A poster asked me the following question and I'm posting it here out of respect to the general politics of the site. best to keep arguments over here, I think.

One question though... do you believe the holocaust is a true military account of it's officers? You said that the nigger accounts were true and you believe that cuz of the clarity of the reporting. If that's the case then you believe that 6 million jews were murdered by the Nazis.

Yes or no?



No.

I don’t believe in the “Holocaust” AS PACKAGED AND SOLD.

But . . . I think the Germans were responsible for the death of millions of Eastern Europeans, Ukrainians and Russians, and that a lot of these died in camps. But a massive, camp-based killing machine that murdered 6 million? No.

I use to believe the story completely. I grew up in the 60s and back then it was just accepted but it wasn’t called the “Holocaust.”

Some things later made me change my mind:

1) While studying the military campaign in Galicia between Russia and Austro-Hungary (1914-1916) I read about how American Jewish leaders were trying to build support for a Jewish Palestinian state based on the Balfour Declaration. They described the “holocaust” of Jews killed in Galicia . . . and I even saw the figure: 6 million. That's almost 30 years before the Nuremberg Trials. That was too much coincidence.

2) I started learning about the sources of much of the trial evidence and they seemed pretty flimsy. It’s hard to beat emotional witness testimony and there is a lot of it. But a confession from a German prisoner of war in a Russian prison? Or one single paper report being the only source of documentation for the Wannsee Conference? That’s not evidence . . . that's garbage.

3) The use of films taken during the last few weeks of the war to sell the idea that this was “how it always was” was clear trickery. I’ve studied the Confederate prisoner of war system, especially Andersonville Prison. I just see too much resemblance between liberated Union prisoners and liberated camp inmates. It’s what happens in prisons when the flow of resources dries up. The use of films shot in April 1945 to imply that this is how it was always, is classic propaganda.

4) Finally, the adjustment of numbers at Auschwitz in 1990 . . . when that didn’t trigger a change in the “6 million” that was it for me. As I understand it, the original estimate of 4 million from the Soviets is now down to slightly over 1 million. Yet there’s no change in the final 6 million number? That’s garbage.


I think the truth lies somewhere between two ideas:

a) The Germans (both directly and indirectly) killed a shit-load of civilians. I wouldn't be surprised if they did kill 6 million (not Jews, but civilians) in the Wermacht's rear area. Given the demographics in Poland and the Ukraine a lot would have been Jews.

The distance from Berlin to Moscow is roughly the same as Washington, DC to Dallas, TX. With the front line reaching Moscow in 1941, that meant the Germans had a huge security challenge on their hands . . . the same as securing the US from the Mississippi River to the East Coast. Plus, they had to organize human labor in the area for work in camps and factories.

I think the Einsatzgruppen and other security forces probably killed partisans and civilians in the millions. I think the executions at Babi Yar, the destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto, and a lot of other killings happened.

I also think a huge number of camp inmates died of starvation and disease.

But I don’t believe that there were actual extermination camps. I think that’s pure propaganda.


. . . and . . .


b) I believe that the Jews, specifically Zionists, have greatly exaggerated the numbers to extort money and gain political support for Israeli independence.


CONCLUSION: I would not be surprised if the Germans killed 6 million or more and if that included millions of Jews. That's no different than what happened in Galicia during World War One when the Jews were caught in a massive war zone where both sides were anti-Semitic.

But extermination camps? No. Pure propaganda.

I also think a huge number of camp inmates died of starvation and disease.

That is the bulk of the number there. Because of Allied bombing and anexation of food/supplies many jews died that were in the camps.

You should do a search in "titles only" for the word "holocaust" on this forum. There is a mass of info that you prolly don't have yet.

One of the most important factors is that there weren't even 6 million jews in central Europe at that time. AND the census figures from '33 to '45 only suggest that half of a million died.

Of course the doctored photos are the icing on the gefelte fish.

not all were killed by the germans, and in fairness germany actually assisted many jews to get to palestine before shit hit the fan...some 40k or so I blieve...when england wasn't letting them in still.

As far as the actual figure, I don't think it matters TBH...

It was war, people die in war.

International law and treaties provide for the execution of partisans and for reprisals against civilians who harbor partisans. Any civilians who act against occupying military forces should understand that they endanger the lives of many over and above themselves. That is a fact of war.

not all were killed by the germans, .

So your a Holocaust denier now.
Okay, It will be remembered.

I told you ones, monkey, you're a brainless troll. No chance you're Jewish.

So your a Holocaust denier now.
Okay, It will be remembered.

I told you ones, monkey, you're a brainless troll. No chance you're Jewish.

What????
lmfao
where did I deny the holocaust please show me.

I stated facts only.

Plenty of jews were killed by those other than the germans.
Germany did help many jews reach Palestine prior to outbreak of world wars.
You really are a dumb shit aren't you?

Faceless you might want to read this.

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/freedman.htm

Not sure as to how truthful all of it is...or if it is authentic even, but it will make one think to say the least...

Call me self-hater or troll all u want.
Fact is its ppl like u that give all of us jews a bad name.
You think no jew can do any wrong
you think anyone not jewish is inferior
You give them a reason to hate us...

not all were killed by the germans, and in fairness germany actually assisted many jews to get to palestine before shit hit the fan...some 40k or so I blieve...when england wasn't letting them in still.

As far as the actual figure, I don't think it matters TBH...

It was war, people die in war.

Finally, a reasonable assessment from you.

Finally, a reasonable assessment from you.

red dots then pls! =p

What????
lmfao
where did I deny the holocaust please show me.

I stated facts only.

Plenty of jews were killed by those other than the germans.
Germany did help many jews reach Palestine prior to outbreak of world wars.
You really are a dumb shit aren't you?

Why won't you go and feed the jellyfishes in hell with your stinking Nazi corpse?

red dots then pls! =p

Sorry Zmei.. er Ze'ev, I can't just yet.

Why won't you go and feed the jellyfishes in hell with your stinking Nazi corpse?

wtf? :mad:

:rofl

I told you ones, monkey, you're a brainless troll. No chance you're Jewish.

This post makes you somewhat questionable, imo.:rofl

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showpost.php?p=522222&postcount=54

It is pretty clear you didn't understood it. It is not your fault , you read English and you think that this article is written in the English language but it is actually written in some kind of jewspeak , which is less a language of words but more of energies. It is like the Orot or the Lurian Kabbalism. It seems to be written in Hebrew, yet , the true meaning is obscured by the words.

lol @ bickering jews

the standard of being a jew includes whether or not you buy into every kosherized detail of the holyhoax. ROFL.

This post makes you somewhat questionable, imo.:rofl



why is that?

International law and treaties provide for the execution of partisans and for reprisals against civilians who harbor partisans. Any civilians who act against occupying military forces should understand that they endanger the lives of many over and above themselves. That is a fact of war.

Please cite the international law that allowed for reprisal killings or killings of unarmed combatants that had been captured.

That is the bulk of the number there. Because of Allied bombing and anexation of food/supplies many jews died that were in the camps.


Starvation and disease did not become rampant until mid 1945.

Auschwitz was liberated in January 1945.


You should do a search in "titles only" for the word "holocaust" on this forum. There is a mass of info that you prolly don't have yet.


Yeah - use VNN as an impartial source.


One of the most important factors is that there weren't even 6 million jews in central Europe at that time. AND the census figures from '33 to '45 only suggest that half of a million died.


And who said anything about central Europe? Germany did conquer Eastern Europe and much of Russia correct?

And I'd love to see these mythical census figures ... can you point to them?



Of course the doctored photos are the icing on the gefelte fish.

:confused:

Please cite the international law that allowed for reprisal killings or killings of unarmed combatants that had been captured.

The basic idea is contained in the Geneva Conventions.

Here's a quote from the U.S. Military that gives an interpretation of the Laws of Armed Combat:

Unlawful Combatants. Unlawful combatants are individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so. For example, bandits who rob and plunder and civilians who attack a downed airman are unlawful combatants. Unlawful combatants who engage in hostilities violate LOAC and become lawful targets. They may be killed or wounded and, if captured, may be tried as war criminals for their LOAC violations.

Here's the link:

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/loac_2.htm


Reprisals can be ordered (by the U.S. Military as an example) by field officers of the rank of General.

Here's some discussion of reprisals:


In warfare, a reprisal is a limited and deliberate violation of the laws of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war) to punish an enemy for breaking the laws of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war). A legally executed reprisal is not an atrocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocity).
To be legally justified, a reprisal can only be directed against the party carrying out the original violation, can only be carried out as a last resort, after having given formal notice of the planned reprisal, must be proportionate to the original violation, must have the aim of persuading the original violator to comply with the legally accepted behaviour in future, and must not continue after the illegal behaviour ends.
Circumstances usually dictate that reprisals can only be taken against people innocent of the original violation...


Here's the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprisal


As far as killing captured unarmed combatants goes, see James Bacque's 1989 monograph Other Losses for anlysis of "Ike" Eisenhower's 1945-46 program of killing a million or so "disarmed enemy forces" through exposure and starvation. Nobody's complained, so it must be OK.

Unlawful Combatants. Unlawful combatants are individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so. For example, bandits who rob and plunder and civilians who attack a downed airman are unlawful combatants. Unlawful combatants who engage in hostilities violate LOAC and become lawful targets. They may be killed or wounded and, if captured, may be tried as war criminals for their LOAC violations.

I think this law is stupid. What if the jews attacked Lebanon again and a jew pilot of a jew plane who was bombing schools and hospitals as jews typically do crashed to the ground for some reason, perhaps hit by a missile shot by the Hezz?

What if the Lebanese civilians who had just recently watched their friends and relatives get ripped apart by jew cluster bombs all converged on the downed plane and captured the still living jew pilot and executed him?

Would these Lebanese be war criminals? No, they would be admirable heroes doing the world a favor by ridding it of a sheeny piece of shit.

The basic idea is contained in the Geneva Conventions.

Here's a quote from the U.S. Military that gives an interpretation of the Laws of Armed Combat:

Unlawful Combatants. Unlawful combatants are individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so. For example, bandits who rob and plunder and civilians who attack a downed airman are unlawful combatants. Unlawful combatants who engage in hostilities violate LOAC and become lawful targets. They may be killed or wounded and, if captured, may be tried as war criminals for their LOAC violations.

Here's the link:

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/loac_2.htm


Reprisals can be ordered (by the U.S. Military as an example) by field officers of the rank of General.

Here's some discussion of reprisals:


In warfare, a reprisal is a limited and deliberate violation of the laws of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war) to punish an enemy for breaking the laws of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war). A legally executed reprisal is not an atrocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrocity).
To be legally justified, a reprisal can only be directed against the party carrying out the original violation, can only be carried out as a last resort, after having given formal notice of the planned reprisal, must be proportionate to the original violation, must have the aim of persuading the original violator to comply with the legally accepted behaviour in future, and must not continue after the illegal behaviour ends.
Circumstances usually dictate that reprisals can only be taken against people innocent of the original violation...


Here's the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reprisal


As far as killing captured unarmed combatants goes, see James Bacque's 1989 monograph Other Losses for anlysis of "Ike" Eisenhower's 1945-46 program of killing a million or so "disarmed enemy forces" through exposure and starvation. Nobody's complained, so it must be OK.


Interesting, but when did I ask about unlawful combatants? Is it your claim that the vast thousands executed by the eitzengruppen were unlawful combatants simply because they were Jewish? I asked unarmed combatants who had been captured.

And why did you exclude this from your citation??

"All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties, shipwreck survivors, prisoners of war and civilians, as well as certain buildings and property. An additional 1977 protocol extends this to cover historic monuments, works of art and places of worship."

And for the record, in the US generals do not have the authority, its generals in command of a theater.

Interesting, but when did I ask about unlawful combatants? Is it your claim that the vast thousands executed by the eitzengruppen were unlawful combatants simply because they were Jewish? I asked unarmed combatants who had been captured.

And why did you exclude this from your citation??

"All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties, shipwreck survivors, prisoners of war and civilians, as well as certain buildings and property. An additional 1977 protocol extends this to cover historic monuments, works of art and places of worship."

And for the record, in the US generals do not have the authority, its generals in command of a theater.

Do you have trouble reading?

You asked about "unarmed combatants who had been captured." The definition cited (you asked for a cite) states that unlawful combatants are "...individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so." Whether a combatant is armed or not at any particular time is immaterial to his status as an unlawful combatant, which is determined purely by his authority (or absence thereof) to participate directly in hostilities.

The general term used to describe civilians who engage occupying (or invading) military forces in hostile or combat situations is, of course, "partisans": "a member of a guerrilla band operating within enemy lines." That's what I'm discussing here. Try reading the material presented, and you will see that partisans do not, under the Geneva Conventions (nor do they in practice ever), enjoy the protections afforded to civilians. Partisans and civilians have very diferent status, and in all theaters of war (as was cited:rolleyes:) partisans may be executed and reprisals made against those who harbor partisans.

You quibble about the level of authority required under U.S. military (offering to set the record straight) and state that [only?] generals "in command of a theater" have authority to order reprisals, when my post was that "Reprisals can be ordered (by the U.S. Military as an example) by field officers of the rank of General." Would you care to provide a cite that distinguishes between "field officers of the rank of General" and "generals in command of a theater" and that clarifies the differences and distinctions as they pertain to ordering reprisals?

As to your question, "Is it your claim that the vast thousands executed by the eitzengruppen [sic] were unlawful combatants simply because they were Jewish?" I find its construction absurd. I make no specific claim as to either the activities of the Einsatzgruppen or the ethnicities in general of those who were executed by their activities. The principal function of the Einsatzgruppen was to surpress partisan activity, and to the extent that their actions were directed to that end - and, indeed, to reprisals against those who harbored partisans - then their activity was consistent with international law and was no different from the actions taken by military commanders everywhere against partisans who have engaged their forces. There is little doubt that German military units operating in and east of the Government General encountered significant partisan casualties and harrassment.

[quote=Slamin2;736311]Starvation and disease did not become rampant until mid 1945.



You are lying.

However, speaking of death and starvation and destruction attendent to war and, concentration camps;



One fraudulent bill of goods that is constantly sold to a gullible public - namely that the concentration camps of Germany were somehow unique and original, both in their bestial conception and in their genocidal function - lies at the heart of moral condemnation.

That charge is not historically correct.

Nizkor claims: "We will not take part in this moral relativism, but will merely present the historical facts . . . and let the reader make up his or her own mind."

Why, kudos to your efforts! If done with honesty, that would be wonderful! That is precisely what we're asking! Revisionism has to do with bringing history in accord with the FACTS.

Nizkor does not have to reach back to the Boer Wars to see that concentration camps of unimaginable brutality existed in countries that were American Allies united only in the purpose of slaying Germany, ironically on "moral" grounds! - one of the many charges being that Germany had "concentration camps".

All Nizkor needs to do is to re-read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago about the Soviet Camps - just who created them and who administered them for the Stalinist Soviet Regime. Names like Yagoda, Frankl etc. come readily to mind - many if not most of whom were Jews. (More about that in QA # 9 (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/009_jam.html)) If concentration camps were the incentive to send Americans into that war, why not, then, go to war against the Soviet Union to "liberate" the Stalin camps! What's this bombast about "moral relativism"?

Nizkor's blatantly ignorant statement (dealt in detail in Question # 8 (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/008_jam.html), but really addressing itself to "moral relativism" in this question) is that, in part, ". . . The Americans did not starve millions of people to death. . ." by a deliberate policy of neglect and starvation."

Oh, yes, they did! You bet they did!


http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/sat-ngt1.jpg


One such series of camps were the infamous "Rhine Meadows (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/index.html)" camps run by the Eisenhower military Administration.

Go to your nearest library and check out the fairly recent and rather well-known book by Canadian author James Bacques who claims in his best selling book "Other Losses" that between 1 and 2 million Germans were deliberately killed in Eisenhower's death camps (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/index.html) after the war by deliberate neglect and starvation - after the end of hostilities, when no more supply trains were being bombed, no bridges and warehouses blown up, no water mains severed etc. The war had ended! James Bacque has since published another book entitled "Of Crimes and Mercies", which goes into even more grusome details.

Yet Germany's concentration camps are always portrayed as ". . . man's darkest hour." Nothing could be farther from the truth.

That more people died - not only in German concentration camps during World War II but in all concentration camps during and after that period - is true. There were simply more people and nations involved in World War II; therefore, it stands to reason there would be many more casualties.


http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/sat-ngt2.jpg..http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/graphics/auschwitz-barracks.jpg

Compare for yourself: [left] Germans prisoners of war living in holes in the ground, hardly any food or shelter and no heat in the winter, with [right] so-called inhumanity of the Auschwitz Barracks with mowed lawns, heated barracks, comfortable beds, flush toilets, running water, and even a swimming pool for inmates. Who were the inhumane ones?


http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/graphics/auschwitz-pool.jpg

Auschwitz swimming pool from theGlobe and Mail - Canada's newspaper of record

Secondly, at no other time in history were the civilian population centers, transportation system, industrial production bases, railroads and bridges knocked out by a deliberate and near-genocidal bombing policy as happened to the German cities.

James J. Martin in his essay "The Bombing and Negotiated Peace - in 1944" mentions some remarkable facts which seem to have disappeared down the memory hole. They may bear being resurrected.

The following is direct citation from Martin's text:


". . . As for the total damage achieved in England by the Germans as compared to that achieved in Germany, the summary by Allen A. Michie, a one-time Time-Life reporter, in the Reader's Digest [of August 1945], is particularly dramatic and succinct:




"The combined damaged areas of London, Bristol and Coventry and all the blitzed cities of Britain could be dumped in the ruins of just one medium-sized German city and hardly be noticed. . . ".

It was politically correct to cite Coventry in the popular propaganda as the excuse for an obliteration strategy applied later on in Germany. Michie estimated that, by comparison, Berlin suffered 363 Coventrys; Cologne, 269; Hamburg, 200; and Bremen, 137.
Consider this: More bombs fell on Berlin in a single day than on England during all of the war!

Toward the end of the war, there simply was no way for Germany to organize and guarantee supplies and medication to the German concentration camps. The Allied aereal terrorists bombed everything that moved on German rails, rivers or roads - there simply was no way!

That is why many inmates died, largely of epicemics. And once again: NOT ONE OF THEM BY GASSING!

This story is told without words in the graph below:

http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/graphics/scale2.jpg

Dachau chart:


As a direct consequence of Allied bombings, people were horribly crowded together as Germany shrunk more and more and as deadly diseases and epidemics began to spread unchecked. One source has claimed that Dachau, built for 3,000 inmates, housed 50,000 inmates!

If Nizkor would honestly factor in all the above facts pertaining to the tragedy of the German concentration camps, particularly Dachau, a totally different picture would emerge. - Ernst Zundel

Source: http://www.zundelsite.org

[quote]


You are lying.


Dachau chart:


As a direct consequence of Allied bombings, people were horribly crowded together as Germany shrunk more and more and as deadly diseases and epidemics began to spread unchecked. One source has claimed that Dachau, built for 3,000 inmates, housed 50,000 inmates!

If Nizkor would honestly factor in all the above facts pertaining to the tragedy of the German concentration camps, particularly Dachau, a totally different picture would emerge. - Ernst Zundel

Source: http://www.zundelsite.org

You call me a liar when I say disease was not rampant until 1945 then post a chart showing exactly what I wrote - are you a moron or just ignorant?

And please explain why the chart claims it was repeated at Auschwitz when the camp was liberated in January 1945?

You call me a liar when I say disease was not rampant until 1945 then post a chart showing exactly what I wrote - are you a moron or just ignorant?

And please explain why the chart claims it was repeated at Auschwitz when the camp was liberated in January 1945?

You are lying. About more than disease and when it became rampant. The chart indicates Dachau specifically; I note that you do not refer to any of the other material in the post.

However, the bombing of German supply routes to not only the work camps; but to important cities within Germany as well did not occur post-war. Disease, typhus ect, and starvation inside the camps started well before 1945 and was due to genocidal and strategic Allied attacks. Even the most illiterate Holocaustian and jew is aware of this.

The rest of the information - including fotos [perhaps redundant to most on this Board] , as to the conditions of Allied camps for German Folk, post war, was set forth as reminder to the Reader; for as Herr Zundel had writ, these facts should not be forgotten or shoved aside by Holocaustian Liars

You are lying. About more than disease and when it became rampant. The chart indicates Dachau specifically; I note that you do not refer to any of the other material in the post.


Explain to us when and how disease was rampant at Auschwitz then.

In what camps were disease rampant and when?

Do you have trouble reading?


Nope


You asked about "unarmed combatants who had been captured." The definition cited (you asked for a cite) states that unlawful combatants are "...individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so." Whether a combatant is armed or not at any particular time is immaterial to his status as an unlawful combatant, which is determined purely by his authority (or absence thereof) to participate directly in hostilities.


What I asked was "Please cite the international law that allowed for reprisal killings or killings of unarmed combatants that had been captured."


The general term used to describe civilians who engage occupying (or invading) military forces in hostile or combat situations is, of course, "partisans": "a member of a guerrilla band operating within enemy lines." That's what I'm discussing here. Try reading the material presented, and you will see that partisans do not, under the Geneva Conventions (nor do they in practice ever), enjoy the protections afforded to civilians. Partisans and civilians have very diferent status, and in all theaters of war (as was cited:rolleyes:) partisans may be executed and reprisals made against those who harbor partisans.


"All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties, shipwreck survivors, prisoners of war and civilians"


You quibble about the level of authority required under U.S. military (offering to set the record straight) and state that [only?] generals "in command of a theater" have authority to order reprisals, when my post was that "Reprisals can be ordered (by the U.S. Military as an example) by field officers of the rank of General." Would you care to provide a cite that distinguishes between "field officers of the rank of General" and "generals in command of a theater" and that clarifies the differences and distinctions as they pertain to ordering reprisals?


