stode up for freedom, liberty and apple pie. Cue: Winston Churchill (gaser of the kurds) fighting them on the beaches)

2) then we have the nazi apologists/neo nazi version, which goes something like. The gas chambers were a hoax, the whole holocaust was a hoax, a few jews died but heck hitler was right: 'the jews' run the world. Cue ayrian master race bs, the protocols are true, blah, blah.

I suggest that for most people these are the only 2 versions they consider and so there is a great danger that those challenging version 1 of WW2 and the holocaust will be seen to be promoting version 2 and to be frank, some of those who challenge version 1 are promoting version 2. This is the danger. The rise of anti-jewish sentiment in today's Germany and Poland is not something to welcome but to oppose as strongly as we oppose the WOT war criminals.

The 3rd version which is my understanding of the truth runs like this.

The PTB financed and controlled (influened) BOTH sides in WW2 just as they are doing today in the WoT. The PTB included elite zionists who had a long term game plan of zionism and the creation of Israel. The whole story and how it would be used was planned many years in advance and Hitler was the puppet and not the mastermind.

So I agree Stellios, (elements of) the US and UK backed Hitler's rise and funded the nazi war machine. This is the real story to tell. The one that shows the parallels back to today. My strong suggestion is focus on exposing the evidence that supports version 3 and avoid the holocaust/camp deaths arguments.

Sites such as jewsaginstzionism and similar offer the best hope of doing this. The PTB are trying desparately to promote a rise in bigotry, race hate and fascism/neo-nazism and a strategy of tension between the faiths. Take great care not to be helping them in this wicked agenda.

German Taxpayers Beware

Stelios wrote:

However what does this revisionism of history achieve?
Well the grossly exaggerated figure of 6 million has achieved large cash payments from Swiss and German banks and companies.

But that’s about to change. One website has upped the ante, or doubled the stakes. Nizcor’s homepage is headlined:

Dedicated to 12 million Holocaust victims who suffered and died at the hands of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime
(http://www.nizkor.org/)

At the foot of the page, it states: Nizkor is a Hebrew word which means "We will remember."

Well, someone must have forgotten to remember that the figure has been six million for ages. But if they are now starting to take non-Jews into account, this would be a welcome first, because it would demonstrate that the Jewish patent on World War Two suffering has, at last, expired and that the deaths of countless other victims will be included in their memorial services, and museums. On the other hand…
___________________

Blackcat, your post was most welcome, as I was about to point out to Wokeman that, although this topic may not be about the details of what happened on 9/11, it is about a powerful force, in the Middle East and other strategic locations, which is intent on manipulating the thoughts, speech and deeds of what used to be called: The Free World. In the opinion of many observers and commentators 9/11 was a false flag operation the purpose of which was to fire up public opinion into condoning the destabilizing terror attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq, in which well over a million people have now died. Iran is third on the hit list. That makes this topic strongly 9/11 related, as well as very important.

Ken McVay
director, Nizkor Project
web: http://www.nizkor.org/
email: kmcvay@nizkor.org


http://www.vex.net/~kmcvay/

Just because you can't find a clip on a net search doesn't mean it never happened. But if you want to e-mail Ken McVay, whose e-mail I found in thirty seconds, he might fill you in further, I dunno. Could it be as simple as it's just not on the net? Not everything is you know.

You said you couldn't find people accusing the truth movement of being nazis but it takes me thirty seconds to find that, too - that's not 'exhaustive evidence' (indeed, I haven't followed any of the links, so don't exactly know which are relevant - you might have to go through a coule of pages if you're that interested, I dunno), you need to play around with the searches a bit.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n ... ement+nazi
What JREF say does concern me as they are increasingly involved with anti-truther media appearances in the US where the truth movement appears to be breaking into the mainstream.

And here is an example of the kind of accusation which could lead up to a conviction.

How so? You've talked about the criminalisation of holocaust denial - something I agree is unjust. But this is not about holocaust denial. Nobody is suggesting having links to or sympathies with the far right be made a crime are they?

So, ‘denying’ the Holocaust could result in a death sentence. Farfetched? I have read of it happening, to an innocent man who died shortly after his conviction for murder had been quashed. He’d contracted the disease after being raped in prison.

This is stirring rhetoric but terrible logic. To be consistent, you must therefore say that any crime involving prison 'could result in a death sentence'. Locking people up for smoking cannabis (which they do a lot in the US) is a travesty, but to say that people in America face a possible death sentence for smoking cannabis is over-egging the case somewhat.
By your logic, rescuing chickens from battery farms or rabbits from laboratories entails a possible death sentence, but I've yet to see the ALF making wild accusations their activists face death sentences.

Is being careful the right reaction? That’s exactly what they want. If we knuckle under to them now, how long do you think it will take for Israel’s atrocities against the Palestinians to be lumped into what we are not allowed to write, talk or think about?

That's an interesting question, and I think some people would certainly like to stop any criticism of Israel...I think some people would like to stop any criticism of Indonesia and so on. I think we disagree on the level of power exerted by Zionists.
There is one thing I've never quite understood - let me be clear - I totally deplore the actions of Israel and the string of atrocities that have been perpetrated against Palestine. I have had some involvement with activism regarding this. However, it is not the only atrocity. Burma, Colombia, Aceh, West Papua, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, Rwanda etc etc etc - there are myriad examples of horrible regimes doing horrible things to their own or others. Many of which get virtually zero coverage in the MSM. Now you cannot play 'which atrocity is best' - that is ridiculous, but it does sometimes seem that Zionism is made into this bogeyman that transcends all others. Since I don't subscribe to any of that 'Jews rule the world' nonsense, I just sometimes wonder why Palestine is the only atrocity people seem to get righteously indignant about round here. I can only stress - I'm not trying to 'downplay' Israeli actions, it just sometimes seems like Israeli shenannigans are seen as the lynchpin of everything. Personally, I think the arms companies, neocons and globalist capitalism are a bigger global problem than Zionists, but that's just me.

Norman Finkelstein, who wrote ‘The Holocaust Industry’ is reviled, probably more than most—if there can be degrees of reviling—because he is a Jew. But he’s not saying that Jews and other ethnic groups were not crammed into cattle trucks and transported, under the most appalling conditions, to the Nazi Death Camps. It is a matter of historical fact that they were, and that fact is indisputable. Other facts, however, are not indisputable, but they soon will be, if the Zionists have their way.

And he's not saying they weren't gassed, neither. In fact, Finkelstein is extraordinarily dismissive of the whole revisionist scene. He berates Lipstadt for taking it too seriously -

To document widespread holocaust denial, Lipstadt cites a handful of crank publications. Her piece de resistance is Arthur Butz, a nonentity who teaches electrical engineering at Northwestern University and who published his book, the hoax of the twentieth century with an obscure press. Lipstadt entitles the chapter on him "Entering the Mainstream". Were it not for the likes of Lipstadt, no one would ever have heard of Arthur Butz.
In fact, the one truly mainstream holocaust denier is Bernard Lewis. A French court even convicted Lewis of denying genocide. But Lewis denied the Turkish genocide of Armenians during World War 1, not the Nazi genocide of Jews, and Lewis is pro-Israel. Accordingly, this instance of holocaust denial raises no hackles in the United States

.
the holocaust industry - page 69

Finkelstein supports free speech for HDs, is fiercely critical of Israel and the exploitation of the holocaust, but doesn't take the claims of revisionism at all seriously - "a handful of crank publications" doesn't imply much respect.
He got himself in trouble for debunking the claim that Palestine was 'empty' when the settlers starting turning up way before he ever looked at the holocaust.
He later mentions that (page 71) Arno Mayer and Raul Hilberg have both referenced HD material. He quotes Hilberg as saying -

'If these people want to speak, let them...It only leads those of us who do research to re-examine what we might have considered as obvious. And that's useful for us"

I always find it strange that the Zionist conspiracy to 'suppress the truth' is so often resisted by the scholars that actually wrote all these 'lies'. The ADL didn't write the history books and neither do politicians.


Just to pop back to the Irving stuff, on neo-nazi website Stormfront (that I thus can't link to, but it's easily googled - search for irving, trial, rudolf, as if you just google stormfront you find yourself on a rather colourful forum - 'world wide white pride' - purlease), they carry some Q & A with Irving.

Someone asks -

My question is simple: Did you withdraw Polanska-Palmer and Rudolf because the three responding affidavits showed they were bad and would not shift the weigh of the evidence in your favour?

He replies -

WE did not see the rebuttal affidavits. You are wrong.

Note - this is not 100% conclusive, but he does not say there weren't any.

In the second Instance (appeal proceedings), Rudolf first supplied at my expense a report which lacked all scientific notes and source references; useless as an expert report. He very grudgingly then filled these in. Scientifically it was a good report, but we could not put it before the Court for the legal reasons stated. [... Further comments about the Germar Rudolf legal situation omitted.]

Counsel (Adrian Davies) had no need to explain to the Court why we could not put in the Rudolf Report. The Court had already refused to let us put in in evidence Prof "Skunky" Evans's post-trial book Lying about Hitler, since our solicitor (by then, discharged) had not given proper notice to the respondents.

If you decide not to call evidence, there is no requirement to inform a Court why. In the first instance, the [2000] libel hearing, Lipstadt's attorneys decided not to call either her or two expert witnesses, and did not explain why. That put me to disadvantage, having had to waste time preparing their cross-examination, and all the Discovery to go with it. These things happen.

Irving's team, and as he notes they didn't have to, didn't actually tell the court why the evidence was withdrawn.
Personally, I'm starting to think that this basically turns on which side you choose to believe. Both sides have a motivation for saying what they say.

I might go through and pick up other points I've missed later. But, this one leaps out.

By using the term ‘passing on a lie,’ I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, in that you were probably unaware that it was a lie. Obviously, not the correct thing to do.

A Big Fat Lie

I have just distilled, from Dogsmilk’s recent post, a big fat lie.

- I'm sorry, but I fail to see the 'benefit of the doubt' in that statement which, as you have failed to acknowledge, was 'justified' by a nonsense argument assuming that because you can produce an example of Rudolf being articulate and coherent, that therefore means his trial must have been at the trial, which is simply not logical. In fact, if you check the quote above, Irving seems to think his initial effort was pretty rubbish himself!

There's some points I've still missed and will maybe try to address them later.
However, as interesting as this exchange is, at some point we should perhaps attempt to agree to disagree on some points and wind down, else we will be here til Christmas. I happen to agree with the thrust of the rebuttals to Wokeman - I simply ignore threads that are not of interest to me - but this is starting to go on a bit, and I'm getting a bit tired of it.

Well, someone must have forgotten to remember that the figure has been six million for ages. But if they are now starting to take non-Jews into account, this would be a welcome first, because it would demonstrate that the Jewish patent on World War Two suffering has, at last, expired and that the deaths of countless other victims will be included in their memorial services, and museums. On the other hand…

Forgot to mention - that I can agree with. As I have mentioned before, T4 is of most interest to me, but comparatively little has been written on it, and I'm still looking for a good text about the fate of gypsies, so will repeat a request for any heads up on that for anyone reading this thread.
However, it needs to be remembered the 6 million figure is far from set - estimates within 'official' scholarship vary quite widely. In fact, people seem to forget that 'official' scholarship contains the kinds of enormous disagreements you get in many historical fields.

Enough

Dogsmilk, here is where I stand, and your endless ramblings are not about to change my mind.

I don’t think anyone or any organization has the right to stuff their opinions down my throat.