Ike would be in command of the Theater - Patton was an army commander.

Though the US army is incorrect - reprisals are outlawed by the Geneva conventions.


As to your question, "Is it your claim that the vast thousands executed by the eitzengruppen [sic] were unlawful combatants simply because they were Jewish?" I find its construction absurd. I make no specific claim as to either the activities of the Einsatzgruppen or the ethnicities in general of those who were executed by their activities. The principal function of the Einsatzgruppen was to surpress partisan activity, and to the extent that their actions were directed to that end - and, indeed, to reprisals against those who harbored partisans - then their activity was consistent with international law and was no different from the actions taken by military commanders everywhere against partisans who have engaged their forces. There is little doubt that German military units operating in and east of the Government General encountered significant partisan casualties and harrassment.

From your link ...

"All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties, shipwreck survivors, prisoners of war and civilians"

:eek:

I wouldn't classify the execution of jews for the crimes of parasitism and nation/culture wrecking as "murder". However I do not believe 6 million of the bastards were executed, unfortunately.

Explain to us when and how disease was rampant at Auschwitz then.

You seem skeptical disease repeatedly swept through Auschwitz. Mainstream historians like Van Pelt don't even deny this. Auschwitz-Birkenau was probably hit the hardest, if nothing else due to its size. It also had serious fecal waste disposal problems.

Jews make bullshit claims that don't even make sense. I was reading yesterday, come across the neocon Kinsey-denouncer kiike Judith Riesman. She claims that hundreds of her relatives died in the Holocaust. The only way jews can get away with this kind of lie is that they know goyish brains shut down the minute they utter Holocaust. Think about it. How many people do you know who aren't African potentates who have "hundreds" of relatives? Let alone kikes who have about 1.1 kids per woman?

The Holocaust is a giant, obvious scam. The second you actually think about it, it disintegrates.

Jews make bullshit claims that don't even make sense. I was reading yesterday, come across the neocon Kinsey-denouncer kiike Judith Riesman. She claims that hundreds of her relatives died in the Holocaust.

First of all, they always quote all deaths by all causes during the war as holocaust deaths, even if they died of sepsis from an abcess. Then there is the Six Million Figure which has remained steady throughout the years in spite of frequently changing and conflicting population data.

You are lying.


I suspect he's really just that ignorant. Epidemics were certainly at their worst in late 44 thru spring 45, but they didn't start then. Coincidentally, one of the biggest (if not biggest) typhus epidemics to hit Auschwitz-Birkenau was in the summer of 42, timed with the alleged beginning of mass-gassings.

From your link ...

"All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties, shipwreck survivors, prisoners of war and civilians"


...still working on the reading comprehension:

All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties [not partisans], shipwreck survivors [not partisans], prisoners of war [not partisans] and civilians [not partisans]. E.G., in war there is a continuous "open season" on partisans, who enjoy no protection under the Geneva Conventions.

An interesting (and not entirely unrelated) aside on the Geneva Conventions is the fact that in WWII most of the combatant states were signatories with the notable exception of the USSR. As a consequence, POWs taken in the war in Europe were in large measure accorded the protections of the Conventions except for Soviet prisoners of the Germans and German prisoners of the Soviets. Prisoners of both sides taken on the "Eastern Front" were accorded the most barbarous treatment, and few survived. By contrast most other Allied prisoners taken by the Germans survived.

...still working on the reading comprehension:

All four Geneva Conventions prohibit reprisals against, respectively, battlefield casualties [not partisans], shipwreck survivors [not partisans], prisoners of war [not partisans] and civilians [not partisans]. E.G., in war there is a continuous "open season" on partisans, who enjoy no protection under the Geneva Conventions.

An interesting (and not entirely unrelated) aside on the Geneva Conventions is the fact that in WWII most of the combatant states were signatories with the notable exception of the USSR. As a consequence, POWs taken in the war in Europe were in large measure accorded the protections of the Conventions except for Soviet prisoners of the Germans and German prisoners of the Soviets. Prisoners of both sides taken on the "Eastern Front" were accorded the most barbarous treatment, and few survived. By contrast most other Allied prisoners taken by the Germans survived.

Lets just make this easy.

Do you agree with this statement as it relates to the military authority over territory of a hostile state?

"No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible. "

Lets just make this easy.

Do you agree with this statement as it relates to the military authority over territory of a hostile state?

"No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible. "

Let's make this morally consistent. The Allies practiced the same, even after the war. And today, Israel uses collective punishment as a tactic against the Arabs. Are we to listen to a lecture of the Evil Germans doing what other people do?

Let's make this morally consistent. The Allies practiced the same, even after the war. And today, Israel uses collective punishment as a tactic against the Arabs. Are we to listen to a lecture of the Evil Germans doing what other people do?

Did you see me justify this on behalf of the allies?

But I would like you to tell us when the allies did this during or after the war - I'm not claiming there were not allied war crimes, I just don't know what you are specifically referring to.

Did you see me justify this on behalf of the allies?

But I would like you to tell us when the allies did this during or after the war - I'm not claiming there were not allied war crimes, I just don't know what you are specifically referring to.

Collective punishments of whole populations. Israel does it today in the Occupied Territories.

Did you see me justify this on behalf of the allies?

But I would like you to tell us when the allies did this during or after the war - I'm not claiming there were not allied war crimes, I just don't know what you are specifically referring to.

You are claiming "consistency" in all matters; yet you continually practice jewish moral relativism. Is it any wonder that but a few of your inanities are addressed when you do this and not only that, also have the mind of sieve.

The Allies did plenty to the German Folk after the war, murder of civilians, rape of German women and girls, illegal detention of German Folk in camps wherein they were allowed to die - I will post again from Herr Zundel that which you elected to ignore from my prior post,




All Nizkor needs to do is to re-read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago about the Soviet Camps - just who created them and who administered them for the Stalinist Soviet Regime.

Names like Yagoda, Frankl etc. come readily to mind - many if not most of whom were Jews. (More about that in QA # 9 (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/009_jam.html)) If concentration camps were the incentive to send Americans into that war, why not, then, go to war against the Soviet Union to "liberate" the Stalin camps! What's this bombast about "moral relativism"?

Nizkor's blatantly ignorant statement (dealt in detail in Question # 8 (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/008_jam.html), but really addressing itself to "moral relativism" in this question) is that, in part, ". . . The Americans did not starve millions of people to death. . ." by a deliberate policy of neglect and starvation."

Oh, yes, they did! You bet they did!


http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/sat-ngt1.jpg


One such series of camps were the infamous "Rhine Meadows (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/index.html)" camps run by the Eisenhower military Administration.

Go to your nearest library and check out the fairly recent and rather well-known book by Canadian author James Bacques who claims in his best selling book "Other Losses" that between 1 and 2 million Germans were deliberately killed in Eisenhower's death camps (http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/index.html) after the war by deliberate neglect and starvation - after the end of hostilities, when no more supply trains were being bombed, no bridges and warehouses blown up, no water mains severed etc. The war had ended! James Bacque has since published another book entitled "Of Crimes and Mercies", which goes into even more grusome details.

Collective punishments of whole populations. Israel does it today in the Occupied Territories.


Have you seen me defend the Isreali policy to the occupied territories??

I think some clarification is in order just the same, since you seem to equate what Isreal is doing to the German occupation in Russia.

Israel doesn’t “collectively punish” the Occupied Territory. About half the OT is administered by Israel and the rest is under Israeli security control.

There is little question internationally that Israel has the RIGHT to secure territory from which attacks (terrorism and intifada) are being launched. This falls under the definition of sovereignty.

It is true that Israel’s CLAIM on the territory is legitimately under dispute today. However, it is a legal tangle and no one has ever written a decisive opinion on the matter. UN Resolution 242 which is close to 40 years old, still calls for Israel to withdraw and challenges have been raised under the Geneva Convention. On the other hand, the area is part of the original League Of Nation’s Palestine Mandate. This gave the British the legal right to split it as they wanted and in 1947, they split the area along the Jordan River. Everything on the east side belonged to Jordan.

According to the UN’s 1947 plan, the area on the west side of the Jordan River was to have been split between an Arab and a Jewish state. But the Arabs rejected this plan so legally, there never was a “Palestinian state.”

Furthermore, Israel occupied these territories militarily in 1967 (Six Day War) in what historians have all called a legitimate preemptive war. Under International Law, it is theirs.

Have you seen me defend the Isreali policy to the occupied territories??

We have not "seen" you state that you find what the jews are doing in israel repulsive; immoral and illegal.

We have not "seen" you state that you find what the jews are doing in israel repulsive; immoral and illegal.

I've not seen you state that the mass murder of Jews is repulsive, immoral and illegal.

Jews make bullshit claims that don't even make sense. I was reading yesterday, come across the neocon Kinsey-denouncer kiike Judith Riesman. She claims that hundreds of her relatives died in the Holocaust. The only way jews can get away with this kind of lie is that they know goyish brains shut down the minute they utter Holocaust. Think about it. How many people do you know who aren't African potentates who have "hundreds" of relatives? Let alone kikes who have about 1.1 kids per woman?

The Holocaust is a giant, obvious scam. The second you actually think about it, it disintegrates.

Ethnic clans and extended families are not a Jewish concept.

I've not seen you state that the mass murder of Jews is repulsive, immoral and illegal.

Show me the gassed, "holocausted" jew and you might. There was no mass murder as alleged by Holocaustians and juden, I find Liars repulsive, immoral and Holocaustianity and its perpertrators should be made illegal and considered criminals worthy of jail, if only for fraud

[quote]

http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/sat-ngt1.jpg

http://www.zundelsite.org/english/antiprop/allied_camps/sat-ngt2.jpg

This tugs on my heart strings. A veritable hell on earth and quite clearly genocide.

It makes the Jews claims seem more disgusting than offensive.

Show me the gassed, "holocausted" jew and you might. There was no mass murder as alleged by Holocaustians and juden, I find Liars repulsive, immoral and Holocaustianity and its perpertrators should be made illegal and considered criminals worthy of jail, if only for fraudhttp://bradleysmithsblog.blogspot.com/
Addressing the Holocaust Taboo and The “Unique Monstrosity” of the Germans


Thursday, March 6, 2008
Squelching Rumors
Professor Samuel G. Freedman
The New York Times

Dear Professor Freedman.

I have here your interesting article published in the New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/education/27education.html
titled "Struggle to Squelch a Rumor." It addresses the rumor propagated via the Internet that due to pressure by Muslims, the University of Kentucky was forced to “drop” its Holocaust course taught there by Professor Jeremy D. Popkin, which in fact is untrue.

I’m interested in the issue of “rumors” regarding the Holocaust story, particularly what appear to be “rumors” that the Germans used gas chambers to kill millions of people during WWII. The heart of the Holocaust story – the claim that about one million victims were murdered by Germans in the gas chambers at Auschwitz – itself appears to be “rumor.”

To that point, I have asked Professor Deborah Lipstadt, author of Denying the Holocaust, The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory, to provide us with the name of “one person, with proof, who was killed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.” I understand that her principles do not permit Professor Lipstadt to respond to such a question. As for myself, on principle, I am sending “The Question” to academics and journalists on and off campus, asking for a response to this simple request. “One person, with proof. . . .”

With regard to “squelching rumors,” revisionist arguments have squelched rumors that during WWII Germans murdered unknown thousands of persons in gas chambers at Buchenwald, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and other camps in and around Germany. These rumors were exceptionally ugly, helping to forward the charge of “unique monstrosity” against the Germans of that era, a charge that is still exploited today by those who profit from it.

It has become a moral imperative to either provide the name of one person, with proof, who was murdered in a gas chamber at Auschwitz, or simply announce that the use of gas chambers at Auschwitz was, and is, a rumor created by those who profited most from it, and protected by a taboo against questioning the rumor. We all know who benefits most from taboo – again, those who profit most from it.

U Kentucky president, Lee T. Todd Jr., wrote “I understand quite well the power of the Internet. “Information flows instantaneously without respect to somewhat arbitrary borders of geography or nation state.” That’s how the “rumor” of Auschwitz spread – “instantly” via wire services, radio, overnight print stories, all of it forwarding rumors initiated by the U.S., British, and Soviet Governments.

Mr. Freedman: can you help here? My understanding is that those who teach the relevant history and journalism courses at Columbia University, your university, are in the top tier of such academics in America. You probably know a number of them. Will you take a moment to run a couple questions past those folk?

Ask the historians if there is not one among them who can provide the name of one person, with proof, who was murdered in a gas chamber at Auschwitz. And ask your peers in the Journalism Department why this question should, or should not, be asked of our historians.

Thank you very much. I will run this letter past U Kentucky Professor Jeremy D. Popkin for his review.

Bradley R. Smith

Samuel G. Freedman is a professor of journalism at Columbia University. His e-mail is sgfreedman@nytimes.com

PS: I copied this letter to academics who teach history and journalism at U Kentucky and Columbia U. None has yet tried to answer the question. I encourage academic historians to reply to The Lipstadt Question. I will publish all replies.

Posted by Bradley R. Smith at 3:58 PM
Labels: Columbia U
1 comments:
RG - Texas said...
Good article,Bradley. You pose a legitimate and common-sensed request. Unfortunately you will have no takers. Like Lipstadt, they are phony as 3-dollar bills. Their one-track minds, eyes with blinders, and intolerance are abysmal. And THESE people are the TEACHERS. A runious and sick situation.
RG, Texas

Please cite the international law that allowed for reprisal killings or killings of unarmed combatants that had been captured.

Watch 1/3 the holocaust you stupid fucking filthy, disgusting, swarthy hook nosed kike....;)

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/

Watch 1/3 the holocaust you stupid fucking filthy, disgusting, swarthy hook nosed kike....;)

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/

That has been tried before to no avail. Sad really.

I've not seen you state that the mass murder of Jews is repulsive, immoral and illegal.
There was no mass murder of jews.

And all of us know, jews included, that if the White race is to survive it will be necessary for us to eliminate the jews from our societies. It still won't be mass murder, it will be self defense. It will not be repulsive or immoral, it will be a matter of survival for not only the White race but for many other life forms facing extinction in this money grubbing judaised poisonous world you kike bastards have created. Killing kews will be seen as a holy duty in the not too distant future.

There was no mass murder of jews.

And all of us know, jews included, that if the White race is to survive it will be necessary for us to eliminate the jews from our societies. It still won't be mass murder, it will be self defense. It will not be repulsive or immoral, it will be a matter of survival for not only the White race but for many other life forms facing extinction in this money grubbing judaised poisonous world you kike bastards have created. Killing kews will be seen as a holy duty in the not too distant future.

What a hateful pathetic person you are.

And many wonder how the Holocaust could have happened.

That has been tried before to no avail. Sad really.

And you failed to address even one of the counter arguments.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/04/quick-links.html


Debunking Ugly Voice videos (and other ugly stuff) at http://zamphir.litek.ws and http://onethirdoftheholocaust.com [permalink]
(also see "denierbud"'s page at YouTube)
Chicken Challenge!
About the Ugly Voice: Master debater by Sergey Romanov (21/08/2006)
More about the Ugly Voice (and clip no. 29):
Troglodyte by Sergey Romanov (24/09/2006)
About clips no. 11, 12: Sometimes pictures speak louder than words by Roberto Muehlenkamp (01/01/2007)
General: Watch Sobe's channel! by Roberto Muehlenkamp (19/02/2007)
Rebuttals of specific clips:

Clips no. 11, 12: Videos, a must see! by Roberto Muehlenkamp (23/06/2006)
Clip no. 14: Ugly Voice Productions and the Holocaust by Sergey Romanov (04/07/2006)
Clip no. 3: Ugly Voice is completely ignorant about documentary evidence by Sergey Romanov (06/07/2006)
Clips no. 4, 7, 8, 22, 27, 28: An Ugly Analysis by Sergey Romanov (21/08/2006)
Clip no. 18: Whining and Kvetching from the Ugly Voice Producer ... by Roberto Muehlenkamp (23/08/2006)
Clip no. 19: Shooting Mattogno in the foot ... by Roberto Muehlenkamp (29/08/2006)
Clip no. 19: The Soviets went over the top in their lies ... by Roberto Muehlenkamp (29/08/2006)
Clip no. 5: More Fun With Ugly Voice Productions (Part 1) by Roberto Muehlenkamp (17/09/2006)
Clip no. 5: More Fun With Ugly Voice Productions (Part 2) by Andrew Mathis (17/09/2006)
Clip no. 5: More Fun With Ugly Voice Productions (addendum) by Sergey Romanov (17/09/2006)
Clip no. 13: More of the same trash ... by Roberto Muehlenkamp (18/09/2006)
Clip no. 16: "But wait", the Ugly Voice’s fans will say ... by Roberto Muehlenkamp (02/10/2006)
Clip no. 1: Historiography as seen by an ignorant charlatan ... by Roberto Muehlenkamp (03/10/2006)
Clip no. 9: The Ugly Voice on Zionism By Way of Burning Synagogues by Andrew Mathis (10/10/2006)
Clip no. 20: Red Army, Red Herrings by Andrew Mathis (04/12/2006)
Clip no. 26: The Ugly Voice as Don Quixote Unhorsed by Andrew Mathis (05/12/2006)
Clip no. 21: Has the Ugly Voice Ever Heard of World War II? by Andrew Mathis (06/12/2006)
Clip no. 23: Incinerating corpses on a grid is a rather inefficient method … by Roberto Muehlenkamp (18/12/2006)
Clip no. 24: If they did it the simple way, they didn’t do it! by Roberto Muehlenkamp (19/12/2006)
Clip no. 25: «B» as in «Bullshit» by Roberto Muehlenkamp (20/12/2006)
Clip no. 17: How to Actually Read a Book and Embarrass a Holocaust Denier by Andrew Mathis(21/12/2006)
Clip no. 15: It’s raining empty claims … by Roberto Muehlenkamp(24/12/2006)
Clip no. 29: Donat Unknowingly Debunks the Ugly Voice by Andrew Mathis(26/12/2006)
Clip no. 6: It’s hard to believe … by Roberto Muehlenkamp(12/01/2007)
Clip no. 2: Well. Well? Well! by Andrew Mathis, Roberto Muehlenkamp and Sergey Romanov (14/08/2007)
Clip no. 2: Well. Well? Well! (Part II) by Andrew Mathis(14/08/2007)

And you failed to address even one of the counter arguments.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/04/quick-links.html

If you meant the last Holocaust thread then it funneled into a dead end after which I had lost all interest in discussing fairy tales. It's not a particularly interesting subject especially with how it's interacted with. Typically if there is a huge contradiction in a case the case is over but the hoax religion instead just begins to argue on points that are uncertain enough to win through muddle. In the end it really matters very little and the only point of remembering something like this is the nature of the Jew and demonstrations for the new comers, otherwise its an irrelevant subject. Even if it was true the only real reply you'd get here is "good".

In the end its about the money made off of this and the illegal prosecution for this that is really the only reason why anyone cares.


Ive looked over the site you cited and its for the most part hearsay evidence that has already been debunked as fake, do we really have to go over it again? I really don't care what documents were produced in Treblinka when there is no proof that Treblinka even existed. It makes little sense to have documents from a non-existent place, even a fool wouldn't accept such evidence.

Ive looked over the site you cited and its for the most part hearsay evidence that has already been debunked as fake, do we really have to go over it again? I really don't care what documents were produced in Treblinka when there is no proof that Treblinka even existed. It makes little sense to have documents from a non-existent place, even a fool wouldn't accept such evidence.

It certainly existed and even revisionists like Graf and Germar admit to this, they argue it was a transit camp, but no knowledgeable people argue that the camp never existed.

It certainly existed and even revisionists like Graf and Germar admit to this, they argue it was a transit camp, but no knowledgeable people argue that the camp never existed.
Correction:
The Death Camp Treblinka did not exist, what was in its place doesn't really concern me. I can't see how documentation can be supplied from a Death Camp if the Death camp didn't exist. It's not that it was a transit camp its that it doesn't exist in the sense they are trying to convey. If the graves don't exist then Treblinka as a death camp doesn't exist either.

What a hateful pathetic person you are.

And many wonder how the Holocaust could have happened.

Realistic!

You jews KNOW in your twisted souls what the inevitable outcome of your nation wrecking must be. That is why you are so obsessed with your holohoax.

The holocaust is a political tool for the Jews. Without it, Israel would likely not exist and the clout of Jewish interest groups would be diminished.

Jews use the holocaust to basically catch any attempts at nationalism and ethnic solidarity. Now you essentially have these pitiful guilt-ridden Europeans who let waves of non-Whites in their countries because they seriously believe that the holocaust happened and that any political tendency towards conservatism and preservation of national values will lead to more holocausts.

Of course, I don't believe the holocaust happened, at least in the way Jews want us to believe (the six million murdered claim, especially). You have to question the motives of people who were 'victims' of the holocaust. In many cases they were political agitators actively working to undermine the government and society - all of the sudden they are these poor victims. The whole ideological battle against communism - which was a heavily disproportional Jewish movement - is totally forgotten.

It is easy to go from the fact that Germany did punish, often by execution, of Jewish political subversives, as well as move and segregate populations of Jews and turn it into some bogus and grotesque stories of torture, lampshades, soap, shrunken heads, and etc. The fact that so many Jews survived this alleged holocaust, and the fact that there were even a small minority of Jews loyal to the Reich is glossed over.

The ultimate reality is that the fight for political and cultural dominance is not a pretty one. If you're on the wrong side of things, you often are not treated well. That is the history of humanity and I refuse to call it good or evil - such petty moralism has been left to the Jews to impose their feelings upon the whole world. We do not need to assimilate the Jews' values when debating the holocaust.

What a hateful pathetic person you are.

And many wonder how the Holocaust could have happened.

One has only to open their eyes to see who is the most hateful. Anybody who stands as a serious threat to the 'Holocaust' is beaten up, killed, bombed, arrested. http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/5406

But sometimes in their rush to vilify the German people the jews unwittingly show how they really feel. I've seen about a dozen of Rod Serling's Twilight Zone episodes that were built around the Holocaust but there was a specific one called Deaths Head Revisited(available on youtube)where an escaped Nazi formerly known as Captain Lutze had returned to a 'death camp' in Dachau out of sadistic euphoria. When he got there a ghost of one of his 'victims' was there, a jew named Becker. Lutze tells him that the war is over and that he was hoping that Becker could forget the little mistakes of the past. Becker replies "Why not ask for the earth to stop revolving on its axis?" :rofl

Even back then the Holocaust was considered equivalent to the earth itself. It's everything.

The holocaust is a political tool for the Jews. Without it, Israel would likely not exist and the clout of Jewish interest groups would be diminished.

Unlikely.

The plan was in place long before the holocaust.
I don't debate that it is used as a political tool tho.
Certainly its not exploited by all jews, but yea...its just like the race card for Blacks pretty much.

Unlikely

BS. Israel would be nowhere without its support from the west, support that was gained because of holocaust sympathy.

BS. Israel would be nowhere without its support from the west, support that was gained because of holocaust sympathy.

wrong again, you do not know your history.
If anyone is responsible for Israel having survived its early life...its Stalin and the USSR who made sure they were sufficiently armed via czeck weaponry and tanks and planes, etc.

USA almost did not even vote in their favor, except FDR died and Truman was sympathetic towards them.
FDR was not...
England also voted against partition.

Stalin supported them because he was wanting to weaken the English' influence in the middle east.
Bear in mind this time was really the beginnings of the cold war.

wrong again, you do not know your history.
If anyone is responsible for Israel having survived its early life...its Stalin and the USSR who made sure they were sufficiently armed via czeck weaponry and tanks and planes, etc..

Well this is great news then - and since israel already has such warm relations with Putin's Russia, China as well; then America and the rest of the West should be let off the hook and stop paying israel tribute/aid money.

Clearly, israel has no further use nor need for America, so it will not mind when the check stops arriving in the mail in the near future.

Well this is great news then - and since israel already has such warm relations with Putin's Russia, China as well; then America and the rest of the West should be let off the hook and stop paying israel tribute/aid money.

Clearly, israel has no further use nor need for America, so it will not mind when the check stops arriving in the mail in the near future.

I don't debate that in more modern years Israel may be receiving a lot of support from the USA and the west in general.
I was merely pointing out that they would not in fact exist at all from inception in 1948 if not for Stalin...who as I said wanted to weaken England, and probably also wanted a place to stick the rest of their jews.

I do think the checks should stop tho. Israel can take care of themselves now I think...and most Israelis would probably even prefer it that way I bet.

I do think the checks should stop tho. Israel can take care of themselves now I think...and most Israelis would probably even prefer it that way I bet.

And yet, the israelis do not have the decency to tell the West, America, that the money is no longer necessary. In fact, the last time it was in the news [MSNBC], the israelis were demanding that America send gold boullion as partial aid; dollars were acceptable for the remainder.

The israelis said this was due to the increasing recession in America, and obviously the fact that the West in general is headed toward global depression. The dollar, according to israel has less value now. The juden know no decency or boundary when it comes to sheer avarice.

Correction:
The Death Camp Treblinka did not exist, what was in its place doesn't really concern me. I can't see how documentation can be supplied from a Death Camp if the Death camp didn't exist. It's not that it was a transit camp its that it doesn't exist in the sense they are trying to convey. If the graves don't exist then Treblinka as a death camp doesn't exist either.

How do you know the graves do not exist?

wrong again, you do not know your history.
If anyone is responsible for Israel having survived its early life...its Stalin and the USSR who made sure they were sufficiently armed via czeck weaponry and tanks and planes, etc.

Um no, check your history, Jew boy. Israel gets its chief support from the United States and Europe who sends billions upon billons to Israel in aid and weaponry. All because we feel bad about Jews during the alleged holocaust.

I'm not saying that Israel doesn't have traditional relations with other nations, I'm just pointing out the obvious and irrefutable fact that Israel's chief mode of support is from nations who fit the description I gave above.

Anyway, I don't need a history lesson from someone who thinks that niggers won the United States all its major wars.T.J.B.

And yet, the israelis do not have the decency to tell the West, America, that the money is no longer necessary. In fact, the last time it was in the news [MSNBC], the israelis were demanding that America send gold boullion as partial aid; dollars were acceptable for the remainder.

The israelis said this was due to the increasing recession in America, and obviously the fact that the West in general is headed toward global depression. The dollar, according to israel has less value now. The juden know no decency or boundary when it comes to sheer avarice.

The Jews actively campaign to keep that support flowing. They instigated the neoconservative movement in the United States which basically has ensured that we forever remain an ally in blood and money to Israel. They have their AIPAC to bribe our politicians and bully those who waver in support of Israel.

I discussed elsewhere how Jews seem to get away with espionage and collusion between our government and Israels while no members of any other ethnic group would be able to do such a thing without being rounded up and executed.

No holocaust means no more sympathy for the Jews and their dream of a middle eastern empire. Can't have that!

The Jews actively campaign to keep that support flowing. They instigated the neoconservative movement in the United States which basically has ensured that we forever remain an ally in blood and money to Israel. They have their AIPAC to bribe our politicians and bully those who waver in support of Israel.

I discussed elsewhere how Jews seem to get away with espionage and collusion between our government and Israels while no members of any other ethnic group would be able to do such a thing without being rounded up and executed.

No holocaust means no more sympathy for the Jews and their dream of a middle eastern empire. Can't have that!

If the money to Isreal is about the Holocaust, why does Egypt get nearly the same aid level?

If the money to Isreal is about the Holocaust, why does Egypt get nearly the same aid level?Because the Egyptian government is a USA-CIA puppet who plays by our rules and plays nice with Israel, that's why.

The point isn't HOW MUCH money Israel gets, the issue is how it is used. Israel is using it to conquer Palestine. It brings us no tangible benefit except scorn and reprisal from the rest of the Arab/Muslim world. The holocaust is merely the elixir that makes us doped up and blindly unaware of the consequence of this parasitical relationship.

If the money to Isreal is about the Holocaust, why does Egypt get nearly the same aid level?

Pay off!

To keep them from erasing the kike cesspool next door from the map.

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpoltreb1.htm

Source: German Crimes in Poland. Volume I. Published by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland. Warsaw, 1946

THE TREBLINKA EXTERMINATION CAMP

p.95

The evidence on which this account relies is in the first place the testimony of 13 Jews, former prisoners at Treblinka, who succeeded in escaping during the armed revolt of August 2, 1943. Their names are: Jankiel Wiernik, Henryk Poswolski, Abe Kon, Aron Czechowicz, Oskar Strawczynski, Samuel Reisman, Aleksander Kudlik, Hejnoch Brener, Starisław Kon, Eugeniusz Turowski, Henryk Reichman, Szyja Warszawsski, and Leon Finkelsztejn.


Additiond facts concerning particularly the number of railway transports, is to be found in the evivdence of 11 Polish railway workers.

The railway records at Treblinka station have a1so been consulted, as well as documents and coins dug out during the levelling of the surface; and the results of legal and medical inquiries, as well was the sworn evidence of a land surveyor, were used by the prosecutors.

I.

The Extermination Camp at Treblinka in which hundreds of thousands of Jews were murdered is situated near the village of Wolka-Okraglik, in the commune of Kosow, district of Sokolow Podlaski, province (voivodship) of Warsaw. The camp site was placed in a sandy region, overgrown with pines and far from human habitation. The nearest village, the above mentioned ,Wolka, was 1½ km from the camp boundary. The nearest railway station Treblinka (after which the camp was named) is 4 km. away.

p.96

At a short distance, along the north-western and northern boundaries of the camp, the road from Kosow to Malkinia and the railway from Siedlce to Malkinia run parallel, but owing to the undulating, wooded character of the region, the grounds of the camp are invisible alike from the road and from the railway.

Near the south-western edge of the camp a branch line runs to a gravel pit and was continued to the camp itself. This extension no longer exists; it served to bring the transports of victims. A road also, still in existence, was made from the high road and continued to the camp.

The area of the camp amounted to 13.45ha. (33 acres). The entire camp had the shape of an irregular rectangle. Construction work was begun on June 1, 1942, and was carried out mostly by Jewish workers brought in cars from the adjoining small towns of Wegrow, and Stoczek Wegrowski, who during their work were killed in masses.


The first railway transports of victims destined for destruction arrived at the camp on July 23, 1942, and from that time until approximately the middle of December, 1942, there was a constant stream of fresh arrivals. After New Year, 1943, the number of transports began to diminish. In February or March, 1943, Himmler visited the camp, and after this a whole-sale burning of corpses was undertaken. On August 2 a revolt broke out, during which part of the camp hutments were burnt. But at the end of the month several more transports arrived The camp was finally ,,liquidated" in November, 1943. At the present time no traces of it are left, except for the cellar passage with the protruding remains of burnt posts, the foundations of the administration building, and the old well. Here and there can also be traced the remains of burnt fence posts and pieces of barbed wire, and short sections of paved road. There are also other traces. For example, in the north-eastern part, over a surface covering about 2 ha. (5 acres),

p.97

there are large quantities of ashes mixed with sand, among which are numerous human bones, often with the remains of decomposing tissues.

As a result of an examination made by an expert it was found that ashes were the remains of burnt human bones. The examination of numerous human skulls found in the camp has shown that they bear no traces of external injuries. Within a radius of several hundred yards from the camp site an unpleasant smell of burnt ash and decay is noticeable, growing stronger as one approaches.


The south-western part of the camp site is covered with the remains of all kinds of aluminum, enamel, glass and porcelain vessels, kitchen utensils, trunks, rucksacks, and remnants of clothing. Almost the whole camp-site is now covered with pits and holes.

II.

According to the evidence of the Jewish witnesses who had been confined at Treblinka, the general appearance of the camp was as follows while it was functioning:

It was enclosed within a 3-4 m. (10-13 ft.) high barbed-wire fence, densely interwoven with pine branches to make it invisible. Along the enclosure were barricades of barbed wire, and at intervals were watch-towers, where Ukrainian guards armed with machine-guns were stationed.

The interior of the camp was divided into two parts: the first, including about five-sixths of the whole, had a railway siding, stores, warehouses, workshops, offices, living-quarters for the SS men, Ukrainians and Jewish workers; garages and a kitchen-garden. It was the administrative part. The second was the extermination camp proper‘and contained two buildings -with 13 gas- chambers, living-quarters for the Jewish

p.98

workers, and the place where the corpses were buried, and afterwards dug up and burnt.

During the first phase of the camp, from July, 1942 onward 3 gas-chambers were in use. In the early autumn of 1942, however, the construction of a new building, holding 10 chambers, was begun. One of the witnesses brought to Treblinka on October 10, 1942, saw these chambers already functioning.

The aspect of the chambers in which victims were gasssed, according to statements by the witnesses Wiernik, Rajchman and Czechowicz, was as follows: Both buildings had many corridors, within the larger building the entrances to the chambers being on both sides of the corridor, but in the smaller one on one side only. The entrances were small and had tightly closing doors. In the outer wall’s of the chambers were large trap doors which could be raised in order to permit the removal of the corpses. The chambers had tiled floors, sloping towards the outer side. In the ceiling were openings connected by pipes with engines situated in adjoining buildings, which produced the CO gas with which the victims were suffocated.

The witness Wiernik, who worked as a carpenter during the whole time of his stay in the camp, and so had a certain amount of freedom, gives the dimensions of the chambers as being in the smaller building 5x5 metres (15ft. 6 in. square) and 7 x7 metres (23 ft. square) in the larger.

The burning of the corpses had begun already at the time of the full functioning of the camp. At Treblinka there were no crematoria with furnaces, but there was a primitive arrangement of grates made from rails placed on supports of reinforced concrete, which could hold 2,500 corpses. Mechanical excavators were used for digging the pits and later for the exhumation of the corpses. In the waybills for the wagons sent from Treblinka at the time of the final "liquidation" of the camp three excavators are mentioned. One of them was

p.99

dispatched from Treblinka on June 29, 1943, to the firm of Adam Lamczak, Berlin-Neukölln, Willy Waltherstrasse 30-3 Tr.

In the general lay-out of the camp the so-called Lazarett or hospital is interesting. It was situated in the first part of the camp, and was in essence a place enclosed by a high fence and divided inside into two unequal parts. The entrance was through a small hut, on which was a Red Cross flag, whence the way led to a smaller "waiting-room", with plush-covered sofas, whence again the victims were taken to the second part. Here there was a pit, on the edge of which an SS-man or Ukrainian shot the victim through the back of the head with a revolver, The Lazarett was designed for the destruction of the sick, invalids, old people, and small children who were too weak to enter the gas-chambers by themselves.

The Sonderkommando tried thus to prevent interruption of the normal smooth working of the camp activities.

The fact of the existence in the camp of arrangements whose sole aim was to deceive the victims as to its real purpose is very noteworthy. A sham railway station was built to resemble a real one, with various inscriptions, such as "refreshment room", "waiting room", or "booking office", and signs showing the "passengers" where to get in for Bialyatok and elsewhere.

III.

The camp was run By a relatively very small group of SS - men. Witnesses mention the names of the following: Stengel, the camp commandant, from Vienna, Kurt Franz from Thüringen, the vice-commandant Rütner from Leipzig, Franz Miete from Bavaria, Mentz from the vicinity of Bydgoszcz, Paul Bredow from Silesia, Willy Post from Hamburg, Kurt Seidel from Berlin, Müller from Hamburg, Suchomil from the

p.100

Sudeten mountains, Schafner, Joseph Herman from Cologne, Schmidt and Minzberger, all of whom worked in the first, administrative, part of the camp. In the second part, where the gas-chambers were, there were, among others, Flops of Munich, a specialist in burning corpses, Emil Ludwik, the manager of this part of the camp, Karl Petzingelr of Leipzig, Mathiss, Lefler, of German origin but probably a citizen of the United States, Edwin Gense of Vienna and Otto Horn.

Auxiliary functions were carried out by the Ukrainians, who numbered about 100, but there were also a certain number of Jewish workers, who were frequently killed off and replaced. As stated by the Jewish witnesses, these workers were chosen from particular transports in parties of not less than ten and not more than 100. In the first part elf the camp there were about 1000 of them, and in the second from 200 to 500. The workers in the two different parts of the camp could not communicate with each other. At the head of the group was a senior official who wore an arm-band with the inscription: Aeltester der Juden (Senior Jew). The group was subdivided as follows:

a) A group with blue arm-bands, who cleaned the wagons after the transports had arrived; b) a group with red arm-bands, who helped to undress the victims; c) the largest group, who sorted the clothing, d) Goldjuden (Gold Jews) who took valuables from the victims, e) a group of workers specially employed in niterweaving the fence with brenches and f) a group of artisans who worked in the workshops. In the secoad part of the camp Jewish workers were employed in removing corpses from the gas-chambers, burying them and later on in burning the remains.

The railway trains had staffs consisting mainly of Ukrainians and Lithuanians under the command of SS-men, recruited from outside the camp. Two German railway mans, Rodolph Emerich and Willy Elinzman were permanently employed at Treblinka station unloading trains of Jews.

p.101

IV

The treatment of the victims was as follows: the railway trams arrived at the station at Treblinka. As the branch line could not take more than 20 wagons at once, the trains were divided, each section in turn being drawn by an engine on to the extension line leading to the camp. Here the SS-men and Ukrainians were standing ready with arms and whips, and after opening the wagons they drove the Jews brutally forward. Everything had to be done in the quickest possible time. The unwilling and those who were too slow were shot. At the same time Jewish workers removed corpses and baggage from the wagons and cleaned them out. We must bear in mind that the victims travelled in locked cars meant for the transport of freight, and especially on bad days, owing to overcrowding (often as many as 200 persons in one car) the weaker ones died before their arrival at the camp.

After leaving the cars the victims were driven along with blows and shouts to the enclosure, where the men were separated from the women and children. Old people, the sick, and abandoned children were directed thence to the lazaret, where they were shot.

A small number of the men were then selected for work in the camp, while others were sent to the adjoining labour camp. After a short time they also died wholesale.

AS the SS-man ordered all money and valuables, to be given up, Jewish workers (Goldjuden) went round with trunks collecting everything that was precious. Afterwards the order was given to strip. The majority of witnesses state that the men were stripped in the courtyard itself; the women and children in a hut on the left. In the huts 60 barbers were kept busy cutting off the women’s hair. Meanwhile the naked men were driven about with whips and made to run and collect all

p.102

the clothes from the whole transport, putting them in heaps to be sorted. Then, when the women had had their hair cut off, the naked men, women and children were directed on to the road leading to the gas-chambers, being told that they were going to the baths. At first the victims were ordered to take a zloty each in their hands as bath fee, the better to deceive them up to the last moment the money being collected by an Ukrainian in a hut by the way, but later this practice was stopped. In front of the entrance to the gas-chamber there were usually several Ukrainians standing by with dogs, who cruelly drove the victims in, often wounding them with knives. The victims were driven into the gas-chambers with their hands up, so that as many might be squeezed in as possible, and small children were piled on top.

SS-man Hitreider specialized in killing infants, seizing them by the legs and killing them with one blow on the head against a fence.

The actual gassing in the chambers lasted about 15 minutes; and after the state of the victims had been observed through a special small window, the doors on the outside of the building were opened, and the corpses, being so closely packed inside, fell out of their own weight on to the ground.

Instantly the Jewish workers removed them, and prepared the place for the next batch.

At first the corpses were buried in pits, but afterwards they were burnt. Only a few hours passed between the arrival of a train-load by the branch line and their gassing.

The Treblinka camp was in reality just a place of mass execution.

V.


An accurate calculation of the number of victims is at present impossible. It will be remembered that Treblinka

p.103

ceased its activities in the autumn of 1943, so that the German authorities had enough time to wipe out the traces of their crimes. The most reliable method of counting the number of victims is by counting the number of train-loads. The figures based on the dimensions of the gas chambers give no guarantee whatever of accuracy, as we do not know, firstly, how often the gas-chambers were used, and, secondly, the number of people who, on an average, were gassed at any one time. In establishing the number of train-loads, the commission based its findings on the evidence given by the witnesses, laying special stress on the statements of the railway workers and on the railway records from Treblinka station, which are in the possession of the commission of enquiry.

The most active period seems to have been from August to the middle of December, 1942. During that time we may assume one daily train-load as unquestionable according to the evidence of the railway-workers. Indeed four witnesses put the figure at two per day. After that, from the middle of January to the middle of May, 1943, the average was probably one a week. Some of the witnesses put the figure at three.

The average number of wagons in a transport was 50 through sometimes, as the railway records showed, it was as many as 58.

The total number of wagon-loads of victimls from August 1, 1942, to May 15, 1943, may be taken, with some certainty, to have been 7,550.

In the later period, from the railway records; the list of the wagons for August 17, 1943; a telegram of August 18, 1943; and a document entitled Fahrplanordnung Nr. 290 sent from Treblinka station by the Reichsbahndirektion Königsberg, the number of train-loads could be established quite accurately.

In the above-mentioned Fahrplanordnung we read among ather things: Zur Abbeförderung von Aussledlern verkehren

p.104

folgende Sonderzüge von Bialystok nach Malkinia. Ziel Treblinka, from which it may be concluded that after the revolt the following train-loads, were brought in: on Aug. 27, 1943, 41 wagons; on Aug. 19, 35 wagons; on Aug. 21, two transports of 38 wagons each; on Aug. 22, two transports of 39 wagons each; and on Aug. 23, one transport of 38 wagons; i. e. a total of 266 wagons.

As an average number of persons per wagon we may take 100 (the majority of witnesses deposed that it was more than 150).

According to this calculation the number of victims murdered at Treblinka amounts to at least 731,600. Taking into consideration the great caution with which the investigators assessed the number of train-loads and the average number of persons per wagon, this must be accepted as probable, that in actual fact the number of victims was even larger1. (1It should be pointed out that from pertinent documents such as telegrams, time-tables and way-bills it appears absolutely certain that more than two thousand wagon-loads of Jews were brought to Treblinka; yet these documents constituted but a small part of all the railway documentary evidence, the greater part of which is lost.)

VI.

It w a s mostly Jews Polish citizens from the central parts of the country (Warsaw, Radom, Czcstochowa, Kielce and Siedlce) who were killed at Treblinka; though there were Jews from the vicinity of Bialystok, Grodno and Wolkowysk; German, Austrian, Czech and Belgian Jews from the west, and Greek Jews from the south.

The railway documents have enabled a number of localities to be identified from which the trains were originally dispatched. We read that on August 6, 1942, a transport

p.105

arrived from Warsaw; on September 1 others from Wloszczowa and Sedziszow; on September 27, one from Kozienice; on October 4, 1942, one from Czestochowa; on February 14, 1943, one from Grodno; on March 23 and April 1, 1943, one from Vienna; on March 26 one from Salonica; on March 29 one from Skoplje (Jugoslavia); and on August 23, 1943, one from Bialystok.

This is the last transport to Treblinka of which we have definite data.

Among the evidence is a collection of coins, Polish, Soviet, German, Austrian, Czech, Greek, Belgian, French and even American, dug up during levelling operations at Treblinka. A German-Jewish identity card issued at Göttingen, the remains of a Soviet passport, and a collection of Polish documents were also found.

One of the witnesses, called Strawczynski, stated that his brother, who worked in the camp sorting the clothing, told him that he also found English documents. The witness Rajzman saw a certificate issued by Cambridge University.