I don’t need anyone—Mark Weber, David Irving, Robert Faurisson, Germar Rudolf or any other person who has been accused of being a neo-Nazi or a Holocaust Denier—to tell me that passing a bill in the Israeli Knesset, in an attempt to make Holocaust denial a world-wide crime, or for the U.S. Congress or the European Parliament to be doing much the same, is a scary prospect. I really can work that one out for myself. If it is not a matter of concern to you, then I feel really sorry for you.

As I’ve indicated, I wouldn’t care about the politics of someone who told me that I am about to be run over by a bus, or where he or she got the information from. I would just thank him or her.

In regard to my warning about the thin end of a BIG political wedge being introduced into the National Curriculum, am not looking for your thanks, or anyone else’s. I just feel that it is right to point out the warning signs of what may be coming, because a lot of people may get seriously hurt, either physically or emotionally, if nothing is done about it. And the only action that will work is if we ALL resist it.

You are foolish to base your rebuttal arguments on stuff like people can die from contracting AIDS in prison, after getting there for smoking cannabis. My reference was an illustration of what could happen, and has, to someone wrongly convicted of a crime. They died!

The bottom line is that I think it is wrong to have laws that put people in prison for writing, thinking or saying what they believe to be true, or not true, as the case may be, and I think that the passing of such laws should be resisted, at all costs.

END

I will respond to any posts, other than yours.

Anthony

Though I acknowledge you won't reply, just a couple of points -

Despite my own occasionally pointed comments and your dismissal of my posts as 'ramblings', I would like to thank you for taking the time to converse with me.

You are foolish to base your rebuttal arguments on stuff like 'people can die from contracting AIDS in prison, after getting there for smoking cannabis.' My reference was an illustration of what could happen, and has, to someone wrongly convicted of a crime. They died!

A law itself may be wrong, but if someone is convicted under that law it can only be classified as a wrongful conviction if there is a clear miscarriage of justice under the terms of that law.
So if HD is illegal and someone is imprisoned for it, it is only a wrongful conviction if they are not actually an HD. However much the law itself may be wrong.
So the comparisons I make are directly relevant.
Yours was not as you refer to someone convicted of murder who was not actually a murderer.

The bottom line is that I think it is wrong to have laws that put people in prison for writing, thinking or saying what they believe, and I think that the passing of such laws should be resisted, at all costs.

I (regarding HD at least) agree. I disagree with 'holocaust deniers', but I fully support their 'right to deny'.

In regard to my warning about the thin end of a BIG political wedge being introduced into the National Curriculum, am not looking for your thanks, or anyone else’s, I just feel that it is the right thing to point out the warning signs that a big storm may be coming, and that a lot of people may get seriously hurt, either physically or emotionally, nothing is done about it. And the only action that will work is if we ALL resist it

Personally, propaganda pushing capitalist consumer culture and the commodification of every facet of our lives is of far more concern to me.
And I think the impending threats to our privacy and threat of constant monitoring by government and corporations (as if there is now much difference between the two) is of way more concern than whether some kids get to see Auschwitz. As much as I agree suppressing people's views on the holocaust is unjustified, I really think the history of the holocaust is a very trivial issue compared to what is going down right now.

I don’t need anyone—Mark Weber, David Irving, Robert Faurisson, Germar Rudolf or any other person who has been accused of being a neo-Nazi or a Holocaust Denier—to tell me that passing a bill in the Israeli Knesset, in an attempt to make Holocaust denial a world-wide crime, or for the U.S. Congress or the European Parliament to be doing much the same, is a scary prospect. I really can work that one out for myself. If it is not a matter of concern to you, then I feel really sorry for you.

Any suppression of freedom of speech is a matter of concern to me. I was simply trying to illustrate it doesn't automatically follow these people are 'freedom fighters'. They aren't.

As I’ve indicated, I wouldn’t care about the politics of someone who told me that I am about to be run over by a bus, or where he or she got the information from. I would just thank him or her.

They may be very wrong about the bus whose driver actually saw you in plenty of time, and make you forget about the piano that just fell out of the third story window above you.

A Generous Comment

Despite my own occasionally pointed comments and your dismissal of my posts as 'ramblings', I would like to thank you for taking the time to converse with me.

Thank you,

Anthony

Dogsmilk says....

I totally deplore the actions of Israel and the string of atrocities that have been perpetrated against Palestine. I have had some involvement with activism regarding this. However, it is not the only atrocity. Burma, Colombia, Aceh, West Papua, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, Rwanda etc etc etc - there are myriad examples of horrible regimes doing horrible things to their own or others. Many of which get virtually zero coverage in the MSM. Now you cannot play 'which atrocity is best' - that is ridiculous, but it does sometimes seem that Zionism is made into this bogeyman that transcends all others. Since I don't subscribe to any of that 'Jews rule the world' nonsense, I just sometimes wonder why Palestine is the only atrocity people seem to get righteously indignant about round here. I can only stress - I'm not trying to 'downplay' Israeli actions, it just sometimes seems like Israeli shenannigans are seen as the lynchpin of everything. Personally, I think the arms companies, neocons and globalist capitalism are a bigger global problem than Zionists, but that's just me.

That's how I see things as well.

This Quote says in a nutshell what I believe is the problem and possibly a reason to keep the Holocaust fresh in our minds as with the exception of possibly Rwanda and Uzbekistan all of our own leaders atrocities have been left off the list!! Where are North America, Canada, India, Austrailia, all of Africa, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Burma (as I'm sure you didn't mean British Rule), Indonesia, Mexico and all of South America in that quote? The Propaganda is clear our biggest enemy Hitler created a mask to hide all our leaders actions under a cloak of 'Well Nothing can be as bad as the Holocaust' and that is the only reason we are not aloud to Forget!!

ian neal wrote:Dogsmilk says....