Besides the Jews who were murdered in this extermination camp, there were a certain number of Gipsies and Poles, but it is impossible to establish exactly how many.

VII.

The belongings of the victims were systematically collected and sorted, before being sent to the Reich. Specialisation in the sorting of this Jewish property even extended to eye-glasses and fountain pens. Gold, jewels and money were collected and sorted with particular care. From time to time lorries were dispatched from the camp loaded with goods of every kind. Among the proofs of this there is a collection of military tickets (Wehrmachtsfahrscheine) dated September

p.106

2-21, 1942. They relate to 203 freight-trains loaded with clothing (described as Bekleidung der Waffen SS). The lists were stamped with an official seal inscribed Der SS Polizei-führer SS Sonderkommando im District Warschau.

A typical Nazi proceeding was to pack the wlomen’s hair, after it had been steamed, in bales, and send it to Germany.

*

The eradication of all traces of the crime by wholesale burning of corpses began after Himmler’s visit in the early spring of 1943 and lasted till the Warsaw Rising, or even later. The camp was finally closed in November, 1943.

During the investigation when the ground was levelled, no collective graves were found, and this together with the evidence given by the witnesses leads to the conclusion that almost all the remains were burnt; the German authorities having had plenty of time to do it since the camp was closed. The site of the camp was ploughed over and sown, and on it Ukrainians were settled. They fled, however, on the approach of the Red Army.

How do you know the graves do not exist?

Well since you know where the graves are; and, since the hoax is your religion; which you defend fervently, you would then go to the jews and order them to dig up a grave or two; collect enough data to provide proof of holocaust and gassing.

Where is that pesky gassed and holocausted jew?

Jose Diaz asks:

Were 6 Million Jews Murdered?

I answer:

Who cares?

How do you know the graves do not exist?


If I see no elephant in my house then there is no elephant in my house.

Jose Diaz asks:

Were 6 Million Jews Murdered?

I answer:

Who cares?

I am of the same opinion, my concern is that no one should have to pay for it and no one should be prosecuted for it. Otherwise I really could care less.

Their names are: Jankiel Wiernik, Henryk Poswolski, Abe Kon, Aron Czechowicz, Oskar Strawczynski, Samuel Reisman, Aleksander Kudlik, Hejnoch Brener, Starisław Kon, Eugeniusz Turowski, Henryk Reichman, Szyja Warszawsski, and Leon Finkelsztejn.

Hehehehe... hehehe... HAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
......

Whew.

It's already known that the Polish investigation was a bit.. sub par.

Jose Diaz asks:

Were 6 Million Jews Murdered?

I answer:

Who cares?

i think a more important question would be, how many are going to die in the coming holocaust?

[quote=psychologicalshock;739652]If I see no elephant in my house then there is no elephant in my house.

I am of the same opinion, my concern is that no one should have to pay for it and no one should be prosecuted for it. Otherwise I really could care less.


Well, I would tend to agree with you ps, I usually do; however, this holocaust nonsense that we are all so very tired of is a huge, international and bloating org and now part of jewish religion - deeming it necessary by order of International Jewry and it's rabbis - that we all bow down before it.

That's why we have to keep going around the damn mulberry bush with juden and exposing The Lie they maintain. When they stop investigating, harrassing, arresting, bringing to show trial and convicting those whom prove them Liars, then perhaps we can all just say, "jewish holocaust, who cares". I'd like to see that day arrive sooner than later. However, it's being used as a weapon all the time against the Folk. Whether one is German or not, all our Folk are guilty of holocausting juden

When the jews stop lying, making up new stories, maintaining the old tales and disseminating propaganda; remove the holocaust as required study from all our schools, globally, and basically take themselves and their holocaust claims out of our Lands, then we can all say, "so what".

Until that day, we must keep at them. Repeating ourselves even, and providing the same information and research writ by our Revisionist Historians - not so much for jews, whom know that they have been exposed; but for the Folk of the Future, and those who still keep faith with juden and Holocaustianity.

Some day the juden will run out of steam and just shut up; or The Lie and the new religion will be exposed to the extent that it is proof of ignorant and backward thinking to even entertain the jewish myth of holocaust.

Some day the juden will run out of steam and just shut up; or The Lie and the new religion will be exposed to the extent that it is proof of ignorant and backward thinking to even entertain the jewish myth of holocaust.

I think it is true to say that they are running out of steam currently in so far that they are looking for new ways to make their so-called 'holocaust' relevant. It is important to discuss the 'caust because we need to make sure the juden cannot just slink off to make; sorry I mean 'discover' or 'find', new 'tragic tales'.

Otherwise it will merely transfer the work of dealing with the 'caust to the next generation; I don't believe we can countenance just leaving to it them to deal with because it is boring, tedious and otherwise irritating to deal with the 'caust now.

Well, I would tend to agree with you ps, I usually do; however, this holocaust nonsense that we are all so very tired of is a huge, international and bloating org and now part of jewish religion - deeming it necessary by order of International Jewry and it's rabbis - that we all bow down before it.

That's why we have to keep going around the damn mulberry bush with juden and exposing The Lie they maintain. When they stop investigating, harrassing, arresting, bringing to show trial and convicting those whom prove them Liars, then perhaps we can all just say, "jewish holocaust, who cares". I'd like to see that day arrive sooner than later. However, it's being used as a weapon all the time against the Folk. Whether one is German or not, all our Folk are guilty of holocausting juden

When the jews stop lying, making up new stories, maintaining the old tales and disseminating propaganda; remove the holocaust as required study from all our schools, globally, and basically take themselves and their holocaust claims out of our Lands, then we can all say, "so what".

Until that day, we must keep at them. Repeating ourselves even, and providing the same information and research writ by our Revisionist Historians - not so much for jews, whom know that they have been exposed; but for the Folk of the Future, and those who still keep faith with juden and Holocaustianity.

Some day the juden will run out of steam and just shut up; or The Lie and the new religion will be exposed to the extent that it is proof of ignorant and backward thinking to even entertain the jewish myth of holocaust.
Oh no EG you misunderstood me. I am speaking of me the person rather than me as part of this group.

If I should speak for me as a member of the group then I shall say that it is the duty of everyone to keep exposing this myth whenever possible. There should be no quarter - even when they remove all this crap from the school program, even when they release all the prisoners even if they give back all the reparations. Even after all this the Holocaust legend should be held up to the HIGHEST contempt and whenever a Jew attempts to speak of any sort of mistreatment the subject should instantly terminate at the mere mention of the Holocaust. This legend should be held in such contempt that the mere mention of Jew should instantly follow with Holocaust, these two nouns should forever be burned into the minds of all White people no matter how removed of this event.

It is in such contempt and remembrance that we will save people from this accursed tribe. Then finally we can say that the Magyars, Khazars, Huns , Mongolians, Moors, Turks and various other Semites/Mongloids are all forever VANQUISHED.

As for me the person - I don't wish to linger on this subject when the day comes. Id much prefer that people more interested in history focus on it and I instead be left to do work more suitable for myself.

How do you know the graves do not exist?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A company with a million dollar + ground effects radar machine combed the entire camp and surrounding areas and found no earth disturbed. Google it.

Jews make bullshit claims that don't even make sense. I was reading yesterday, come across the neocon Kinsey-denouncer kiike Judith Riesman. She claims that hundreds of her relatives died in the Holocaust. The only way jews can get away with this kind of lie is that they know goyish brains shut down the minute they utter Holocaust. Think about it. How many people do you know who aren't African potentates who have "hundreds" of relatives? Let alone kikes who have about 1.1 kids per woman?

The Holocaust is a giant, obvious scam. The second you actually think about it, it disintegrates.

Linder, you are bullshitting and you know it.
The population behavior of the Jews (and others) in 1930 or 1925 is far different from the situation among American Jews in the present.
This behavior is subject to common professions of the woman and the general economic state of the families and those both ar far different in Poland of the 30's then in US of the millenium.

My grandmother, for example , had 64 cousins (All but one were murdered by the nazi monsters ) and I have only 17.
Yet , I am an Israeli , American Jew in my state would have about 5.
So to say that hundreds of relatives were killed in the Holocaust is very realistic and your ignorance proves only itself.

My grandmother, for example , had 64 cousins (All but one were murdered by the nazi monsters ) and I have only 17.


And worst of it they made 128 lampshades out of your cousins!
I have 'em right here!

Wanne buy some? ;)

If I see no elephant in my house then there is no elephant in my house.



Since Treblinka is not your house, this is a rather stupid analogy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A company with a million dollar + ground effects radar machine combed the entire camp and surrounding areas and found no earth disturbed. Google it.

What company would that be? If you can't provide the name then you are just another Nazi liar.

Got a report to go with the mythical company?

I find no such company doing a google search.

Save you the time, if you are referring to Richard Krege, then you are an ignorant fool. Krege has done more harm to the revisionists science than good, since he refuses to publish or make his findings available.

And btw, the equipment he used was not a million dollor + ground effects radar machine - so you are obviously lying or ignorant, most likely the latter.

:puke:What company would that be? If you can't provide the name then you are just another Nazi liar.


Even if your argument was right, to swing the "NAZI" whateverT.J.B.-bat disqualifies the rest of your mental vomit automatically.

ZI...stands for Zion.
National Socialists (Nasos) are known for being truthfull and T.J.B.s are known to be liars.
The word Nazi sounds bad and is a T.J.B. invention to begin with to badmouth a country of the most generous hosts to a bunch of thankless parasites, like yourself :ewww
(disgusting plagiarizer Einstein as an example)

An accurate calculation of the number of victims is at present impossible. It will be remembered that Treblinka

p.103

ceased its activities in the autumn of 1943, so that the German authorities had enough time to wipe out the traces of their crimes. The most reliable method of counting the number of victims is by counting the number of train-loads.

See, this gives me pause: wouldn't a more accurate count of victims be to gather forensic evidence, dig up the entire camp and log every speck of ash; I mean, it would take a massive amount of painstaking effort, but don't we owe it to the victims and to history to have a true, scientifically accurate account of those gassed. (Not only this, but we should take core samples every hundred yards or so within a 10 mile radius of the camp to check if any area was disturbed and possibly used as a burial site, to make sure we get the whole picture.)

This, rather than relying on people's memories of the number of trainloads of victims going in and out, and the numbers of cars filled with victims on the trains - people's memories and perceptions are notoriously unreliable, especially in times of great emotion and turmoil; relying on a handful of people's recollections for close to a million deaths seems ludicrous to me.

I mean, look at all the effort they go to for finding Jimmy Hoffa's remains, this for just one person! We owe it to the victims AND the accused to be more scientfic and careful about this.

And worst of it they made 128 lampshades out of your cousins!
I have 'em right here!

Wanne buy some? ;)

i might like to buy 3 dozen how much are they?

An accurate calculation of the number of victims is at present impossible. It will be remembered that Treblinka

p.103

ceased its activities in the autumn of 1943, so that the German authorities had enough time to wipe out the traces of their crimes. The most reliable method of counting the number of victims is by counting the number of train-loads.

See, this from Slammin2 gives me pause: wouldn't a more accurate count of victims be to gather forensic evidence, dig up the entire camp and log every speck of ash; I mean, it would take a masive amount of painstaking effort, but don't we owe it to the victims and to history to have a true, scientifically accurate account of those gassed. (Not only this, but we should take core samples every hundred yards or so within a 10 mile radius of the camp to check if any area was disturbed and possibly used as a burial site, to make sure we get the whole picture.)

This, rather than relying on people's memories of the number of trainloads of victims going in and out, and the numbers of cars filled with victims on the trains - people's memories and perceptions are notoriously unreliable, especially in times of great emotion and turmoil; relying on a handful of people's recollections for close to a million deaths seems ludicrous to me.

I mean, look at all the effort they go to for finding Jimmy Hoffa's remains, this for just one person! We owe it to the victims AND the accused to be more scientfic and careful about this.

Since Treblinka is not your house, this is a rather stupid analogy.

Jews aren't particularly sharp which is most likely why Sophists had a field day with morons like you.

Anyone with any wit would realize that location doesn't matter. Since you only simulate wit... Well, its pretty apparent why you missed it.

Jews aren't particularly sharp which is most likely why Sophists had a field day with morons like you.

Anyone with any wit would realize that location doesn't matter. Since you only simulate wit... Well, its pretty apparent why you missed it.

jews are smarter than you

Jews are much more sinister than you.

Grammatical corrections in bold.
Dialectic corrections in italics.

Jews make assertions without providing evidence to those assertions. The Holocaust is a parade of "he says she says" at the same time they declare themselves intellectually superior while making that assertion via grammatically poor language. It's really easy to see the rational point of view once you take a step back and have a good look at the hypocrisy.

i might like to buy 3 dozen how much are they?

You may have to contact one of Bormann's sons, a theologian, who fixes the
prices of those lamp shades.
I don't even know if he is still alive.
But he knows which of them are real and which of them are fake.
I wouldn't know!
I'm sure you don't want a lamp shade made from a Palestinian in you home ;)

And you failed to address even one of the counter arguments.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/04/quick-links.html

Ah, how did I know you were a fan of that site?

You may have to contact one of Bormann's sons, a theologian, who fixes the
prices of those lamp shades.
I don't even know if he is still alive.
But he knows which of them are real and which of them are fake.
I wouldn't know!
I'm sure you don't want a lamp shade made from a Palestinian in you home ;)

tuisto, don't be too sure that the jew would not be interested in a palestinian skin lamp shade; the israelis likely have a factory somewheres and already have them ready to give away as Hannukah gifts; along with the ears and various body parts their soldiers already lop off as trophies from their murders.

After all, the new jewish religion asserted that Germans made human skin lamp shades; even though this was later and early on proved a falsehood - the story is still part of the Holocaustian Mythos. Which they assume, under their "eye for eye" dogma from their offshoot religion, judaism allows them such barbarity. Yes, judaism, in the early 21st century has become the part of their holocaust myth, not the other way around.

tuisto, don't be too sure that the jew would not be interested in a palestinian skin lamp shade; the israelis likely have a factory somewheres and already have them ready to give away as Hannukah gifts; along with the ears and various body parts their soldiers already lop off as trophies from their murders.

After all, the new jewish religion asserted that Germans made human skin lamp shades; even though this was later and early on proved a falsehood - the story is still part of the Holocaustian Mythos. Which they assume, under their "eye for eye" dogma from their offshoot religion, judaism allows them such barbarity. Yes, judaism, in the early 21st century has become the part of their holocaust myth, not the other way around.

...and I thought I'd be jew wise :o
Thanks for clearing that up!

Martin Adolf Bormann
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

M A Bormann, 1999Martin Adolf Bormann (born Adolf Martin Bormann on April 14, 1930) is the eldest of ten children of Martin Bormann and the godson of Adolf Hitler.

He was born Adolf Martin Bormann, the first child of Martin Bormann (1900 - 1945) and his wife Gerda Buch (1909 - 1946). Nicknamed Krönzi which is short for "Kronprinz" (Crown Prince), he was an ardent young Nazi, attending the Party Academy in Bavaria from 1940 to 1945. His first exposure to atrocities committed under Nazi rule was in 1944 when he visited Himmler's mistress with his mother and sister. "After chocolate and cake, she insisted on taking the children upstairs to show them the 'special collection' Himmler kept in the attic. 'It was a room under the roof - not big but with a window. And the furnishings were very strange. There was a standard lamp, for example, with a lampshade made out of parchment. And this lampshade made out of parchment was made with human skin.'"[1]

In 1947 he became a Roman Catholic and in 1953 was ordained a priest, serving in the Ordensgemeinschaft der Herz-Jesu-Missionare (Sacred Heart Fathers), in the Belgian Congo for many years. [2] Asking for reassignment to South America, Bormann's request was denied by Vatican officials, wary of his father's prominence in history, as well as his purported exile to Argentina. Disaffected and under influence of the radical changes of the 1960s, not in the least Vatican II and its spirit sweeping through the Church, Martin Adolf resigned the priesthood. Following a near-fatal injury in 1969 he was nursed back to health by a nun, (Sister) Cordula, who then also renounced her vows. They were married in 1971.

He became a teacher of theology and retired in 1992. As recently as 2001, he toured schools in Germany and Austria, speaking about the horrors of the Third Reich, and has even visited Israel, meeting with holocaust survivors.[3]

You see Goddess (are you tall, a Nietzschean condition to be called "Goddess") these Wikipeda "he said she said" stories are real messy.

...and I thought I'd be jew wise :o
Thanks for clearing that up!

You see Goddess (are you tall, a Nietzschean condition to be called "Goddess") these Wikipeda "he said she said" stories are real messy.

LOL -- well, tuisto, I stand at exact 5', 9 1/2"

which, I am told is very tall for a woman!

I am not surprised that wikipedia is still alleging the human skin lampshade story. Perhaps someone should correct them on that.

LOL -- well, tuisto, I stand at exact 5', 9 1/2"

which, I am told is very tall for a woman!

I am not surprised that wikipedia is still alleging the human skin lampshade story. Perhaps someone should correct them on that.

This Bormann family seems to be a real enigma.
May be he's talking about a lamp Himmler bought from a Jew who used goy skin :confused:
(Glad I'm at least taller than you: 6.2 and 88 kg: Heil Hitler!:swastikasmiley:)

After all, the new jewish religion asserted that Germans made human skin lamp shades; even though this was later and early on proved a falsehood - the story is still part of the Holocaustian Mythos. Which they assume, under their "eye for eye" dogma from their offshoot religion, judaism allows them such barbarity. Yes, judaism, in the early 21st century has become the part of their holocaust myth, not the other way around.

Interesting.

It was only six years ago during my first year of high school I was watching videos stating soap and lampshades made out of jews was truth. They were not sensationalist programs like the History Channel, they were those unreferenced videos that were laundry lists of "German atrocities" read by a 'survivor' which you may or may not be familiar with. They are cheap, so that is what many schools use.

Interesting.

It was only six years ago during my first year of high school I was watching videos stating soap and lampshades made out of jews was truth. They were not sensationalist programs like the History Channel, they were those unreferenced videos that were laundry lists of "German atrocities" read by a 'survivor' which you may or may not be familiar with. They are cheap, so that is what many schools use.

I am surprised to hear that this garbage was being taught in schools that recently!

The Lampshade mytho, along with the human soap story was debunked many years ago; I think it was even during or right after the Nurnberg Trials - I will have to locate links to attest to this. For these claims made by "eyewitnesses" are pure fiction,

This Bormann family seems to be a real enigma.
May be he's talking about a lamp Himmler bought from a Jew who used goy skin :confused:
(Glad I'm at least taller than you: 6.2 and 88 kg: Heil Hitler!:swastikasmiley:)

Don't be too happy about this, I am becoming taller than you
:D

I am surprised to hear that this garbage was being taught in schools that recently!

The Lampshade mytho, along with the human soap story was debunked many years ago; I think it was even during or right after the Nurnberg Trials - I will have to locate links to attest to this. For these claims made by "eyewitnesses" are pure fiction,
Slamin's heroes still believe this claim and use it as "proof".

Grammatical corrections in bold.
Dialectic corrections in italics.

Jews make assertions without providing evidence to those assertions. The Holocaust is a parade of "he says she says" at the same time they declare themselves intellectually superior while making that assertion via grammatically poor language. It's really easy to see the rational point of view once you take a step back and have a good look at the hypocrisy.

I could care less about grammar.
What are you some kind of grammar nazi? :rofl
:[]

I could care less about grammar.
What are you some kind of grammar nazi? :rofl
:[]

If you're going to insult someone's intelligence you might as well show some yourself. You know - as decorum.

I could care less about grammar.
What are you some kind of grammar nazi?


Because you are a bilious jewish slob and indulge in amusing yourself with badly worded, nonsensical posts does not mean you set any standard of conduct for White Members whom post.

If you're going to insult someone's intelligence you might as well show some yourself. You know - as decorum.

First of all, I am pretty sure in the post you so kindly corrected for me, I had not insulted anyone's intelligence. "Jews are smarter than you" was obviously a joke.

Second of all, my grammar is usually impeccable. Forgive me if I ignore an occasional comma or colon or period....I frankly do not care that much tho.

Because you are a bilious jewish slob and indulge in amusing yourself with badly worded, nonsensical posts does not mean you set any standard of conduct for White Members whom post.

Never said I did...

:[] :rofl

btw, I would like to take this time to thank whitenightshade and psychologicalshock for helping me to get my 4th red dot.
Thanks! =0

First of all, I am pretty sure in the post you so kindly corrected for me, I had not insulted anyone's intelligence. "Jews are smarter than you" was obviously a joke.
I don't take Jokes too well, you see I had to sit through Roger Baer's "performance" and since then I haven't been one for Jewish humor. Sorry to be offended :(.

Second of all, my grammar is usually impeccable. Forgive me if I ignore an occasional comma or colon or period....I frankly do not care that much tho.

Why are you fixating on grammar? The Dialectics were much more important.

Never said I did...

:[] :rofl
I saw Person X is an Idiot, then I say "And Person Y isn't far from it."
Did I directly insult Person Y? No. Did I call him an idiot? Yes.
Not all has to be direct to be interpreted.

btw, I would like to take this time to thank whitenightshade and psychologicalshock for helping me to get my 4th red dot.
Thanks! =0
No problem Ze'ev, at VNN we like competition. :-D

Here's a snippet from "I Will Bear Witness 1933-1941: A Diary of the Nazi Years" by jew Victor Klemperer. This is from his diary in the year 1940:

Two closely written sheets from Sussmann. He describes how he clears land all day. His son-in-law has bought a little summer house with a bit of woodland near Stockholm; it is supposed to be turned into a farmland. Lotte Sussmann is working as a doctor in Switzerland [...] Kate [...] has invited her father, her earnings are sufficient for two - I think to New York. Georg seems to have given up all contact with Europe.

There's your "holocaust." The atrocity mists burn off in the sunny truth of emigration. The jews simply abandoned Germany for Switzerland, Sweden, the U.S. and a dozen other countries. Jew Klemperer was one of a small number who stayed behind. He made it through the entire war living in Germany, and survived several decades after its end.

Death camps? Gassings? No. Progressive legal restrictions leading to emigration.

Here's a snippet from "I Will Bear Witness 1933-1941: A Diary of the Nazi Years" by jew Victor Klemperer. This is from his diary in the year 1940:

Two closely written sheets from Sussmann. He describes how he clears land all day. His son-in-law has bought a little summer house with a bit of woodland near Stockholm; it is supposed to be turned into a farmland. Lotte Sussmann is working as a doctor in Switzerland [...] Kate [...] has invited her father, her earnings are sufficient for two - I think to New York. Georg seems to have given up all contact with Europe.

There's your "holocaust." The atrocity mists burn off in the sunny truth of emigration. The jews simply abandoned Germany for Switzerland, Sweden, the U.S. and a dozen other countries. Jew Klemperer was one of a small number who stayed behind. He made it through the entire war living in Germany, and survived several decades after its end.

Death camps? Gassings? No. Progressive legal restrictions leading to emigration.Any relation to this guy?http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/1750/klempererfq3.jpg (http://imageshack.us):[]

Here's a snippet from "I Will Bear Witness 1933-1941: A Diary of the Nazi Years" by jew Victor Klemperer. This is from his diary in the year 1940:

Two closely written sheets from Sussmann. He describes how he clears land all day. His son-in-law has bought a little summer house with a bit of woodland near Stockholm; it is supposed to be turned into a farmland. Lotte Sussmann is working as a doctor in Switzerland [...] Kate [...] has invited her father, her earnings are sufficient for two - I think to New York. Georg seems to have given up all contact with Europe.

There's your "holocaust." The atrocity mists burn off in the sunny truth of emigration. The jews simply abandoned Germany for Switzerland, Sweden, the U.S. and a dozen other countries. Jew Klemperer was one of a small number who stayed behind. He made it through the entire war living in Germany, and survived several decades after its end.

Death camps? Gassings? No. Progressive legal restrictions leading to emigration.


Comparatively speaking, the Jews of Germany were not a large group, by far most victims of the Holocaust were Polish, Russian and Hungarian.

The Jews of Germany lost in the Holocaust were something like 150,000.

So claiming the Jews of Germany simply abandoned German leaves over 5 million more to be accounted for.

I'll check back to see how you do with this one.

Don't be too happy about this, I am becoming taller than you
:D


Slamin's heroes still believe this claim and use it as "proof".

Not my heroes. When have I defended the lampshade or soap claims?

he Jews of Germany lost in the Holocaust were something like 150,000.

So claiming the Jews of Germany simply abandoned German leaves over 5 million more to be accounted for.

I'll check back to see how you do with this one.

Sorry Chump; but the ball's in your court on this one; where is that evidence of one gassed/holocausted kike?

Where is the legitmate evidence? So far, you have produced nothing. I'll check back in another 50 years; see how you do with this one. Meantime, let's freeze the hoax reparations; have the money returned, dissolve israel and send the juden packing off to Africa or the Galapalagos Islands. You all cannot come back amongst civilisation until the evidence has been provided.

Not my heroes. When have I defended the lampshade or soap claims?

Don't you read the crap sources you post? :rofl:rofl

Don't you read the crap sources you post? :rofl:rofl

What the fuck are you talking about? When have I referenced anything specific to lampshades or soap?

BTW, still waiting for the GPR study from Krege, seen it yet?

Anything to rebut the Polish study I provided?

How about Leuchter's engineering degree? Did he get one yet? Did he even take a single engineering class?

When you get down to it, revisionists are a lot like the presidential candidates, not much but sound bites.

Perhaps you'd care to explain to our web master how many German Jews are alleged to have died in the Holocaust, and claims that German Jews fled before hand are basically a non-issue. Hell, Germany even claims to have birth records for the 150,000 that did die.

Sorry Chump; but the ball's in your court on this one; where is that evidence of one gassed/holocausted kike?

Where is the legitmate evidence? So far, you have produced nothing. I'll check back in another 50 years; see how you do with this one. Meantime, let's freeze the hoax reparations; have the money returned, dissolve israel and send the juden packing off to Africa or the Galapalagos Islands. You all cannot come back amongst civilisation until the evidence has been provided.

Sorry bitch, the trials have been had and the jury's in - the Nazi's have been found guilty time and again in trial after trial for several decades. You don't get to turn legal precedence on its head because you wanna really really bad wish it weren't so.

Don't know what you are studying in NY, but is sure as hell isn't law.

What the fuck are you talking about? When have I referenced anything specific to lampshades or soap?
Read your blog source.


BTW, still waiting for the GPR study from Krege, seen it yet?
I don't subscribe to the Journal cited but here's the citation.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p20_radar.html


Anything to rebut the Polish study I provided?
Jankiel Wiernik.


How about Leuchter's engineering degree? Did he get one yet? Did he even take a single engineering class?
Jews have given out non-formal degrees to niggers and various other scum like candy. Its quite obvious that Leuchter easily deserves one as his knowledge is sufficient for at least a Bachelors.

Not my heroes. When have I defended the lampshade or soap claims?

Members of the US military and government presented those items in a public display as if they were really from humans. Are you calling Americans liars?

Sorry bitch, the trials have been had and the jury's in - the Nazi's have been found guilty time and again in trial after trial for several decades. You don't get to turn legal precedence on its head because you wanna really really bad wish it weren't so.

Don't know what you are studying in NY, but is sure as hell isn't law

pleeezzee.....Rabbi!....don't "come the raw prawn" with this "court-room" drama shite.....no "nazis" have EVER been "convicted" of ANY "crime against humanity" in ANY court of common law in ANY 'common-law'-country....why is that important?....because: the 'standard of proof' required for such courts ("beyond reasonable doubt") and the "rules of evidence" against hearsay in particular would "see off" pretty much ALL of the so-called "guilty" verdicts entered agin' former Nazis....as happened with the so-called 'war-crimes trials' in Australia during the late 1980s...as i pointed out on a previous post in another thread...but...which you conveniently "finessed"; viz: ignored!....HTF do u explain that jew-boy? hunh?.....the only time that i can recall that such WWII/crimes agin' "humanity" were brought in a common-law nation, they were NUKED in court! :D .....WTF the reason for that there, Mr Goldsilverbergstein?

(jimbo!)


http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q197/__jimbo__/regalia_mothercross_gold.jpg

Not my heroes. When have I defended the lampshade or soap claims?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So you will admit that lampshades and soap claims were lies then? As far as who did the methodic radar grid of Treblinka with zero results of disturbed earth goes, who cares if you challenge this? The kike is the father of all lies. I must assume then that everything claimed by holoco$ted jews to be fabrications of a demented sick mind. Yours seems to be no exception.

When have I defended the lampshade or soap claims?

Finally, a jew whose granny is not a lampshade.

Finally, a jew whose granny is not a lampshade.

your granny is a lampshade! :[]

*500th post!*

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So you will admit that lampshades and soap claims were lies then? As far as who did the methodic radar grid of Treblinka with zero results of disturbed earth goes, who cares if you challenge this? The kike is the father of all lies. I must assume then that everything claimed by holoco jews to be fabrications of a demented sick mind. Yours seems to be no exception.

http://www.gayecameron.com.au/images/Dominos%2002.jpg

Just as the Dominoes fall one after another so too shall the legend fall down one claim after another . The Jews lied once and since then they have had to make up more and more boisterous claims, since that day it began they have only been giving the story even more and more ridiculous aspects. At first not even an average soldier believed it, but now.. now it is a crime not to!

If they are to release one claim and admit themselves wrong then the rest slowly becomes illogical. Instead they have tried to do rewrite it all in the presences of the new Liberal children . Just the observance of the "edits" in the book "Night" show how quickly the story is being reformed. And it continues, they reform and change the story until it looks like nothing that it was originally, a story that no one had been condemned to. You can't change realistic lies without having to change everything.

Don't believe anyone who "doesn't believe" some part of the Holocaust because they are liars who are trying to change their story to make it sound sound more convincing. They do it because the original was debunked and they should be reminded at every opportunity of the original because if they don't stick to it , it never happened! They'll try to beguile you but they are of such a low character that they shouldn't even be allowed to speak. It's only to humor us that this filth is allowed in here.

your granny is a lampshade! :[]

*500th post!*

I can't wait for your post number 1488.

I can't wait for your post number 1488.

stfu faggot.

South Africa belongs to the BLACKS!

stfu faggot.!

Kindly mind your manners.

I am not a faggot.

I am the mother of a beautiful white girl.




South Africa belongs to the BLACKS!

Tell that to your chums here. ;)

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii256/WNSWhiteNightShade/082ede14.jpg
http://haruth.com/jw/JewsSouthAfrica.html

Thankfully there are not too many of them left as most of the cowards ran.

stfu faggot.

South Africa belongs to the BLACKS!

So should all non-Blacks get up and leave Africa immediately? You do realize that will result in mass starvation and total economic collapse?

Well, thats not too different than what has happened already due to Jewish activism.

Originally Posted by Slamin2 http://www.vnnforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=740684#post740684)
Sorry bitch, the trials have been had and the jury's in - the Nazi's have been found guilty time and again in trial after trial for several decades. You don't get to turn legal precedence on its head because you wanna really really bad wish it weren't so.

Don't know what you are studying in NY, but is sure as hell isn't law



Actually, I think it is every Aryan's duty to have more than a passing acquaintance with law and the ethics therein; the laws passed since the War do not protect us at all, therefore we should not remain in ignorance, as we have done and been forced to do;

by sheer fact that the jews' corner on the law market have made it unethical and unsavoury for any White Folk with a conscience to even wish to study law.

It is a ridiculous argument you propose and the subject you keep evading, ie, criminal or even civil legal evidence of the one gassed, holocausted jew is the apex as well as nadir of jewish approach to ethics, religion and law - all of which they have bundled into one tidy package.

You have stated that there are graveyards stuffed with gassed and holocausted juden. Why not dig one up; and use the remains to provide proof. Clearly the jury is "not in", or you would not be here to debate the matter.

Sorry bitch, the trials have been had and the jury's in - the Nazi's have been found guilty time and again in trial after trial for several decades. You don't get to turn legal precedence on its head because you wanna really really bad wish it weren't so.

I have never heard of a case where the facts and claims keep changing from day to day. Such a case would be thrown out completely. That and it makes little sense to prosecute the staff of a camp for 4 million people when it was actually more than 4 times smaller. That means that 3/4ths of those you prosecuted are innocent. With such an error margin all Holocaust courts should cease and desist immediately.

stfu faggot.

South Africa belongs to the BLACKS!

You're one to talk. Go back home scum!

Oh wait, no one wants you back in Khazaria. They never did!

You're not wanted anywhere, not in the past, not in the present and not in the future. You're literally a homeless gypsy .

stfu faggot.

What did Freud say about the projection of desires again?

I am surprised to hear that this garbage was being taught in schools that recently!

The Lampshade mytho, along with the human soap story was debunked many years ago; I think it was even during or right after the Nurnberg Trials - I will have to locate links to attest to this. For these claims made by "eyewitnesses" are pure fiction,

It's a bit tricky to explain.

What would happen in these videos was a so-called survivor coming on and saying something like "not only did they gas us but soap was being made from cildren blah blah" and a host would take over moving to the next segment without addressing the survivor's account. Very subtle. So while a host would introduce the survivor confession they did not claim responsibility for what would be said by them on the video. Literally anything could be said and it would be taken as truth.

It's a bit tricky to explain.

What would happen in these videos was a so-called survivor coming on and saying something like "not only did they gas us but soap was being made from cildren blah blah" and a host would take over moving to the next segment without addressing the survivor's account. Very subtle. So while a host would introduce the survivor confession they did not claim responsibility for what would be said by them on the video. Literally anything could be said and it would be taken as truth.

I have to say my experience was slightly different; we didn't have the whole 'holocaust survivor' thing but rather our teacher spent a number of 40 minutes lessons enlarging upon what she called 'the despicable crimes of the Nazis'. This included the soap, lampshades, Mengele eye ball stories etc ad infinitum. I had about four years of this since I covered the Third Reich four times in five years in my history lessons.

I also remember all sorts of inaccuracies in the textbooks regarding the Reich. For example they produced a well known diagram of Semitic/jewish noses which they described as a typical Nazi illustration to foster the idea that the jew was different to everyone else. They also implicitly suggested it was a lie.

In fact said diagram; which I can still draw from memory, was part of an 1885 scientific monograph (in both a and b parts) by Joseph Jacobs for the Royal Society in London. Joseph Jacobs being a jew who contributed many articles to the Jewish Encyclopedia (Funk and Wagnells [1901-1905]) and to various academic and learned journals in his life.

I am yet to find a Third Reich book; which uses his illustrations (although I have found jewish books such as 'Jews, Race and Environment' by Maurice Fishberg (1911) and general scientific books 'Race' by John Baker (1974), which have.).

Oh and it also repeated; as did my teacher, the 'Big Lie' deliberate mis-quotation as well. She had a history degree specialising in the Third Reich and the SS.

Goes to show how little the 'educated historian' knows; half the time (although it tends to get a lot better the further back you go).

I have to say my experience was slightly different; we didn't have the whole 'holocaust survivor' thing but rather our teacher spent a number of 40 minutes lessons enlarging upon what she called 'the despicable crimes of the Nazis'. This included the soap, lampshades, Mengele eye ball stories etc ad infinitum. I had about four years of this since I covered the Third Reich four times in five years in my history lessons.

I also remember all sorts of inaccuracies in the textbooks regarding the Reich. For example they produced a well known diagram of Semitic/jewish noses which they described as a typical Nazi illustration to foster the idea that the jew was different to everyone else. They also implicitly suggested it was a lie.

In fact said diagram; which I can still draw from memory, was part of an 1885 scientific monograph (in both a and b parts) by Joseph Jacobs for the Royal Society in London. Joseph Jacobs being a jew who contributed many articles to the Jewish Encyclopedia (Funk and Wagnells [1901-1905]) and to various academic and learned journals in his life.

I am yet to find a Third Reich book; which uses his illustrations (although I have found jewish books such as 'Jews, Race and Environment' by Maurice Fishberg (1911) and general scientific books 'Race' by John Baker (1974), which have.).

Oh and it also repeated; as did my teacher, the 'Big Lie' deliberate mis-quotation as well. She had a history degree specialising in the Third Reich and the SS.

Goes to show how little the 'educated historian' knows; half the time (although it tends to get a lot better the further back you go).


Well, Herr Radl,

Judging by both your and Signe's replies, it seems you all got the full assault of Holocaustianity thrust on you.

I was rather more fortunate, though not by much, in that I was home-schooled for many years; and when I did go to the last year of Middle School and into High School, whenever I heard the horror stories, I knew that they were fables.

Though some were so awful that I did bring it home to Mutti; and this is where having a parent whom also is a financial supporter of a private School comes in handy; for she marched herself down to the Dean's office and stated that such nonsense had no business inside a private, much less Irish Catholic schoolroom. She threatened to not only pull me from the school; but to withdraw her rather substantial charitable donation to the school. So, keeping to the strict letter of holocaustian law; so as to not be accused of denial, the hoax was taught - but mainly in English class, and a shortened syllabus in History.

Another reason to home school and hire suitable tutors for my children when they are old enough; as well as increased call for reform:

No teaching of Holocaustianity inside any public or private Christian schools. Unless it's as an elective course in some high school "comparative religion" class.

That's how it always should have been; if at all

Well, Herr Radl,

Judging by both your and Signe's replies, it seems you all got the full assault of Holocaustianity thrust on you.

I was rather more fortunate, though not by much, in that I was home-schooled for many years; and when I did go to the last year of Middle School and into High School, whenever I heard the horror stories, I knew that they were fables.

Though some were so awful that I did bring it home to Mutti; and this is where having a parent whom also is a financial supporter of a private School comes in handy; for she marched herself down to the Dean's office and stated that such nonsense had no business inside a private, much less Irish Catholic schoolroom. She threatened to not only pull me from the school; but to withdraw her rather substantial charitable donation to the school. So, keeping to the strict letter of holocaustian law; so as to not be accused of denial, the hoax was taught - but mainly in English class, and a shortened syllabus in History.

Another reason to home school and hire suitable tutors for my children when they are old enough; as well as increased call for reform:

No teaching of Holocaustianity inside any public or private Christian schools. Unless it's as an elective course in some high school "comparative religion" class.

That's how it always should have been; if at all

Well I figure I should chip in even though my story is nothing that will amaze. The stand taken on it in my house was always that of the coldest apathy. When I asked my father he said "If it happened, great. If it didn't I don't care." and that was all. When it was spoken of in school I slept and didn't catch a word of it and then finally I heard it mentioned just last year while in guidance. It was a sort of office complex with thin walls so you could hear other students speaking to their counselors. At that point in time mine was finishing my paper work so neither I nor her spoke, I got to listen to a conversation next door.
The rather dimwit blond girl was happily babbling away about her insignificant degree and mentioning Holocaust studies ever few moments. "Should I take Holocaust studies? Bla bla bla hehe." It hit me then that not even they take it as something serious but rather just another event in a distant land, no these people were happily babbling away about a supposed extermination of 6 million creatures. Yes they would look down on those who denied but as zealots not because they truly found any worth in the Jew's life. Its in this meaningless babble that I got to see the true bones of the Holocaust - the true nihilism experienced by its believers. They believed in nothing and they were happy in believing in nothing.

Read your blog source.

My 'blog source' does not claim that lampshades or soap has been shown to be true'.


I don't subscribe to the Journal cited but here's the citation.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p20_radar.html



That's not a formal study moron.

"Krege is preparing a detailed report on his Treblinka investigation. He says that he would welcome the formation, possibly under United Nations auspices, of an international team of neutral, qualified specialists, to carry out similar investigations at the sites of all the wartime German camps."

The article is from May-June 2000 - almost 8 years and no published study - think something may be wrong??

I have never heard of a case where the facts and claims keep changing from day to day. Such a case would be thrown out completely. That and it makes little sense to prosecute the staff of a camp for 4 million people when it was actually more than 4 times smaller. That means that 3/4ths of those you prosecuted are innocent. With such an error margin all Holocaust courts should cease and desist immediately.



You never heard of a historical record being redefined as additional information came to light? Small bubble you live in.

Kindly reference the part of the Nuremberg Judgment in which its was held four million were killed in Auschwitz .

My 'blog source' does not claim that lampshades or soap has been shown to be true'.

Learn to read




"Krege is preparing a detailed report on his Treblinka investigation. He says that he would welcome the formation, possibly under United Nations auspices, of an international team of neutral, qualified specialists, to carry out similar investigations at the sites of all the wartime German camps."

The article is from May-June 2000 - almost 8 years and no published study - think something may be wrong??

Yeah there is something wrong, it's called Holocaust police.

" Krege and his team are associated with, and funded
by, the Adelaide Institute, a south Australia revisionist
"think tank." Its director, Dr. Fredrick Toben, was jailed
in Germany for seven months in 1999 for disputing
Holocaust extermination claims. ("'Vernichtungslager'
Treblinka: archaelogisch betrachtet," by Ing. Richard
Krege, in Vierteljarhreshefte f�r freie
Geschichtsforschung, June 2000 [4. Jg., Heft 1], pp.
62-64; "'No Jewish mass grave' in Poland," The Canberra
Times, Jan. 24, 2000, p. 6; "Poland's Jews 'not buried at
Treblinka'," The Examiner [Australia], Jan. 24, 2000.
[The latter two newspaper items are reprinted in
facsimile in VHO-info, May 2000, p. 30.]; Information
provided by Richard Krege; M. Weber and A. Allen,
"Treblinka," The Journal of Historical Review, Summer
1992, pp. 133-158; Journal of Historical Review |
Volume 19, number 3 (May/June); "German Court
Sentences Australian Holocaust Skeptic," The Journal of
Historical Review, July-August 1999, pp. 2-5; Y. Arad,
"Treblinka," in I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Holocaust [New York: 1997], pp. 1481-1488.))
"


If you give a shit then repeat the experiment his procedure is pretty well laid out. Until then stfu.

It's laughable that you think the truth will be something people are arrested for. Very ludicrous and stupid.

You never heard of a historical record being redefined as additional information came to light? Small bubble you live in.
Oh so courts just shuffle up evidence when it's on hand? No, stick to your story.
You're being judged, you're not writing history because this history has been forbidden to be modified by anyone but Jews and lackeys like yourself. So no, stick with your story. The next time I hear you say a word about you agree with this or that I am going to shove your lies in your face no matter if you agree with them or not and I recommend for all VNNers to do the same. You will have your lies shoved at you no matter if you accept them or not, they're your lies, keep them.

Kindly reference the part of the Nuremberg Judgment in which its was held four million were killed in Auschwitz .
It was written by your beloved Polaks who worship mister Jankiel Wiernik. Are they not part of the Nurenberg trial because you don't agree with them? Aww, that makes those poor Polaks very very sad. What's the source of this lie? The tortured victim of the Jews - Rudolf Hoess who was beaten until he confessed to such a number such as 4 million.

You have stated that there are graveyards stuffed with gassed and holocausted juden. Why not dig one up; and use the remains to provide proof. Clearly the jury is "not in", or you would not be here to debate the matter.

When did I state this? Can't help but lie can you? Its getting worse - seriously!

Learn to read




Yeah there is something wrong, it's called Holocaust police.