I totally deplore the actions of Israel and the string of atrocities that have been perpetrated against Palestine. I have had some involvement with activism regarding this. However, it is not the only atrocity. Burma, Colombia, Aceh, West Papua, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, Rwanda etc etc etc - there are myriad examples of horrible regimes doing horrible things to their own or others. Many of which get virtually zero coverage in the MSM. Now you cannot play 'which atrocity is best' - that is ridiculous, but it does sometimes seem that Zionism is made into this bogeyman that transcends all others. Since I don't subscribe to any of that 'Jews rule the world' nonsense, I just sometimes wonder why Palestine is the only atrocity people seem to get righteously indignant about round here. I can only stress - I'm not trying to 'downplay' Israeli actions, it just sometimes seems like Israeli shenannigans are seen as the lynchpin of everything. Personally, I think the arms companies, neocons and globalist capitalism are a bigger global problem than Zionists, but that's just me.

That's how I see things as well.

Given that Truman would surely have known what had taken place can anyone understand his remarks written in 1947?

Harry Truman's Forgotten Diary

1947 Writings Offer Fresh Insight on the President


--Truman then went into a rant about Jews: "The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as D[isplaced] P[ersons] as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog.--

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... -2003Jul10

It seems strange in any case to compare them unfavourably with Hitler so soon after the war but if the gas chambers etc were known facts it would surely be simply incredible.

ian neal wrote: Your post stellios perfectly explains why revisiting the holocaust is the last place to start in trying to draw the true lessons from WW2.

There are many ways to look at ww2 I will give just 3

1) the accepted version of history. Hitler was crazed tyrrant and german people collectively responsible for supporting him, his propaganda against the jews was hated filed nonsense without substance and 6000000 of them died at nazi hands. Britain and America (with considerable support from the likes of Russia, Poland and Serbia, which is repeatedly under recognised) saved the day, stode up for freedom, liberty and apple pie. Cue: Winston Churchill (gaser of the kurds) fighting them on the beaches)

2) then we have the nazi apologists/neo nazi version, which goes something like. The gas chambers were a hoax, the whole holocaust was a hoax, a few jews died but heck hitler was right: 'the jews' run the world. Cue ayrian master race bs, the protocols are true, blah, blah.

I suggest that for most people these are the only 2 versions they consider and so there is a great danger that those challenging version 1 of WW2 and the holocaust will be seen to be promoting version 2 and to be frank, some of those who challenge version 1 are promoting version 2. This is the danger. The rise of anti-jewish sentiment in today's Germany and Poland is not something to welcome but to oppose as strongly as we oppose the WOT war criminals.

The 3rd version which is my understanding of the truth runs like this.

The PTB financed and controlled (influened) BOTH sides in WW2 just as they are doing today in the WoT. The PTB included elite zionists who had a long term game plan of zionism and the creation of Israel. The whole story and how it would be used was planned many years in advance and Hitler was the puppet and not the mastermind.

So I agree Stellios, (elements of) the US and UK backed Hitler's rise and funded the nazi war machine. This is the real story to tell. The one that shows the parallels back to today. My strong suggestion is focus on exposing the evidence that supports version 3 and avoid the holocaust/camp deaths arguments.

Sites such as jewsaginstzionism and similar offer the best hope of doing this. The PTB are trying desparately to promote a rise in bigotry, race hate and fascism/neo-nazism and a strategy of tension between the faiths. Take great care not to be helping them in this wicked agenda.

Great post, Ian. Crystallises some of the issues nicely. I have emphasised bits I found particularly useful. I broadly agree with your ("third way") interpretation of WWII.

Sheeesh. This stuff is so repetitive and boring. You have to have the mind of a OCD to face it.
No wonder I'm wandering off from here

Dogsmilk wrote: Now you cannot play 'which atrocity is best' - that is ridiculous, but it does sometimes seem that Zionism is made into this bogeyman that transcends all others. Since I don't subscribe to any of that 'Jews rule the world' nonsense, I just sometimes wonder why Palestine is the only atrocity people seem to get righteously indignant about round here. I can only stress - I'm not trying to 'downplay' Israeli actions, it just sometimes seems like Israeli shenannigans are seen as the lynchpin of everything. Personally, I think the arms companies, neocons and globalist capitalism are a bigger global problem than Zionists, but that's just me.

mate, zionism is the bogeyman
it is the mother and father of many conflicts in the last 100 years
many millions have died as a result which far exceeds all other causes of wars, it is laughable for you to claim the mainstream media which is 99% pro zionist makes it out to be the bogeyman, far from it they do their best to justify and apologise for it.
Why is a palestinian freedom fighter known as a terrorist in fact why are Iraqi resistance known as insurgents?
Why are labour mps who oppose the war known as rebels?
Why is a democratically elected palestinian official instantly assasinated by Israel every time a new one is elected and this is not condemned by the 99% pro zionist media

i am surprised at your examples
Burma, Colombia, Aceh, West Papua, Uzbekistan
you are comparing these to be equal to zionism
it is laughable
even if u had picked better examples such as bosnia, cambodia, armenia, kurdistan, you would still come up short

zionism is the number one problem in the world today and has caused more deaths than any other political ideology

Zionism’s Greatest Weapon: The Holocaust Story

Ian Neal wrote:

Your post stellios perfectly explains why revisiting the holocaust is the last place to start in trying to draw the true lessons from WW2.

You should be telling that to the Zionists, Ian. If they plan to extend and enlarge the teaching of their own version of the Holocaust, revisiting it, regularly, at British schools with the help of the British taxpayer, the myths—and it cannot now be doubted that there is a lot of mythology attached to their version—will be perpetuated. And it is the perpetuation of the myths which are so important, to them.