" Krege and his team are associated with, and funded
by, the Adelaide Institute, a south Australia revisionist
"think tank." Its director, Dr. Fredrick Toben, was jailed
in Germany for seven months in 1999 for disputing
Holocaust extermination claims. ("'Vernichtungslager'
Treblinka: archaelogisch betrachtet," by Ing. Richard
Krege, in Vierteljarhreshefte f�r freie
Geschichtsforschung, June 2000 [4. Jg., Heft 1], pp.
62-64; "'No Jewish mass grave' in Poland," The Canberra
Times, Jan. 24, 2000, p. 6; "Poland's Jews 'not buried at
Treblinka'," The Examiner [Australia], Jan. 24, 2000.
[The latter two newspaper items are reprinted in
facsimile in VHO-info, May 2000, p. 30.]; Information
provided by Richard Krege; M. Weber and A. Allen,
"Treblinka," The Journal of Historical Review, Summer
1992, pp. 133-158; Journal of Historical Review |
Volume 19, number 3 (May/June); "German Court
Sentences Australian Holocaust Skeptic," The Journal of
Historical Review, July-August 1999, pp. 2-5; Y. Arad,
"Treblinka," in I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Holocaust [New York: 1997], pp. 1481-1488.))
"


If you give a shit then repeat the experiment his procedure is pretty well laid out. Until then stfu.

It's laughable that you think the truth will be something people are arrested for. Very ludicrous and stupid.

You've referenced a newspaper article moron.

Show me how his procedure is laid out - what scans are available, show us on a map what he surveyed.

If you consider any of these items to be scholarly work - then you are an idiot!

If you consider any of these items to be scholarly work - then you are an idiot!

You are one to talk, you have yet to produce anything except your own rather loud flatulence as "scholarly work".

You stated some time ago that you have the inside news on everything Holocaustian; including the mass graves where those missing, gassed, holocausted juden are to be found.

Where is your proof of one gassed, holocausted jew.

You've referenced a newspaper article moron.

Show me how his procedure is laid out - what scans are available, show us on a map what he surveyed.

If you consider any of these items to be scholarly work - then you are an idiot!

The technology used is widely available, if you want to dispute it do it yourself. The methods used are outlined in his preliminary study and from what I understand they are pretty standard for forensics. If not - well its a professional opinion which is accepted in Jewish courts so why not now? :)
Oh I know why, do you? :[]

You manage to avoid what's not on hand. It wasn't published because it's illegal you dumbfuck. Get it? It's illegal to publish reports that contradict your fairy tale, that's why it's not there. Are you going to deny that?

You don't have a case, produce evidence otherwise or stfu.

Don't you realize the newspaper article is for citing Holocaust police? That's the point, idiot.

What Krege did is illegal in Australia.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23290926-2702,00.html

Publishing is extremely risky for him. Even if this was a subject-neutral field you can see that if there is no dissent allowed its absolutely impossible to critically look at the Holocaust. Thus demanding "evidence" from the illegal side is unreasonable since most scientists who would be interested in studying your myth are too afraid to. If you want a fair study have all the laws removed, until then the burden of proof is on you and so far you have been a complete failure.

It really becomes obvious why only people like Leuchter publish - they have nothing to lose. Krege has everything to lose and he knows that your kind will ad hominem him and lie about everything just to bring him down. Afterwards he will spend 3 years in jail and pay a hefty fine and never get to do science again. All to prove that the king has no clothes? No thanks fuck face. I support Krege in with-holding.

What Krege did is illegal in Australia.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23290926-2702,00.html

Publishing is extremely risky for him. Even if this was a subject-neutral field you can see that if there is no dissent allowed its absolutely impossible to critically look at the Holocaust. Thus demanding "evidence" from the illegal side is unreasonable since most scientists who would be interested in studying your myth are too afraid to. If you want a fair study have all the laws removed, until then the burden of proof is on you and so far you have been a complete failure.

It really becomes obvious why only people like Leuchter publish - they have nothing to lose. Krege has everything to lose and he knows that your kind will ad hominem him and lie about everything just to bring him down. Afterwards he will spend 3 years in jail and pay a hefty fine and never get to do science again. All to prove that the king has no clothes? No thanks fuck face. I support Krege in with-holding.

It is not illegal in Australia - its illegal in Austria.

Did you take stupid pills today?

The technology used is widely available, if you want to dispute it do it yourself. The methods used are outlined in his preliminary study and from what I understand they are pretty standard for forensics. If not - well its a professional opinion which is accepted in Jewish courts so why not now? :)
Oh I know why, do you? :[]

You manage to avoid what's not on hand. It wasn't published because it's illegal you dumbfuck. Get it? It's illegal to publish reports that contradict your fairy tale, that's why it's not there. Are you going to deny that?

You don't have a case, produce evidence otherwise or stfu.

Don't you realize the newspaper article is for citing Holocaust police? That's the point, idiot.

Again its not illegal in Austraila dumb fuck - get a fucking atlas if you are this stupid.

Krege is in Austrialia, not Austria, he even attended the Holcoaust party in Iran last year.

God, did you get hit by a dumb bomb today?

It is not illegal in Australia - its illegal in Austria.

Did you take stupid pills today?

Wow really?! Why is it that Australians are being called in court over it?

Learn to read , Zhid .

"decision by Justice Catherine Branson to remove the Holocaust-denial material. "

What more do you need? Maybe a public beheading? A public stoning? Formal jail terms? What?

Forget about it, you're wasting my time with meaningless prattle.


You can go over formalities all you want, here's what ADL has to say



Holocaust Denial in Australia
In Australia, there are no specific statutes prohibiting Holocaust denial. However, the Australian courts have made it clear that Holocaust denial is a form of antisemitism and vilification, which is prohibited by Federal anti-discrimination laws. In doing so, Australian law has developed genuine protection against Holocaust denial, and has demonstrated that Jews will have a means of redress.

The leading judgement is that of Jones v Toben [2003] FCA 137 decided by the Federal Court of Australia in 2003. The case concerned a website of an extreme right wing group, the Adelaide Institute, run by Fredrick Toben. The material published on the website denies the reality of the Holocaust and makes antisemitic statements. This material was held to be in breach of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), as it was reasonably likely to offend, insult, or humiliate and intimidate Jews in Australia because of their origins. The court ordered the respondent, Adelaide Institute director Fredrick Toben, to remove all offensive material from the site.

When an order of the Court is not complied with, it is possible to charge a perpetrator with contempt of court. In 2007 the ECAJ brought a successful action for contempt of court, which required Toben and the Adelaide Institute to comply with the 2002 order.
Holocaust denial is a crime, just not a separate crime. So what?

Idiot.

Again its not illegal in Austraila dumb fuck - get a fucking atlas if you are this stupid.

Krege is in Austrialia, not Austria, he even attended the Holcoaust party in Iran last year.

God, did you get hit by a dumb bomb today?


Again learn to read, if someone can be pushed over to remove a site then its illegal. If you do not have free speech for it its illegal just as screaming "fire" is. If it was legal no one would have to remove it. Now you go on block, your stupidity has gotten to me.

Wow really?! Why is it that Australians are being called in court over it?

Learn to read , Zhid .

"decision by Justice Catherine Branson to remove the Holocaust-denial material. "

What more do you need? Maybe a public beheading? A public stoning? Formal jail terms? What?

Forget about it, you're wasting my time with meaningless prattle.

Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 13 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

If its illegal, cite the Austrialian law.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/

Web site still active.

When Toben is in an Australian jail then you can talk.

[...]
The rather dimwit blond girl was happily babbling away about her insignificant degree and mentioning Holocaust studies ever few moments. "Should I take Holocaust studies? Bla bla bla hehe." It hit me then that not even they take it as something serious but rather just another event in a distant land, no these people were happily babbling away about a supposed extermination of 6 million creatures. Yes they would look down on those who denied but as zealots not because they truly found any worth in the Jew's life. Its in this meaningless babble that I got to see the true bones of the Holocaust - the true nihilism experienced by its believers. They believed in nothing and they were happy in believing in nothing.

Wow! I had a similar experience. Going to public school in Southern California meant annual trips to Weisenthal's Holocaust Museum/Musuem of Tolerance in Los Angeles. It was perhaps 10-15 children per guide. These disinterested guides would walk in front of us, stopping every 20 seconds or so to point at something and say "this is the wooden frame of a bunk bed where up to six jews would sleep", "this is a tool Mengele used on children", "this is a short clip of jews walking into gas chambers". It was a job to them, and their glazey eyes couldn't even fake emotion if they tried. Just like the girl you described, they would get a bit bouncy when it came to their favorite part of the tour. Whether it was walking into a mock gas chamber or looking at the huge pile of discarded shoes. It was mechanical, it was going through the motions, and most of all it was memorization from their own indoctrination. Finish the tour and grab some coffee in back.

That museum was so cold and impersonal. A two hour drive from a kids family in a bus, strangers making you walk in a single file line...etc. Age old methods.

By the way, one part of the tour was seeing screen shots of "hate websites". That's the first time I heard of VNN ;)

Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 13 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

If its illegal, cite the Austrialian law.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/



I believe it to be implicitly illegal in Australia as well. While there may not be specific statutes against Holocaust denial, the courts have been open in saying that Holocaust denial is a form of anti-semitism and vilification, which is prohibited by Federal anti-discrimination laws.

Twelve million live in the U.S. alone. Rephrasing the question: Will 12 million jews be murdered?

You bet your happy ass they will.

Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 13 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

If its illegal, cite the Austrialian law.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/

Web site still active.

When Toben is in an Australian jail then you can talk.


Actually, Herr Toben's site was down under Aus court orders and jew demands for same for several days a few months back; as well, Herr Toben was under orders by Aus' courts to remove several found to be 'objectionable' items on his site; oddly, one section was an in depth, day by day accounting of the Sylvia Stolz holocaust denial trial in Germany. If objectionable material were not removed as deemed by jews; then, Herr Toben would have been incarcerated, without trial.

Also, in America, if one is overtly anti-semitic in any fashion at all, do not even attempt to tell me that this is allowed and tolerated.

America is not free and you know it Slammin; America stopped being a free land somewhere in the 60's - you are one of the people ensuring that America will never be free; unless it is as you dictate. You have absolutely no moral authority to speak as to any European Land; and America is not your Land either. You are the jew that swears no allegience to any flag, you are the jew that exists to shatter into pieces every effort toward a new world humankind attempts. You are the jew that hates his own tribe and all that lives. Because you are a jew and for no other reason. There is no explanation necessary as to why you are this way. One only has to state:

This, This is the jew in his full spasm of hate. This is the jew and his holocaust. He swears to it because he must have it; not because it is real or true. The jew must have ugliness and disease and lies because anything more nourishing would kill it.

jews such as yourself are the most evil; because you lie and deny who and what you are; yet you are so obvious. Go ahead, tell me again how "White" you are and how you are not really a jew because of this or the other thing. Liar.

If its illegal, cite the Austrialian law.



He already did, you bloodsucking piece of shit. Quote:

"Holocaust Denial in Australia
In Australia, there are no specific statutes prohibiting Holocaust denial. However, the Australian courts have made it clear that Holocaust denial is a form of antisemitism and vilification, which is prohibited by Federal anti-discrimination laws. In doing so, Australian law has developed genuine protection against Holocaust denial, and has demonstrated that Jews will have a means of redress."

In other words, "holocaust denial" is not classified as a crime. But to deny the holohoax is "antisemitism", which IS a crime. Of course you understand this perfectly well. But you bastards think if you can split enough hairs and shovel out enough bullshit you can derail the debate. They must teach you this technique in jew school, because all you greasy sheenies try it. Furthermore, you understand perfectly well that it is career suicide for anyone in academia to openly question your blatant lies about the poor 6 million gassed and roasted chosen ones, lights unto the nations everyone of the bastards.

Twelve million live in the U.S. alone. Rephrasing the question: Will 12 million jews be murdered?

You bet your happy ass they will.

Actually it won't be murder. One does not refer to the execution of criminals as "murder". The 12 million jews in the U.S. will be executed for their crimes, which includes murder, genocide, treason, murder through abortion, usuary, nation wrecking, the destruction of Western Civilisation, extreme ugliness, larceny, sexual perversion, lying, drug dealing, and being jews.

Other than that minor technicality I agree with you 100%. You have a clear understanding of the problem and also the solution. I like that. Rep to you.

Law Prohibiting Antisemitism

Australia has a federal system of government and laws on racism and racial hatred exist both at state and commonwealth levels. Australia has a written constitution, but has no bill of rights. Human rights legislation in Australia is based on international law, as a result of Australia being party to all the international human rights instruments. The most important international law concerning racism and antisemitism is the Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.


Commonwealth law

On a Federal level, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) deals with racial hatred. It prohibits words and acts that are likely to insult, offend intimidate or humiliate a person or group on the basis of their race, colour, national or ethnic origin.

The courts have held that Jewish people are a group with a common ethnic origin, and are protected under these laws from hatred.

Complaints under this law are administered by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC). HREOC investigates and conciliate complaints of acts of racial hatred. HREOC’s decisions can be enforced by the Federal court.

Victorian law

The Victorian parliament recently enacted the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 (Vic). This law prohibits speech that incites hatred, contempt, revulsion or ridicule against a person or group on the basis of their race or religion.

This covers any form of antisemitism or racial villification (holohoax denial)

I love the one they have called "defaming the dead", or something like that...:rolleyes: Hell, they "defame" my dead ancestors every day with their attempts at rewriting my history, and their accusations and insinuations that my ancestors were oppressive, evil, genocidal pieces of shit....:cool: It's too bad they don't look into a mirror first before they say that.

Actually, Herr Toben's site was down under Aus court orders and jew demands for same for several days a few months back; as well, Herr Toben was under orders by Aus' courts to remove several found to be 'objectionable' items on his site; oddly, one section was an in depth, day by day accounting of the Sylvia Stolz holocaust denial trial in Germany. If objectionable material were not removed as deemed by jews; then, Herr Toben would have been incarcerated, without trial.

Also, in America, if one is overtly anti-semitic in any fashion at all, do not even attempt to tell me that this is allowed and tolerated.

America is not free and you know it Slammin; America stopped being a free land somewhere in the 60's - you are one of the people ensuring that America will never be free; unless it is as you dictate. You have absolutely no moral authority to speak as to any European Land; and America is not your Land either. You are the jew that swears no allegience to any flag, you are the jew that exists to shatter into pieces every effort toward a new world humankind attempts. You are the jew that hates his own tribe and all that lives. Because you are a jew and for no other reason. There is no explanation necessary as to why you are this way. One only has to state:

This, This is the jew in his full spasm of hate. This is the jew and his holocaust. He swears to it because he must have it; not because it is real or true. The jew must have ugliness and disease and lies because anything more nourishing would kill it.

jews such as yourself are the most evil; because you lie and deny who and what you are; yet you are so obvious. Go ahead, tell me again how "White" you are and how you are not really a jew because of this or the other thing. Liar.


:rofl:rofl

Is it healthy to have so much hate and vile in your heart?

:rofl:rofl

Is it healthy to have so much hate and vile in your heart?

Well of course it is. This is so we can fend off the vomits such as yourself.

Is it healthy to have so much hate and vile in your heart?

I don't know, Rabbi, is it? T.J.B.

Actually it won't be murder. One does not refer to the execution of criminals as "murder". The 12 million jews in the U.S. will be executed for their crimes, which includes murder, genocide, treason, murder through abortion, usuary, nation wrecking, the destruction of Western Civilisation, extreme ugliness, larceny, sexual perversion, lying, drug dealing, and being jews.

Other than that minor technicality I agree with you 100%. You have a clear understanding of the problem and also the solution. I like that. Rep to you.

Right on, Fred. It wouldn't be counted as murder; more like happy slaughtering. The non-technicality will be the jewish cry babies crying out, "Oh Vey, they are murdering us for no reason!" "Those fascists nazis -- they are worse than Hitler."

:rofl:rofl

Is it healthy to have so much hate and vile in your heart?

I think you mean BILE, tapeworm.

It will prove to be unhealthy for you jews.

He already did, you bloodsucking piece of shit. Quote:

"Holocaust Denial in Australia
In Australia, there are no specific statutes prohibiting Holocaust denial. However, the Australian courts have made it clear that Holocaust denial is a form of antisemitism and vilification, which is prohibited by Federal anti-discrimination laws. In doing so, Australian law has developed genuine protection against Holocaust denial, and has demonstrated that Jews will have a means of redress."
Id give you more rep if I could Fred.


In other words, "holocaust denial" is not classified as a crime. But to deny the holohoax is "antisemitism", which IS a crime. Of course you understand this perfectly well. But you bastards think if you can split enough hairs and shovel out enough bullshit you can derail the debate. They must teach you this technique in jew school, because all you greasy sheenies try it. Furthermore, you understand perfectly well that it is career suicide for anyone in academia to openly question your blatant lies about the poor 6 million gassed and roasted chosen ones, lights unto the nations everyone of the bastards.

A Jew is never direct so to save itself for being discovered it asks for direct statements knowing it wont get caught in the crossfire that way. Tricky fiends, but not so tricky once you crack them open.

Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 13 countries: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Switzerland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

If its illegal, cite the Austrialian law.

http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/

Web site still active.

When Toben is in an Australian jail then you can talk.

it is not "illegal" per se to "question the Holocaust" in Australia; how-ever, it is illegal, under state law, to engage in racial/religious vilification (penalties: fines/gaol terms of up to two years!); recently, there was a major "test case" of this some-what controversial legislation in Victoria involving a Muslim organisation and the Pastor (Danny Nylander, i think his name was!) of a fundamentalist christian church; the jews are endeavouring to "buckle" Frederick Toben under virtually identical South 0zz legislation.....claiming his "Holocaust denial" 'vilifies' them as liars!....that's my "under-standing" of it all....i haven't explored Toben's case too deeply! that said, the afore-mentioned legislation, because of its "controversial" nature, is rarely, if ever, used.....the "test case" mentioned above(which ran for months and cost the average Aussie tax-payers $$hundreds of thousands$$ with no real result for the Crown!) pretty much threw "a wet blanket" on overly-enthuastic DPPs (Directors of Public Prosecutions) from pursuing such charges! in the light of all this, the fact that Toben is still being pursued over this matter means that there must be ENORMOUS PRESSURE being exerted "behind the scenes" via the usual suspects! T.J.B.

*the 1975 Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act is not used for individual prosecutions in the sense of someone's "published" opinions/speech (@ least: to my knowledge, it has never been so used)....it is primarily used in the work-place where people claim they were "discriminated" against....usually re: hiring/firing*

(jimbo!)


http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q197/__jimbo__/regalia_mothercross_gold.jpg

http://modiya.nyu.edu/modiya/bitstream/1964/335/6/hoload_v3.jpg (http://modiya.nyu.edu/modiya/handle/1964/335)


This advert was an attempt to be clever - a trick used by juden in Germany; designed to appeal to all - The large, bold print states : "The holocaust Never Happpened".

Then, the fine print states, "there are still many people who make this claim. In 20 years there could be even more. Make a donation to the memorial for the murdered Jews of Europe".

This is jewish "wit" in action, as of 2001.

stfu faggot.

South Africa belongs to the BLACKS!

turd world splender of black rule:

http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?from=rss_Transport&set_id=1&click_id=181&art_id=vn20080311055052610C293756

Human excrement and illegal electrical connections running beneath railway tracks in Metrorail's Central Line, are causing major train delays and malfunctions, says Metrorail's regional executive after visiting stations there.

Nyanga station, its surrounds and the stretch of railway between Nolungile and Nonkqubela stations in Khayelitsha came under the spotlight for encroachments on to the railway tracks by people living in informal settlements.

According to Metrorail's Blits publication, residents are forced to dump their excrement on to the railway line, due to the lack of amenities in informal settlements.

"As a result of the waste seeping into the ballast stone supporting the tracks, insufficient power is generated to operate trains.

More:

turd world splender of black rule:

http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?from=rss_Transport&set_id=1&click_id=181&art_id=vn20080311055052610C293756



More:

lol thats nasty.

I still say that tho...whites have no business in africa.
If you want all blacks to africa, and all jews to israel (or dead) ....then whites have no place in Africa.
Heck, they have no place in the USA for that matter...by that logic =)

lol thats nasty.

I still say that tho...whites have no business in africa.
If you want all blacks to africa, and all jews to israel (or dead) ....then whites have no place in Africa.
Heck, they have no place in the USA for that matter...by that logic =)

Negroes are a failed species of ape that have no claim to anything. Africa is full of farmland and mineral resources that if not claimed by Whites will be taken by the Chinese.

The complete extermination of negroids would be a massive step forward for human progress because then Homo Sapiens would not have the risk of having their genetics downgraded by mixing with negroids who are similar to Homo-Erectus.

I love the one they have called "defaming the dead", or something like that...:rolleyes: Hell, they "defame" my dead ancestors every day with their attempts at rewriting my history, and their accusations and insinuations that my ancestors were oppressive, evil, genocidal pieces of shit....:cool: It's too bad they don't look into a mirror first before they say that.

You are exactly correct. It is a must with the tolerance crowd to defame whites. Similar collective judgements being applied to any special minority peoples is an outrage, something that is even a crime in many parts of the western world. When it is applied to whites, as a people, though and our ancestors it is known as "healing" and "tolerance." People who speak against this are often the ones who will be called a racist, or in the very least, they will be called insensitive. If they truly were to enforce those laws quoted across the board, lots of lefties, jews and other assorted minorities would be slapped with a fine or thrown in prison for hate speech. Anti hate laws are racist.


I still say that tho...whites have no business in africa.
If you want all blacks to africa, and all jews to israel (or dead) ....then whites have no place in Africa.
Heck, they have no place in the USA for that matter...by that logic =)

In a perfect world I suppose, everyone would have their own homelands and control over those homelands. The reality is, though if a group of people can take a land by force and keep it and especially if they are able to bring civilization to that land(and the africans are failures in this regard), it is theirs. These things, in my mind are what gives whites the "right" to North America and yes I suppose I would even apply the same kind of thinking as far as Israel goes. What have negroes done with South Africa other than turn it in to a crime infested sewer? Is the hellhole that it is now a positive change?
Sub Saharan Africa is the toilet bowl of the world.

The complete extermination of negroids would be a massive step forward for human progress because then Homo Sapiens would not have the risk of having their genetics downgraded by mixing with negroids who are similar to Homo-Erectus.

Amen to that. It would also go a long way toward ensuring the survival of several other species which are rapidly being done in by the niggers. Most of Africa should be considered unsettled territory, uninhabited by humans, and thus open for settlement. Of course the settlers would have a lot of clean up to do in order to restore the balance of Nature.

lol thats nasty.

I still say that tho...whites have no business in africa.
If you want all blacks to africa, and all jews to israel (or dead) ....then whites have no place in Africa.
Heck, they have no place in the USA for that matter...by that logic =)

I've wondered about this myself. There's also the Criollos in Latin America, they'd have to go back to Europe too. I don't really have a problem with repatriation but this "You go back nigger, we stay", arrangement will not do.

In a perfect world I suppose, everyone would have their own homelands and control over those homelands. The reality is, though if a group of people can take a land by force and keep it and especially if they are able to bring civilization to that land(and the africans are failures in this regard), it is theirs. These things, in my mind are what gives whites the "right" to North America and yes I suppose I would even apply the same kind of thinking as far as Israel goes. What have negroes done with South Africa other than turn it in to a crime infested sewer? Is the hellhole that it is now a positive change?
Sub Saharan Africa is the toilet bowl of the world.


this I agree with I suppose.

In a perfect world I suppose, everyone would have their own homelands and control over those homelands. The reality is, though if a group of people can take a land by force and keep it and especially if they are able to bring civilization to that land(and the africans are failures in this regard), it is theirs. These things, in my mind are what gives whites the "right" to North America and yes I suppose I would even apply the same kind of thinking as far as Israel goes. What have negroes done with South Africa other than turn it in to a crime infested sewer? Is the hellhole that it is now a positive change?
Sub Saharan Africa is the toilet bowl of the world.

No arguments here. North America is yours, and Africa is ours. And whether the resources of Africa are fully utilized or frivolously squandered should be no concern to those outside of our 'toilet bowl'.

No arguments here. North America is yours, and Africa is ours. And whether the resources of Africa are fully utilized or frivolously squandered should be no concern to those outside of our 'toilet bowl'.

How will you get the blacks to africa? There is no welfare here.

How will you get the blacks to africa? There is no welfare here.

:rofl I do enjoy racist humor of all kinds, but on a more serious note: Don't worry about that, just make sure that your bags are packed and ready to go.

....then whites have no place in Africa.
Heck, they have no place in the USA for that matter...by that logic =)

What has this to do with the thread and it's topic? It's my understanding that you are not a kike; but a wannabe, at least that's the information I have gotten from a few Phora members.

Why the charade. To cover the fact that you are a Gentile, whom has bought into Holocaustianity and would purport to be a jewish priest, here to 'educate'. If that that is the case, then you are doing a piss-poor job on all counts. You have yet to say anything of any intellectual merit; on any subject, not merely The Lie.

Princess Vivid and ZeevRosen are my whores, my property. I own their asses. Leave'em alone.

Princess Vivid and ZeevRosen are my whores, my property. I own their asses. Leave'em alone.

You're a snotty nosed kid that has up to this point, have only served to prove your worthlessness around here. Talking trash, and doing nothing to further any causes, other than to display your kind as ignorant. You're nothing but an insignificant piece of brown trash, that talks shit from the comfort of your basement somewhere in your third world shit hole, you ugly 3rd world monkey!

This is a photo taken from your profile.
What an ugly piece of shit, fat bitch...
http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh179/rinnaye/vijay.jpg

I really hate to pollute this thread with my mud presence but i've got to say it:


ps- rilly

No, I think you said it pretty well.

Sounds like someone has a self hate complex. Is that why the only thing you've added to these boards is a rather foul smell of stinch, and ugly odor to reak off of that turd colored skin you're in? Well, do us all a favor, and end it. You're miserable, and you'de like for everyone else to be as miserable as you are, so do it. No one will miss you. Not even your mother, hell, you'de be doing her a favor.

ps- rilly

This is your profile photo,
so we understand...
http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh179/rinnaye/vijay.jpg

You're nothing but an insignificant piece of brown trash, that talks shit from the comfort of your basement somewhere in your third world shit hole, you ugly 3rd world monkey!

It's so funny when negroids call other people apes because they are the most apelike people of all.

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/4828/zzzzzzzz180ou4.jpg
http://i27.tinypic.com/214ehp1.jpg

It's so funny when negroids call other people apes because they are the most apelike people of all.

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/4828/zzzzzzzz180ou4.jpg
http://i27.tinypic.com/214ehp1.jpg

True, true.

But "looks" are the least of the problems facing your race. Sure, I have a sense of humor, and can actually see the similarity between these two. :rofl
All I can say to that is, I'm glad I don't look like either, and too bad for the ones who do, but the condition facing average Americans, such as yourself, is no laughing matter. I can't help it if you don't like me, but what I can do, is that which is right, and try to change the situation as best I can, before it's too late.

Have a nice day!

Princess Vivid and ZeevRosen are my whores, my property. I own their asses. Leave'em alone.

Umm...OK..And don't send me anymore PMs.

True, true.

But "looks" are the least of the problems facing your race. Sure, I have a sense of humor, and can actually see the similarity between these two. :rofl
All I can say to that is, I'm glad I don't look like either, and too bad for the ones who do, but the condition facing average Americans, such as yourself, is no laughing matter. I can't help it if you don't like me, but what I can do, is that which is right, and try to change the situation as best I can, before it's too late.

Have a nice day!

If I look like an ape then he must be pretty handsome and I am flattered that anyone would place me in his likeness. :rofl

stfu faggot.

South Africa belongs to the BLACKS!

And who does Europe belong to? :D

What has this to do with the thread and it's topic? It's my understanding that you are not a kike; but a wannabe, at least that's the information I have gotten from a few Phora members.

Why the charade. To cover the fact that you are a Gentile, whom has bought into Holocaustianity and would purport to be a jewish priest, here to 'educate'. If that that is the case, then you are doing a piss-poor job on all counts. You have yet to say anything of any intellectual merit; on any subject, not merely The Lie.

-You figured me out!!!


Umm...OK..And don't send me anymore PMs.

he keeps sending me pm's too, trying to flirt w/ me I think or something...the fucking faggot!

And who does Europe belong to? :D

by this logic...obviously to Europeans I would imagine.

Americas to the indians/inuit/aztleans

Europe to the "Whites"

Africa to the blacks

Pakistan to the paki's

etc....

That is the WN logic if Im not mistaken no?

Personally I think the land belongs to those who are able, capable, and strong enough to hold and defend it.

by this logic...obviously to Europeans I would imagine.

Americas to the indians/inuit/aztleans

Europe to the "Whites"

Africa to the blacks

Pakistan to the paki's

etc....

That is the WN logic if Im not mistaken no?

Personally I think the land belongs to those who are able, capable, and strong enough to hold and defend it.

Why have put quotation marks around Whites?

Are you saying that Whites do not exist?

This is a common jew tactic used against Whites. Whites cannot defend themselves if they have been conditioned to believe that they do not exist as a group.

Why have put quotation marks around Whites?

Are you saying that Whites do not exist?

This is a common jew tactic used against Whites. Whites cannot defend themselves if they have been conditioned to believe that they do not exist as a group.

Good question.

I am just not sure exactly what defines a "WHITE", as this will vary based on who you ask, especially amongst WN types...
I certainly meant no slander, I have nothing against "WHITES".
Vast majority of my friends and associates are probably what you would call White.

Americas to the indians/inuit/aztleans

The indians are just wayward chinks descended from Genghis Khans tribe, whom the world hated. They didn't originate here..so why the fuck should they have the americas? They all need to go the fuck back to China.

Long before our(re)arrival the indians were constantly warring over land and everything else, as is their way- which tribe do you propose should get it?

The indians are just wayward gooks descended from Genghis Khans tribe, whom the world hated. They didn't originate here..so why the fuck should they have the americas? They all need to go the fuck back to China.

Long before our(re)arrival the indians were constantly warring over land and everything else, as is their way- which tribe do you propose should get it?

they were there/here way before genghis kahn I think...
The berring strait ice bridge or w/e no?
at least that is the scientifically accepted theory of most...so yea I suppose you are right tho.
Indians back to asia!!!
lol!

I've wondered about this myself. There's also the Criollos in Latin America, they'd have to go back to Europe too. I don't really have a problem with repatriation but this "You go back nigger, we stay", arrangement will not do.

All good sense points to land belonging to those who work on it, benefit it and ultimately are the big time benefactors. Its only reasonable that during a divorce a child should be left with the parent who can best raise them , correct? After all, the child might be biologically borne from the mother but what if the father is a better benefactor to that child? Should the lower leveled mother get it simply from argument of origin? No. The same reasoning can easily be applied to the idea of whose land it is by right or might, either way works . Whites have always been great benefactors to the places they inhabit and that fact has never been denied by anyone sane. If by this logic you think the planet belongs to us, then yes that is of course the eventual and happy outcome. In fact I believe it will be even better on multiple planets and multiple systems so that the progress and ideas can only continue growing outwards and ties between people become even larger.

Other races get the short end of the stick yeah but unfortunately when it comes to survival it's either them or us and I choose us because not only would it be a huge loss to the planet and perhaps the Universe at large but also because I am a member of this species and it is to my interest that my offspring live longer, better and more happily. The massive over-reproduction of non-White races, the mind-poison spread by these races and the general havoc and hatred they bear are all a direct threat to me today and to my offspring tomorrow. It is thus pertinent that they simply cease to exist. You can moral babble all you want but once the cob-webs are removed and one has a good look around there really is only one question : to be or not to be? I chose to be and I believe everyone else who is either a WN or a NS has chosen the same thing.


The indians are just wayward chinks descended from Genghis Khans tribe, whom the world hated. They didn't originate here..so why the fuck should they have the americas? They all need to go the fuck back to China.

Long before our(re)arrival the indians were constantly warring over land and everything else, as is their way- which tribe do you propose should get it?

Karen, that's exactly right because if we follow the trail of who belongs where it turns out that Magyars and Khazars existed in Europe but what did they do? Plunder, rape, pillage, generally terrorize the population in such a way that Genghis Khan would be proud. Does land belong to terrorists? NO! Land belongs to its benefactors.

how many injuns are there anyways? 2? 3?

Land belongs to who ever is strong enough to hold it :)

Did six million Jews die? I doubt it but I really don't give a damn if it was 60,000 600,000 or 1,000,000. The Jews however have created an entire industry revolving around the Holocaust with a revenue of billions each year employing countless thousands.

What pisses me off is the tens of millions of white people that died during World War 2 that seem to have been forgotten.

Land belongs to who ever is strong enough to hold it :)

Being a beneficiary to the land and being strong enough to hold it are inter-connected with one another. If a people desire to hold onto that land then no known force will ever pry them off. If they aren't willing, well they will be gone as quickly as the Jews fled.. and fled... and fled. Funny that you say what you say since by that logic you should be extinct.

I suppose I should have said, they are the same type peoples as Kahns tribe, and from the same area.. supposedly Siberia, actually.

I suppose I should have said, they are the same type peoples as Kahns tribe, and from the same area.. supposedly Siberia, actually.

It's a good thing that most of Syberia's native gooks were driven off or wiped out. First step to solving over population.

There is also much proof out there of pre-indian caucasians setting up house here and then getting 'genocided' by the encroaching slant eyes.

Hell one of the ancient aryan campsites was even covered up by a jew, literally, and scant mention of the campsites on the Jewtube, either, which have been found all over the continent.

There is also much proof out there of pre-indian caucasians setting up house here and then getting 'genocided' by the encroaching slant eyes.

Hell one of the ancient aryan campsites was even covered up by a jew, literally, and scant mention of the campsites on the Jewtube, either, which have been found all over the continent.

Aistulf has dug up proof of Aryan mummies in China but the Chinese government is covering them up and even destroying them. Insolent yellow beasts.

What you say isn't surprising, yellows have a hatred for one another but their hatred for non-yellows is even deeper.

Aistulf has dug up proof of Aryan mummies in China but the Chinese government is covering them up and even destroying them. Insolent yellow beasts.

Oh I know, at this point I'm convinced that every civilization that ever existed outside of mud huts was created by whites, then ran over by natives. Asia, India, Africa, South America.. al of them.

Oh I know, at this point I'm convinced that every civilization that ever existed outside of mud huts was created by whites, then ran over by natives. Asia, India, Africa, South America.. al of them.

and just about every invention too, even the ones we forgot we invented, like silk and acupuncture

!The middle east, I forgetted. :) Thats ours too.

All good sense points to land belonging to those who work on it, benefit it and ultimately are the big time benefactors. Its only reasonable that during a divorce a child should be left with the parent who can best raise them , correct? After all, the child might be biologically borne from the mother but what if the father is a better benefactor to that child? Should the lower leveled mother get it simply from argument of origin? No. The same reasoning can easily be applied to the idea of whose land it is by right or might, either way works .

Your analogy is a matter of personal perception. A child is the product of two people, and therefore the question as to who the most capable parent is, automatically arises. There is no partnership or question of rights when it comes to a land that has historically been the home of a specific race. I do acknowledge the question of might however. If you can take it then it's yours.

This part of your speech reminds me of something that I read by William Pierce on one site or another. Riveting stuff. He spoke of white mercilessness and how the Natives naturally defended what was theirs. Kill or be killed. In that regard, I can appreciate your mercilessness, I just hope that you can appreciate the fact that most people will not bow before you just because your inner conquistador has decided to surface.


Whites have always been great benefactors to the places they inhabit and that fact has never been denied by anyone sane.

Again, you have no right to it, no matter how pristine your ownership record is.

Other races get the short end of the stick yeah but unfortunately when it comes to survival it's either them or us and I choose us because not only would it be a huge loss to the planet and perhaps the Universe at large but also because I am a member of this species and it is to my interest that my offspring live longer, better and more happily. The massive over-reproduction of non-White races, the mind-poison spread by these races and the general havoc and hatred they bear are all a direct threat to me today and to my offspring tomorrow. It is thus pertinent that they simply cease to exist. You can moral babble all you want but once the cob-webs are removed and one has a good look around there really is only one question : to be or not to be? I chose to be and I believe everyone else who is either a WN or a NS has chosen the same thing.

Morals are shapeless, unreliable concepts which quickly morph into ethical contradictions to counter the pressure of immediate situations. Does the jew really want anything more than what you wanted from the natives? Not really. He wants your land, maybe some of your 'white girls', and most importantly, he wants you dead. But from your current position his tactics are transformed into "general havoc and hatred", and rightly so, because you want to live. We all do. And survival lies in the psychological retrogression that subsequently follows a person's acceptance of 'Kill or be killed'.

This part of your speech really reminded me of how Maurice Samuel dissects Gentile morals. I believe that he used boxing for his analogy. Two men fight, and fighting is immoral, so why the etiquette, why can't a man hit below the belt? Basically saying : The jew will always fight dirty because morality is a temporary and silly thing. Indeed, despite the jew's many faces and names, his primal survival tactics are always the same and I can't deny that I have some odd admiration for that, considering the contradictions of all the other races.

Your analogy is a matter of personal perception. A child is the product of two people, and therefore the question as to who the most capable parent is, automatically arises. There is no partnership or question of rights when it comes to a land that has historically been the home of a specific race. I do acknowledge the question of might however. If you can take it then it's yours.
This is a more modern principal and generally I have the same opinion however movement towards domination by force must first be inspired by movement of the right. Generally speaking people wont commit action which is "extreme" if they do not see a direct link between it and the goal. Thus to speak about any sort of conquest in modernity is to first ask the question, who is right? Then the analogy comes up. As far as it goes, to me the analogy is pretty useless and since you understand how basic things are its quite useless to you as well.

This part of your speech reminds me of something that I read by William Pierce on one site or another. Riveting stuff. He spoke of white mercilessness and how the Natives naturally defended what was theirs. Kill or be killed. In that regard, I can appreciate your mercilessness, I just hope that you can appreciate the fact that most people will not bow before you just because your inner conquistador has decided to surface.
I am quite aware and this problem has been in the works for centuries with various success. A decade or so ago the best idea we would have had was nerve gas, today a vacuum bomb has reared its head into the scene and thus the age of solution-seeking comes to an end whereas the age of implementation instead takes its place.

As for mercilessness, it's hard to have mercy to those who give you none either. The Native people cannot be quelled and anything short of driving them off or exterminating them will not work. There are exceptions such as South Africa but in general populations, aren't that lax.




Again, you have no right to it, no matter how pristine your ownership record is.

This is a problem really because its quickly becoming apparent that you're comparing Whites to others.

An Aryan is not a nomad living in his environment he creates that environment. Sure driving others off isn't nice but what have you destroyed by doing so? Nothing of great importance. Destroying what an Aryan has created isn't the same as driving a nigger out of his mud hut. We see today that destroying something like this is hurting yourself through instability worldwide for years to come. Destroying White nations is principally not right from a view point of mutual interest. Destroying an African nation makes no difference. It's not so much as right then as what is beneficial. Of course if you're an African savage - that matters very little, which is exactly why it is better to simply get rid of it all by any means available . They care none for what Aryans value and its in this that we see that there is no compatibility between races at all. The Aryan values creation, other races are apathetic living a crass life day after day, week after week, pointless and without any benefit to either man or animal .


Morals are shapeless, unreliable concepts which quickly morph into ethical contradictions to counter the pressure of immediate situations. Does the jew really want anything more than what you wanted from the natives? Not really. He wants your land, maybe some of your 'white girls', and most importantly, he wants you dead. But from your current position his tactics are transformed into "general havoc and hatred", and rightly so, because you want to live. We all do. And survival lies in the psychological retrogression that subsequently follows a person's acceptance of 'Kill or be killed'.

This part of your speech really reminded me of how Maurice Samuel dissects Gentile morals. I believe that he used boxing for his analogy. Two men fight, and fighting is immoral, so why the etiquette, why can't a man hit below the belt? Basically saying : The jew will always fight dirty because morality is a temporary and silly thing. Indeed, despite the jew's many faces and names, his primal survival tactics are always the same and I can't deny that I have some odd admiration for that, considering the contradictions of all the other races

And this is where we somewhat split. You speak of for example boxing where you can principally go below the legs and that is fine and well in a fight however not in boxing. It's the same reason as to why you play classical football with two goals or why you dribble in basketball or why you put skates on when you play hockey. Its when you keep these things orderly that you can determine as to who specifically has the best skill in this. Its for this same reason that you cannot say for certain as to who is the better thief among roughly the same skilled thieves but you can say who is the better scientist. Why? Because science has structure within which people work, its this beautiful web of works that keeps growing outwards whereas thievery is simply a toss of a die- luck. If a person came home too soon, if there is a lock too many, if the loot is too small, all of these things do not depend at all on the thief but they directly relate to how successful he is. A thief finds himself merely thrown by the waves to opportunity or death . Obviously, a thief can be skilled, very skilled but he can run out of luck and he wont be immortalized in any sort of fashion. He does not stand on anothers shoulders and the art will never be improved beyond a few technical improvements that will be quickly canceled out by technical improvements in the guard. The structured arts do not suffer such problems.

A Jew - he is a thief, he has no excellence in anything and his survival is not that of human survival for if his host dies the Jew too shall perish. In fact if the White Man stops existing the rest of the world too shall slowly perish and it will all be for naught. This is exactly the reason why the Aryan has more of a right to exist, his existence is meaningful in that he creates something greater than himself and that he creates structure within which other Aryans can build on his previous greatness and in such a way the Aryan tames the universe around him whereas the others simply seek to interact with the Aryan's makings in the only way they can - through destruction and exploitation. It thus becomes obvious that the Aryan's existence is so unique that it deserves saving at all costs. But its obviously impossible to explain the importance of creation to those who can't create just as its impossible to explain what dreams are to those who cant dream or calculus to a dog who can't even speak your language. The problem simply is that an Aryan is superior and he should know that he is superior, being equal drains him of his natural tonic power.

As for survival-
Obviously survival is that of prime importance, it is of prime importance to all animals but what is the purpose of a mud surviving? What is his reason for existing? His only reason for existing is parasitism and even a parasite greatly hates another parasite. If a parasite could think it would first of all hate those who are parasites to it thus understanding the negativity of this parasitism. Blacks and Jews understand what they are doing but out of the base want to survive they are doing what they hate, in such a way Blacks and Jews both exist in eternal hate that is imprinted on its host. A miserable existence it is, to be unnaturally existing.

So why do I say unnatural? Because it stems from an unnatural emotion which is principally only expressed naturally in limited amounts. We call it pity and through pity's grotesque workings the Jew survives, thrives even. Those who are struck by it lose their will to power while the weak, which shouldn't live only prospers. And in this weakness , in this sludge, we see the natural self termination of it all. Pity is meaningless, pointless, it points the gun at itself and there is absolutely nothing natural in suicide. And it is not the suicide of sorrow or of utility but that of a suicide that is willingfully destroying itself. The Jew's workings are certainly a hideous phenomenon that express all that is tainted through betrayal of natural reason and the Earth in general. Its surprising how many fall for it but then I suppose Aryans fall for allure of many things through their basic, childish flaws. It is really the question as to if the tribe can get over these and decide on their existence that we will see future events in. Shall it all come to naught or will it all come forward? Its not clear, but it is clear that there is only one way to win.