I know that you are sensitive to accusations that this site appears to be anti-Semitic, but simply writing…

So I agree Stellios, (elements of) the US and UK backed Hitler's rise and funded the nazi war machine. This is the real story to tell. The one that shows the parallels back to today. My strong suggestion is focus on exposing the evidence that supports version 3 and avoid the holocaust/camp deaths arguments.

…does not solve the problem, because the Holocaust is part and parcel of the cover-up; it is the tool and the weapon that the Zionists use in order to try and prevent historians looking into their role in it, as well as the fact that many Jewish lives could have been saved, were it not for their narrow-minded, tunnel-visioned agenda: the establishment of the State of Israel, at all costs, in the midst of a predominantly Arab environment, where they must have known that it would be a constant source of confrontation. Remember what Albert Einstein said? I’ve already quoted it, above. In my opinion, exposing Zionism is far from being anti-Semitic, because it is their agenda which is fostering anti-Semitism. Just take a look at what they are proposing.

No other event, to my knowledge, has ever been made the subject of an attempted international gag order, criminalising, on pain of extradition and imprisonment, the act of publicly expressing any doubts about whether the Zionist’s version of the Holocaust is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (although I’ll bet Dogsmilk can find one).

Doesn’t that ring any alarm bells? Jesus H. Christ, these people want to extradite us to their stolen state, and put us on trial for suggesting that the Holocaust story could do with a little polishing to expose some of the myths and exaggerations—if not any bare-faced lies—and to find out why it happened in the first place. I’ve said it before, but it is worth repeating, because it doesn’t seem to be sinking in:

What Are They Trying to Hide?

Which is why I wrote, in my original post:

Could there have been other solutions to Hitler’s ‘Jewish Problem’? Solutions which were not acceptable to certain foreign Zionists, because it might have blocked the establishment of a Jewish state?

Whatever the answers, they will never become general knowledge, as long as the truth is being covered up in favour of the version which, apparently, allows the Israelis to ‘holocaust’ the Palestinians, which they started doing a long, long time ago, and which they continue to do, with apparent impunity, under the ridiculous proposition that the land they keep stealing had, long ago, been pledged to them by ‘God’.

I asked the question in the first paragraph, above, because I know that there were other possible solutions, but they were not acceptable to the Zionists. In fact I’d hoped that someone out there might have come up with the same references that I have, but no one did.

One ‘final’ solution of Hitler’s—and many historians believe that what he meant by ‘final solution’ was exile, not death—was that the island of Madagascar be turned into the new ‘Promised Land,’ because, at the time, Hitler was getting on well with the Arabs (most of whom couldn’t stand the British), and didn’t want to rock that particular boat by allowing hundreds of thousands of Jews to immigrate to Palestine.

It is unfashionable to regard Adolph Hitler as having been an evil genius, these days; the evil bit is okay, but thinking of him as a genius could get the Nazi-sympathiser label firmly stuck to you. So how about ‘an evil, but not unintelligent opportunist’? He had, after all, risen from being a mere corporal to become a charismatic leader, idolised by many ordinary Germans because he’d raised their country from the ashes of defeat and the effects of the financially-devastating war reparations imposed by her conquerors, into a nation which could hold its head high, once more, on the international stage. These war reparations, by the way, would, eventually, re-line the pockets of the financiers and bankers who simply revel in war, as well as the preparations for them, because there is so much money to be made from both sides—the eventual winners and the losers, alike. Let’s face it, the economies of Britain and the U.S. would go into deep recession, if the arms-export business hit a slump.

So here is Hitler, in 1933, newly appointed Chancellor of the Third Reich, when war is declared on Germany. No, I haven’t got the date wrong, the following headline appeared in The March 24, 1933 issue of The Daily Express, London:

JUDEA DECLARES WAR ON GERMANY

JEWS OF ALL THE WORLD UNITE
BOYCOTT OF GERMAN GOODS
MASS DEMONSTRATIONS

No need to take my word for it, there’s a picture of the newspaper’s front page. Go to: http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/script ... ecwar.html

This article, from the Barnes Review, for January/February 2001 includes the following:

Long before the Hitler government began restricting the rights of the German Jews, the leaders of the worldwide Jewish community formally declared war on the "New Germany" at a time when the U.S. government and even the Jewish leaders in Germany were urging caution in dealing with the new Hitler regime.

The war by the international Jewish leadership on Germany not only sparked definite reprisals by the German government but also set the stage for a little-known economic and political alliance between the Hitler government and the leaders of the Zionist movement who hoped that the tension between the Germans and the Jews would lead to massive emigration to Palestine. In short, the result was a tactical alliance between the Nazis and the founders of the modern-day state of Israel - a fact that many today would prefer be forgotten.

To this day, it is generally (although incorrectly) believed that when Adolf Hitler was appointed German chancellor in January of 1933, the German government began policies to suppress the Jews of Germany, including rounding up of Jews and putting them in concentration camps and launching campaigns of terror and violence against the domestic Jewish population.

So, where was I? Oh, yes. Hitler was not a stupid man, and he had a big problem: An economic boycott had been imposed on Germany, by Jews who were not actually living there, so, what to do with those who were? In fact, for quite a number of years he did very little, however, as it became clear that his war plans were nearing the point where a lot of manpower would be needed, for the manufacture of war materials, you know, labour intensive stuff like guns, bullets, uniforms, bombs, submarines, ships, aircraft and such like, and, being unsure of the loyalty of German Jews, what would his most likely solution have been, in order to solve both problems in one hit:

a) gas all the Jews? or

b) make use of them as workers?

There are a number of things which suggests that Hitler chose solution (b). Here is one which I believe to be eminently plausible.

Auschwitz was the site of Germany's newest and most technologically advanced synthetic rubber plant; and Germany was the world's leader in this particular field of technology. Shortly after the war [began] the Germans were cut off from their supply of natural rubber. In the months that followed they set about building our own synthetic rubber plants.

Auschwitz was a major work camp that had forty different industries. The true reason for the existence of the Auschwitz camp is revealed in these little shown pictures of the industrial complex which surrounded the camp - most of it within full view of the interior of the camp itself.

Right [reference to picture] The Monowitz industrial complex, where most of Auschwitz's inmates were put to work in a variety of heavy industries, ranging from rubber manufacture, medical supplies, armaments and, as illustrated in the picture right, clothing. This photograph shows the tailor's workshop at Auschwitz 1, where prisoners would make up clothing for use by the German army.
http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Auschwitz/truth.htm

But why were there so many deaths? Typhus. What were Zyklon-B and the ‘gas chambers’ used for. Delousing clothes, because typhus, among other diseases, is carried by lice and fleas.

Why do Zionists want us to believe that Hitler had a specific extermination plan, to gas and cremate or bury as many Jews as possible? Because no one would then believe that they, the Zionists, could possibly have been hand-in glove with Hitler in his quest to exterminate their own co-religionists. In the lead up to the war, the Zionists wanted Hitler to deport the German Jews, but Hitler had made deals and pacts with the Arabs—to do with oil, what else?—which prevented him from allowing them to immigrate to Palestine, which clearly upset the Zionist’s ‘Promised Land’ agenda, so they refused to allow any alternative arrangements to be made; Palestine, or bust. So to speak.

Read again, a few sections from Nathan Milstein’s letter to Jeff Rense:

Thanks to Lenni Brenner, we now know that the Nazis had agreed to give all Jews safe passage out of Europe in 1942-43 for the paltry sum of $2 million dollars.

However, when top Rabbis went to Switzerland to world Zionist headquarters and asked for the money, the Zionists told them NO and to paraphrase the quote from Brenner: "Unless large amounts of Jewish blood is spilled during the war, we won't be able to so easily secure our new homeland in Palestine after the war."

So, in a pivotal sense, the Zionists were ultimately responsible for the Holocaust - as it was they who decided this catastrophe of death and suffering in the War had to continue to serve THEIR purposes. They sacrificed us - 'burnt offerings' - and they are still using us and Judaism today. Read it and weep. (emphases added)
http://www.rense.com/general31/Zionist.htm

But the ‘burnt offerings’ would appear to have been those who died of disease and were cremated, rather than having been deliberately gassed to death, because it would not have made sense for Hitler to destroy an essential workforce, for purely ideological reasons, while fighting a war on two fronts. Hitler may have been evil, but he wasn’t stupid.

I have further references, but I know that there are those who find this tiresome, so I’ll save them for later, should anyone request further substantiation of Hitler’s concern to keep his slave labourers fit and well, not to mention: Alive!

Stelios wrote:

mate, zionism is the bogeyman
…

zionism is the number one problem in the world today and has caused more deaths than any other political ideology

Relative to the world’s population, at the time, I’m not sure that it beats the scourge of the Papist-inspired Crusades or the Jesuit-lead decimation and enslavement of the original populations of the New World. But, just as the threat of eternal damnation was and remains Catholicism’s greatest weapon, Stelious might well have added that:

Zionism’s most powerful weapon is The Holocaust Story.

Ian,

With the best will in the world, the Holocaust cannot be extricated from an examination of the Zionist agenda.

Anthony Lawson wrote:........Doesn’t that ring any alarm bells? Jesus H. Christ, these people want to extradite us to their stolen state, and put us on trial for suggesting that the Holocaust story could do with a little polishing to expose some of the myths and exaggerations—if not any bare-faced lies—and to find out why it happened in the first place. I’ve said it before, but it is worth repeating, because it doesn’t seem to be sinking in:

What Are They Trying to Hide?

Difficult and, sadly, dangerous arguments......very well put.

Excellent post Andrew.

I have never heard the comparison made between 'The Holocaust' and the Catholic Church's (and Christianity's ?) doctrine of eternal damnation.....this is a very interesting point.

As a Catholic I can tell anyone who wants to know that the idea of 'eternal damnation' weighs very heavily on sensitive and well-intentioned minds. Speaking to Schizophrenics who fear that they are possessed by a/the Devil one can come to understand their illness as being the result of their own spiritual attack on (or rejection of) themselves in response to some real or imagined sin on their part. The motive behind this psychic suicide is invariably the fear (however irrational to the outsider) of eternal damnation.

There may be, like the Holocaust, some truth in the 'damnation' story....i.e. in this case the soul's belief that it can become lost to God, even eternally.

This is deep water indeed and I am not trying to start a new discussion....

....However, thanks again for your post Anthony. Those comments about the Holocaust etc. really needed saying. This remains an issue that we must not allow Zionism/Israel to have the last word on. It still retains the power, being a cover for all kinds of other agendas (promoted by people who are often not Jewish at all), to destroy us all.

the Zionist’s version of the Holocaust is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (although I’ll bet Dogsmilk can find one).

He already has posted his "fact" that when world Jewry declared war on Germany in 1933 it was in response to Hitler's targetting of Jews and threats to eradicate them. bs of course, but if it is said often enough.......

I'm sorry if the examples I gave don't fit people's favourite atrocity - I would certainly not get into debating 'which atrocity is best?' - though maybe someone should start a poll thread on the matter?
I am curious as to why DD didn't think Colombia, as a US client state, is nothing to do with 'our' atrocities or says I should have listed Indonesia but not Aceh or West Papua...er, so who exactly is responsible for goings on there if not Indonesia? (apart from us for arming them of course) Also, if Zionism is the bogey man, quite where stuff like Cambodia fits into the big Zionist plot is beyond me. Or were Pol Pot and his Western military trainers Jewish?

No other event, to my knowledge, has ever been made the subject of an attempted international gag order, criminalising, on pain of extradition and imprisonment, the act of publicly expressing any doubts about whether the Zionist’s version of the Holocaust is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (although I’ll bet Dogsmilk can find one).

Aha! Though not international, if you look further up the thread, you'll notice in one of my posts reference to a comparable national one! So, not exactly, but kinda beat you to it! Those Armenians were just making it up - it's a big plot by 'world Armenianry'!

He already has posted his "fact" that when world Jewry declared war on Germany in 1933 it was in response to Hitler's targetting of Jews and threats to eradicate them. bs of course, but if it is said often enough.....

Yes - I'm sure if Nick Griffin were elected Prime Minister, or even getting close, 'world muslimry' would take a 'hands off, wait and see' stance and give the fella a chance.
If you don't mind, I shall stick to my 'bs' and naively fail to blame 'Zionists' for every bad thing in this world.

I am taking a break from this forum for a while, so I'll leave you crazy kids to it - have fun!

Except to say - Stelios - since you're posting on this thread, you still haven't confirmed if you disregard the lovely films I posted for you on the 'animals' thread as being of 'extra-terrestrial' origins. I was just wondering if you dismissed them as being from outer space or not.

Yes - I'm sure if Nick Griffin were elected Prime Minister, or even getting close, 'world muslimry' would take a 'hands off, wait and see' stance and give the fella a chance.
If you don't mind, I shall stick to my 'bs'

Like I said - if you say it often enough.....

If "world muslimry" were screwing the UK into the ground maybe the UK would elect Nick Griffin as Prime Minister with glee. It only takes "world muslimry" to be framed with a few false flag atrocities, plus some dodgy dossiers and suspicious murders, and hundreds of thousands of them are slaughtered in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hitler eat your heart out!!

Dogsmilk wrote:Except to say - Stelios - since you're posting on this thread, you still haven't confirmed if you disregard the lovely films I posted for you on the 'animals' thread as being of 'extra-terrestrial' origins. I was just wondering if you dismissed them as being from outer space or not.

send me a PM and we can discuss whatever you want.
In my books you lost all crediilty by using alien abduction and mutilation photos as an argument against eating meat.
And what that has to do with your posts in this topic most of which have huge holes in it.
Answer this question directly
Do u believe hitler killed 6 million jews unassisted
or
do you now accept the overwhelming evidence that zionists financed and supported hitler and indeed contributed to the slaughter of religious mainly orthodox jews and that although the eventual numbers were large they were much less than 6 million. And therefore zionists are as much to blame for the holocaust because without their money germany was bankrupt in 1929-1933.

If our kids are to be taught history it must be complete and true history not a hollywood version

Yes. yes Stelios, there were no gas chambers, Zionists were behind Pol Pot and the corpses you gnaw were sung gentle lullabies, held by the hoof and felt naught but a little prick as they drifted away. Though I'd have to say Hitler certainly didn't kill 6 million people unassisted - he had people to do that for him.
Why do you want me to pm you for some private chinwag? In case you have any funny ideas, I must make it very clear - I simply do not feel that way about you and am already in a relationship.

Rather than get drawn back into debates, I just wanted to pop back as I thought you guys might like this - it's a doc about Fred Leucter - about him not revisionism so doesn't go into detail about 'the evidence' and about the first twenty minutes or so is about electric chairs. It's pretty interesting and very balanced.

[GVideo]http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?doc ... q=mr+death[/GVideo]

Anyway, before I start sounding like Though Criminal constantly threatening to leave, I really must definitely be off.

Cheerio!

blackcat wrote:

Yes - I'm sure if Nick Griffin were elected Prime Minister, or even getting close, 'world muslimry' would take a 'hands off, wait and see' stance and give the fella a chance.
If you don't mind, I shall stick to my 'bs'

Like I said - if you say it often enough.....

If "world muslimry" were screwing the UK into the ground maybe the UK would elect Nick Griffin as Prime Minister with glee. It only takes "world muslimry" to be framed with a few false flag atrocities, plus some dodgy dossiers and suspicious murders, and hundreds of thousands of them are slaughtered in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hitler eat your heart out!!

Yea and us being Nazi sympathizers are really towing the line?
There are a lot more to these questions than being privy to some National Socialist movement! Or any political faction for that matter!
It is more to do with whether you believe Genocide was an integral part of Nazi doctrine/society (which as you already know I doubt) and whether you believe all humans are capable of such horrors (which again I doubt, unless extreme circumstances dictate otherwise)
Don't get me wrong though I'm quite sure there are plenty of Brits out there willing to crush Muslim skulls but to say they are the mainstay of Blairite Britain is quite an over statement don't you think???

Whaterver-isms

kbo234, sadly, the allegedly Gentle Jesus, meek and mild… who many of us learned about in Sunday School, was hijacked, a long time ago, by people with similar kinds of agendas as those of today’s Zionists. Much the same goes for just about every religion you can think of, although one or two may have been blatantly about control, right from the get go.

The terrible thing is that many people come to rely on the teachings of the hijackers—in hostage situations this is known as Stockholm Syndrome transference—and it can tear them apart, almost literally, as in the sad cases of people believing that they are being controlled by the ‘Devil’. What they are being controlled by, of course, is some of the viler teachings of the particular ism which has them in its thrall.

Perhaps you know the story about the little boy who was transferred to a Catholic school, because his parents thought that it might help overcome his scholastic laziness. When he gets home, after the first day, they have to tear him away from his homework, to make him go to bed at about midnight. Same thing the next day, and the next. Eventually, they ask him why he’s changed so much. ‘Well,’ he says, ‘They say that you’ll be punished, if you don’t get your homework right.’ ‘What kind of punishment?’ his parents ask. ‘Well I don’t know what he got so wrong, replies the boy, but it was probably his maths, because they've nailed this poor guy to a big plus sign, and hung it on the wall.’

That is what control is all about. Fear. The Zionists want to frighten us into seeing things their way. They didn’t seem to care about the suffering of the German Jews, as Lenni Brenner sees it: the ‘blood’ of some German Jews was necessary in order to produce the kind of sympathy required to convince others that the world owed them Palestein. (That really was a typo, but I’m leaving it in, because it fits.)

You write that these are “Difficult and, sadly, dangerous arguments....” and you are correct, but the world will be a far more dangerous place, for our children, if the arguement are not heard. Even worse, if their warnings are not heeded

Blackcat makes a good point, which illustrates the Biblical proverb: ‘Cometh the hour, cometh the man’. I hope it doesn’t fall to someone like Nick Griffin to be ‘the man’, but, as with politics in the U.S., they all seem to be bought and paid for, these days, so the pressure group with the deepest pockets gets to call the tune.

They are off to a good start with Gordon Brown, in that area. (See my opening post on this topic.) What needs to be done is to put a stop to that kind of thing.

stelios wrote:

Dogsmilk wrote: Now you cannot play 'which atrocity is best' - that is ridiculous, but it does sometimes seem that Zionism is made into this bogeyman that transcends all others. Since I don't subscribe to any of that 'Jews rule the world' nonsense, I just sometimes wonder why Palestine is the only atrocity people seem to get righteously indignant about round here. I can only stress - I'm not trying to 'downplay' Israeli actions, it just sometimes seems like Israeli shenannigans are seen as the lynchpin of everything. Personally, I think the arms companies, neocons and globalist capitalism are a bigger global problem than Zionists, but that's just me.

mate, zionism is the bogeyman
it is the mother and father of many conflicts in the last 100 years
many millions have died as a result which far exceeds all other causes of wars, it is laughable for you to claim the mainstream media which is 99% pro zionist makes it out to be the bogeyman, far from it they do their best to justify and apologise for it.
Why is a palestinian freedom fighter known as a terrorist in fact why are Iraqi resistance known as insurgents?
Why are labour mps who oppose the war known as rebels?
Why is a democratically elected palestinian official instantly assasinated by Israel every time a new one is elected and this is not condemned by the 99% pro zionist media

i am surprised at your examples
Burma, Colombia, Aceh, West Papua, Uzbekistan
you are comparing these to be equal to zionism
it is laughable
even if u had picked better examples such as bosnia, cambodia, armenia, kurdistan, you would still come up short

zionism is the number one problem in the world today and has caused more deaths than any other political ideology

I don't believe any one on this thread is defending the crimes of the Israeli state, but Israel has not caused more deaths than say the US

If we are talking about the deaths caused by the US empire then I know that it can be argued that influential supporters of Israel also support and strongly influence US foriegn policy (the zionists of PNAC and AIPAC, etc). But unless you can show me how these 'zionists' are more influential than other secretative and influential groups (such as skulls and bones society to give just one example) that shape the american empire, it is plain untrue to say zionism has caused more deaths than any other political ideology.

But in short my main problem with this argument and all those who bang on about zionism, is you are using the wrong word.

If you want a word that brings to together and unites all the different isms that the PTB have invented to, that is ism is fascism, which I take to be the fussion of military, government, industrial/business and media power. In short the military industrial complex. It is this concentration and abuse of power in the hands of a few that unites Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Bush crime family and on and on.

This crime nexus is global and the word 'zionism' does not even come close to capturing it. Indeed to keep banging on about zionism and Israel is to fall straight in to the hands of the PTB which is running a conserted effort to link 911 truth with 'anti-semiticism'.

Our aim must be to undermine the lies of 'western democracies' and 'the international community': to expose them as the servants of fascists that they truly are. In reference to WWII, the way to do this is to focus on the links between Hitler and the US before, during and after the war. Focussing on the holocaust is entirely counter-productive, since most causal readers will assume that 'holocaust deniers' are in effect hitler apologists and neo-nazis.

Anthony Lawson wrote:[Zionism’s most powerful weapon is The Holocaust Story.

Ian,

With the best will in the world, the Holocaust cannot be extricated from an examination of the Zionist agenda.

The holocaust is a very powerful weapon, agreed

But we are in an information war, in which issues need to be introduced in a certain order IMO.

In the same way that I would argue that the way to gain mass support for 911 truth is start off with the mainstream arguments: those presented by 911 Press for Truth before moving onto more contentious areas, the same is true with zionism.

To my mind you were spot on in recommending http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/ as a starting point for this debate. I would flag up the current day crimes of Israel and known Israeli flase flag operations (eg USS Liberty), but do so alongside other examples of high state crimes and false flag terror, so that it is clear that the message is not just focussed on Israel but all sponsors of state terrorism

When there is widespread acceptance that Israel is actually a criminal state on a par with apartheid south africa, then the time will be right to revisit the holocaust. And in examining it, these are the arguments to look at

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antis ... /index.cfm

When the holocaust and zionism is placed in proper context and as part of a movement that exposes a great many other secrets and high crimes then we have a chance to unite people around the world against the NWO criminals. But if the focus is solely on zionism and the 'holohoax' that message will not unite global opinion. Instead it will divide it and create more ethinic and religious tension. In the end we would end up doing the PTB's work for them. At the end of the day zionism is but one layer of the onion. If the PTB are trying to raise the holocaust higher up the education agenda (and I believe they are), they are doing so for a reason.

Just as in 30's germany, it now suits their bigger picture agenda to stoke the flames of anti-semiticism and hatred, to polarise opinions and give rise to neo-nazism/BNP in this country and raising the holocaust up the agenda is part of this agenda.

Let's take great care in how 'we' respond to this agenda and know that they are trying to trap us. We should all be aware that the ADL is crying out for more evidence that will allow them to portray 9/11 truth = anti-semiticism

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASInt_13/4346_13.htm