But principally you're wrong- we and Jews are nothing alike and our interests are nothing alike. A Jew destroys which as you and I have shown requires no structure, no pre-thought, nothing. A Jew and an animal are equals in how well they can destroy most mindlessly. A Jew's only point is to destroy and cause chaos. To compare our method of existence with his is ludicrous and as far as it goes a Jew has no place anywhere. He is an outcast and his death will be a boon to all. Nature is apathetic towards natural conflict however a Jew's existence isn't natural but rather aberrant , a Jew's very hatred of all things natural make this obvious. Either we or nature shall wipe him out, the Aryan shall live indefinitely if that is his wish.

Land belongs to who ever is strong enough to hold it :)

So that means if all the jews were in fact exterminated; as a means to gaining land rights, then that'd be okay with you?

Just curious.

So that means if all the jews were in fact exterminated; as a means to gaining land rights, then that'd be okay with you?

Just curious.

Oy Karl, but Jews are souch wounderful peeple, how cud anyone do something so HORRIBLE to them?!

Whe'ever they live they only spread peace n love... and tolerance.. and multiculturalism, its so wounderful. Everyone who hates those po po jews is sooo VILE!

Aistulf has dug up proof of Aryan mummies in China but the Chinese government is covering them up and even destroying them. Insolent yellow beasts.

What you say isn't surprising, yellows have a hatred for one another but their hatred for non-yellows is even deeper.

China history unravelled by mummies
by Benjamin Robertson in Beijing
Sunday 14 May 2006 11:38 PM GMT

Tests say the Beauty of Loulan is of Indo-European descent

In a find that could turn conventional history on its head, scientists using genetic testing have discovered that Caucasians lived in western China's Tarim Basin a thousand years before East Asians arrived.

Unearthed lying on her side as though in sleep, a single tuft of red hair falling across her head and ragged moccasins on her feet, the Beauty of Loulan is considered to be one of the best preserved mummies ever found.

Roughly 3800-years-old and discovered in the sands of Xinjiang province in western China, her emaciated features betray a facial bone structure that is surprisingly similar to Caucasian looking women.


http://i5.tinypic.com/1408zlf.jpg (http://tinypic.com/)

A team of American and Chinese researchers working in a laboratory in Sweden used DNA samples to date and profile her mummy, confirming she and other mummies are of Indo-European descent.

Related Article:

By Robert J. Saiget
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

URUMQI, China -- After years of controversy and political intrigue, archaeologists using genetic testing have proved that Caucasians roamed China's Tarim Basin 1,000 years before East Asian people arrived.

The research finding -- which the Beijing government apparently delayed releasing -- is based on a cache of ancient dried-out corpses that have been found around the Tarim Basin in recent decades.

The discoveries in the 1980s of the undisturbed 4,000-year-old "Beauty of Loulan" and the 3,000-year-old body of the "Charchan Man" are legendary in international archaeological circles for the fine state of their preservation and for the wealth of knowledge they bring to modern research.

In historic and scientific circles, the discoveries along the ancient Silk Road were on a par with finding the Egyptian mummies.

The desiccated corpses, which avoided natural decomposition because of the dry atmosphere and alkaline soils in the Tarim Basin, have given historians a glimpse of life in the Bronze Age.

Mr. Mair, a University of Pennsylvania professor who played a pivotal role in bringing the discoveries to Western scholars in the 1990s, has struggled to take samples out of China for genetic testing. One recent expedition was allowed to take five samples out.

"From the evidence available, we have found that during the first 1,000 years after the Loulan Beauty, the only settlers in the Tarim Basin were Caucasoid," Mr. Mair said.

East Asian peoples began showing up in the eastern portions of the Tarim Basin only about 3,000 years ago, he said, while the Uighurs arrived after the collapse of the Orkhon Uighur Kingdom, largely based in modern-day Mongolia, about the year 842.

A study last year by Jilin University also found that the mummies' DNA had Europoid genes.

Meanwhile, Yingpan Man, a nearly perfectly preserved 2,000-year-old Caucasoid mummy, was allowed this month to leave China for the first time, and is being displayed at the Edo-Tokyo Museum.

The Yingpan Man, discovered in 1995 in the region that bears his name, has a gold foil death mask -- a Greek tradition -- covering his blond bearded face, and wears elaborate golden embroidered red and maroon garments with seemingly Western European designs.

His nearly 6-foot-6 body is the tallest of all the mummies found, and the clothes and artifacts discovered in the surrounding tombs suggest the highest level of Caucasoid civilization in the ancient Tarim Basin region.

So that means if all the jews were in fact exterminated; as a means to gaining land rights, then that'd be okay with you?

Just curious.

That would depend, and I fully understand that your question is rhetorical.

I don't agree with aggression or colonialism as a policy!

I was just saying that in certain cases....such as the USA who industrialized it and whatnot, its not realistic to give it back to the native americans.

Israel could fit into the same category. It was mostly desert, and malaria infested swampland before 1900's. Once the jews began moving there, even pre-1948, the quality of life skyrocketed for all who lived there.
Yes I know many palestinians were deplaced or felt forced to leave...so I am not even trying to go there. In general tho, The jews in Israel did what the Whites (AND JEWS) in the USA did. Israel was swamp and desert, its now fertile and high quality of comfortable/technologically advanced lifestyle.

That would depend, and I fully understand that your question is rhetorical.
That would depend.... on?

Rather typical of you to not complete a statement, that way no one can criticize it.


I don't agree with aggression or colonialism as a policy!
Most don't agree with lying but that hasn't stopped Jews from doing it now has it?


I was just saying that in certain cases....such as the USA who industrialized it and whatnot, its not realistic to give it back to the native americans.
Ever heard of the Louisiana dump? Worse than an oil spill and all by your's truly - the red man.

Anyways here's the reality of what a Red Man is, not what the media has cooked up.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/HNS/Indians/redman.html

Israel could fit into the same category. It was mostly desert, and malaria infested swampland before 1900's. Once the jews began moving there, even pre-1948, the quality of life skyrocketed for all who lived there.
Yes I know many palestinians were deplaced or felt forced to leave...so I am not even trying to go there. In general tho, The jews in Israel did what the Whites (AND JEWS) in the USA did. Israel was swamp and desert, its now fertile and high quality of comfortable/technologically advanced lifestyle.
You know what I said about lying above? This is a perfect example.
Israel 1900
http://www.sacred-destinations.com/israel/images/jerusalem/church-redeemer-c1900-libofcongress-pd-350h.jpg
The Ottomon empire was not a "desert" nor was it a "malaria infested swampland", it was a culture that produced much more than you could ever hope to. As for Israel - that is laudable. Some towns are at up to 30% unemployment , other places are at 50%. The general treatment of Palestinians is absolutely horrendous and the internal economy is constantly shrinking while the USA/EU investment only grows. Modern country? Not even close. A parasite is more like it.

That would depend.... on?

Rather typical of you to not complete a statement, that way no one can criticize it.

The rest of my post which you chopped into separate quotes was the rest of the statement.
_____________________________________________
Quote:
I don't agree with aggression or colonialism as a policy!
Most don't agree with lying but that hasn't stopped Jews from doing it now has it?

Huh? Is this a question directed towards me?
___________________________________
Quote:
I was just saying that in certain cases....such as the USA who industrialized it and whatnot, its not realistic to give it back to the native americans.
Anyways here's the reality of what a Red Man is, not what the media has cooked up.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/HNS/Indians/redman.html

That is fascinating! Not sure what yer point is here tho.
_______________________________________________
http://www.sacred-destinations.com/israel/images/jerusalem/church-redeemer-c1900-libofcongress-pd-350h.jpg[/IMG]
The Ottomon empire was not a "desert" nor was it a "malaria infested swampland", it was a culture that produced much more than you could ever hope to. As for Israel - that is laudable. Some towns are at up to 30% unemployment , other places are at 50%. The general treatment of Palestinians is absolutely horrendous and the internal economy is constantly shrinking while the USA/EU investment only grows. Modern country? Not even close. A parasite is more like it.

Sure some areas were nice...That looks like it must be a photo of Jerusalem?
Do some reading tho, on what the Jews brought to the area way before 1948 tho.
They industrialized it, irrigated it, brought modern science and medicine, and the overall quality of life for all that lived there, jew chrisian and arab alike skyrocketed.

That would depend, and I fully understand that your question is rhetorical.

Don't try and act intelligent; it doesn't befit you.

I don't agree with aggression or colonialism as a policy!

What is 'aggression' in your book then? Since you have just stated to us that you support aggression because;

Land belongs to who ever is strong enough to hold it

Therefore if somebody is not strong enough to hold it then they have no right to it; therefore aggression in the sense of an offensive move militarily, economic, demographically (etc) is justified because of the principle of natural order on which your above statement rests.

Colonialism or to colonise a geographic area rests on exactly the same principles which I have stated above and do not follow from your claim to be against both.

I was just saying that in certain cases....such as the USA who industrialized it and whatnot, its not realistic to give it back to the native americans.

No it isn't but at the same time can we not say that the Americanids colonised North America and hence also have no right under the idea that colonisation and colonialism is bad to inhabit it.

Israel could fit into the same category. It was mostly desert, and malaria infested swampland before 1900's. Once the jews began moving there, even pre-1948, the quality of life skyrocketed for all who lived there.

You realise that's also a direct summary of 'From Time Immemorial' do you not? As I recall the 'arid, rocky desert with sparse inhabitants' theory has long been considered to be an invention of Israeli propaganda in academe.

Its up to you to prove that indeed this was the case; Rivers certainly did prove her case, I am just interested in what new evidence you have to cite?

I'd suggest a reading of 'The Case Against Israel' (Neumann) and 'Beyond Chutzpah' (Finkelstein) for a kosher counter-argument. I also have a couple of books from the 19th century; by gentile travel authors and academics, on Palestine which run absolutely contrary to Rivers' (and most other Zionist) assertions on this subject.

Also why is this an exception to your rule of thumb; the 'can't be given back now' clause only can be invoked if it would not viable for the apparently aboriginal population to create a viable state usually due to a lack of population size. It has nothing to do with economic development and industrial development per se; you are using that as an [bad] excuse.

Your theory was based on strength not on how much one in theory benefits a piece of land by 'bringing' (in Israel's case effectively blackmailing) modern technologies to it. Please stick to your stated premises and not try to mish-mash logic and your claims.

Yes I know many palestinians were deplaced or felt forced to leave...so I am not even trying to go there.

So then if you feel this way; why are you making THE classic Zionist claim?

Why defend Israel's right to exist on the basis of industrialisation and egro the classic jewish claim to being the benefit of the world (cf. Osborne and others)?

In general tho, The jews in Israel did what the Whites (AND JEWS) in the USA did.

No; they didn't. The Europeans never made any bones about wiping out the Americanids; they went and took the virgin land for themselves and built a nation which later became a country. The Israelis screamed holocaust and demanded the world give them a place to hide; they then proceeded to claim they did nothing wrong and that there were never Arabs there in any essentially civilised element in the first place.

There's quite a big difference; its called Race.

Israel was swamp and desert, its now fertile and high quality of comfortable/technologically advanced lifestyle.

That's not what I read in my email box; I am constantly told how many poor needy jews there are in Israel, how high the unemployment is, how corruption is endemic, how funding is desperately needed and how poor ole Sderot is the place of martyrs etc et nausem.

Besides whose money, theories and technologies did the jews use to make Israel into what its propaganda image pertains (which you have succinctly stated)?

Sure some areas were nice...That looks like it must be a photo of Jerusalem?
Do some reading tho, on what the Jews brought to the area way before 1948 tho.
That was built by Prussians.


They industrialized it, irrigated it, brought modern science and medicine, and the overall quality of life for all that lived there, jew chrisian and arab alike skyrocketed.
As if.
Jews didn't contribute anything, it was all thanks to Britain.

The reality of it was that Jews like everywhere else rode on the shoulders of the goy and when the time came...


1939

The British government published a new White Paper restricting Jewish immigration and offering independence for Palestine within ten years. This was rejected by the Zionists, who then organized terrorist groups and launched a bloody campaign against the British and the Palestinians. The aim was to drive them both out of Palestine and to pave the way for the establishment of the Zionist state


They stole it all.

If Israel was prosperous before Zionism, as you have stated then it was thanks to the Palestinians and Brits, they owned all the land and industries.

Israel isn't first world even now. It depends on America to stay afloat. Its GDP is equal to Kazakstan which by the way doesn't need USA donations to prosper.

Don't try and act intelligent; it doesn't befit you.



What is 'aggression' in your book then? Since you have just stated to us that you support aggression because;

Aggression would be a more powerful nation taking over in an imperialistic fashion a neighboring country for no reason other than because they can, and want their resources or to enslave the people.



Therefore if somebody is not strong enough to hold it then they have no right to it; therefore aggression in the sense of an offensive move militarily, economic, demographically (etc) is justified because of the principle of natural order on which your above statement rests.

Colonialism or to colonise a geographic area rests on exactly the same principles which I have stated above and do not follow from your claim to be against both.
I am against colonialism quite strongly. I simply think that in some modern day cases, such as the usa, israel, etc...it is just not realistic to try and reverse it after these modern day civilizations have already been so established.



No it isn't but at the same time can we not say that the Americanids colonised North America and hence also have no right under the idea that colonisation and colonialism is bad to inhabit it.

Yes...exactly. That has already been discussed. They were originally from asia (siberia?)


You realise that's also a direct summary of 'From Time Immemorial' do you not? As I recall the 'arid, rocky desert with sparse inhabitants' theory has long been considered to be an invention of Israeli propaganda in academe.

Have not read that (its a book I assume?) I only know what I have read, which is that the "Sabras" and Jewish immigrants Palestine modernized the country, and there are many statistics available to support the increase of quality of life, and average lifespan, do to what the Jews brought to Palestine.

Its up to you to prove that indeed this was the case; Rivers certainly did prove her case, I am just interested in what new evidence you have to cite?

I think not. The burden of proof rests on the revisionists, always.
Besides, I make no claims of being an expert on history, nor am I a scientist or a politician...Id be happy to see any evidence that you might have however!


I'd suggest a reading of 'The Case Against Israel' (Neumann) and 'Beyond Chutzpah' (Finkelstein) for a kosher counter-argument. I also have a couple of books from the 19th century; by gentile travel authors and academics, on Palestine which run absolutely contrary to Rivers' (and most other Zionist) assertions on this subject.

Thanks, I will look at those. I am familiar with Finkelstein and his writings, but not Neumann.
I am sure it is mostly revisionist nonsense that is discounted by any logical people tho =p

Also why is this an exception to your rule of thumb; the 'can't be given back now' clause only can be invoked if it would not viable for the apparently aboriginal population to create a viable state usually due to a lack of population size. It has nothing to do with economic development and industrial development per se; you are using that as an [bad] excuse.

Its not. I think I already answered this tho.

Your theory was based on strength not on how much one in theory benefits a piece of land by 'bringing' (in Israel's case effectively blackmailing) modern technologies to it. Please stick to your stated premises and not try to mish-mash logic and your claims.

If you are referring to my statement about the land belonging to who is strong enough to hold it....
Yes I think that in some ways, for example its not as if the USA is going to give back texas to mexico, or the jews are going to leave Israel and let the muslims have it...
I was also being facetious when I said all whites out of south africa etc...if you read more of my posts instead of just attacking me you would realize alot of what I say is often sarcasm....a typical Jewish trait yes? :eek:
And yes my logic is QUITE mish-mash, as I have always said, I have mixed feelings on most all of this, nor am I any sort of expert on the facts.


So then if you feel this way; why are you making THE classic Zionist claim?

Why defend Israel's right to exist on the basis of industrialisation and egro the classic jewish claim to being the benefit of the world (cf. Osborne and others)?

read the above ....and again, I make no claims.



No; they didn't. The Europeans never made any bones about wiping out the Americanids; they went and took the virgin land for themselves and built a nation which later became a country. The Israelis screamed holocaust and demanded the world give them a place to hide; they then proceeded to claim they did nothing wrong and that there were never Arabs there in any essentially civilised element in the first place.

baloney. The europeans massacred the indians and stole the land.
The israelis screamed holocaust after it happened. Israel was in the works LONG before the holocaust tho.




That's not what I read in my email box; I am constantly told how many poor needy jews there are in Israel, how high the unemployment is, how corruption is endemic, how funding is desperately needed and how poor ole Sderot is the place of martyrs etc et nausem.

You have mostly the evangelicals to thank for this. I personally think Israel can take care of themselves, and should not take any money from the USA.
Fact is there are many jews in the USA that will keep lobbying for support of Israel, and there is not much that can be done about that.

Besides whose money, theories and technologies did the jews use to make Israel into what its propaganda image pertains (which you have succinctly stated)?

Dont you, why don't you tell me?
*guesses*
USA tax dollars?
I think the Rothschilds and other wealthy jewish families had major agricultural colonies going waaaay before 1948.

That was built by Prussians.


As if.
Jews didn't contribute anything, it was all thanks to Britain.

The reality of it was that Jews like everywhere else rode on the shoulders of the goy and when the time came...


1939

The British government published a new White Paper restricting Jewish immigration and offering independence for Palestine within ten years. This was rejected by the Zionists, who then organized terrorist groups and launched a bloody campaign against the British and the Palestinians. The aim was to drive them both out of Palestine and to pave the way for the establishment of the Zionist state


They stole it all.

If Israel was prosperous before Zionism, as you have stated then it was thanks to the Palestinians and Brits, they owned all the land and industries.

Israel isn't first world even now. It depends on America to stay afloat. Its GDP is equal to Kazakstan which by the way doesn't need USA donations to prosper.




More nonsense. Britain promised Palestine to the Jews via the Balfour declaration, then tried to re-nig via all those white papers, as they were fearful of upsetting the arabs since all the OIL was booming.
Jews started pouring in then after the holocaust as no other country would take them!
Israel was then attacked on all sides and defended itself winning independance w/ not only no help from any western nation (only some stuff from france, and mostly from chzecks on Stalins orders were they armed and able to defend themselves)

America gave the jews no help whatsoever untill after Truman took power too.
Sure in modern times as we all know, a lot of USA dollars is going there, which I for one (and most Israeli's I think even!) do not like at all.
Can't blame any american for being upset about this frankly.

More nonsense: Britain promised Palestine to the Jews via the Balfour declaration, then tried to re-nig via all those white papers, as they were fearful of upsetting the arabs since all the OIL was booming.
Yes indeed more nonsense.


Jews started pouring in then after the holocaust as no other country would take them!
Not even the Kwa?


Israel was then attacked on all sides and defended itself winning
independance w/ not only no help from any western nation (only some stuff from france, and mostly from chzecks on Stalins orders were they armed and able to defend themselves)
Israel did have a huge technological advantage over the Arabs and it was indeed all thanks to Stalin.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/001808.html

And obviously there would be no help from Western nations because Stalin was against British expansion so obviously there would be no western help. But really what does it matter? Stalin's war, Churchill's war, your point doesn't float.

Yes indeed more nonsense.

indeed!


Not even the Kwa? refresh my memory, the Kwa stands for what again? If the USA, then nope, they did not want the jews, and were not letting many if any in (afaik) during these times, nor was england obviously.


Israel did have a huge technological advantage over the Arabs and it was indeed all thanks to Stalin.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/001808.html

And obviously there would be no help from Western nations because Stalin was against British expansion so obviously there would be no western help. But really what does it matter? Stalin's war, Churchill's war, your point doesn't float.

I'm not floating any points, and you just agreed w/ me for that matter.
At least you are not ignorant to history like many posters on here =)

Aggression would be a more powerful nation taking over in an imperialistic fashion a neighboring country for no reason other than because they can, and want their resources or to enslave the people.

Ah; but not 'self-defense' right?

Since if that was applied the postage stamp state would find itself in a very difficult position to justify its own wars of conquest.

I am against colonialism quite strongly.

Then why do you support Israel?

I simply think that in some modern day cases, such as the usa, israel, etc...it is just not realistic to try and reverse it after these modern day civilizations have already been so established.

There you go saying it the same situation again; it is not. The situations were and are quite different; since America has been a state with stable borders for over a century now that would make it unrealistic to want to 'give it back' (ignoring the entire question of supposed aboriginal authority).

Israel does not have static borders and is currently still changing them as and when it moves it settlements around; abandoning some, building others. Building more housing for jews in formerly Arab zones of Jersualem and what not. It is in a state of war with the Palestinian people in general; which is caused by both sides hatred of each other.


Yes...exactly. That has already been discussed. They were originally from asia (siberia?)

Depends what you read; the origins of the Americanid population are still quite hotly debated even if we know the Asians came over there is a lot of unanswered evidence in regards to the origins and influences in the Americanid population.

Have not read that (its a book I assume?) I only know what I have read, which is that the "Sabras" and Jewish immigrants Palestine modernized the country, and there are many statistics available to support the increase of quality of life, and average lifespan, do to what the Jews brought to Palestine.

But that does not follow from your ideas on colonisation and aggression; you waged a war of conquest (and still in practice do) and hence you must oppose that to be consistent and non-hypocritical.

You cannot be pro-right of conquest and anti-aggression/colonisation at the same time.

I think not.

Technically; I made a mistake 'did' should be 'did not'. Typos will happen.

The burden of proof rests on the revisionists, always.

Only if the fact or event in question is proven valid. That is what Revisionism is about.

Besides, I make no claims of being an expert on history, nor am I a scientist or a politician...Id be happy to see any evidence that you might have however!

I told you; do some reading (from all sides of the argument) child. I am not going to do the running for you.

Thanks, I will look at those. I am familiar with Finkelstein and his writings, but not Neumann.
I am sure it is mostly revisionist nonsense that is discounted by any logical people tho =p

'Logical people' being the 'scholarly' (heh) Alan Dershowitz and David Harris then?

I've read Dershowitz's responsa, books and televised speeches/debates. I was far more impressed with Meir Kahane; at least the jew was honest, than with Dershy.

Its not. I think I already answered this tho.

You didn't; you haven't justified your criteria.

If you are referring to my statement about the land belonging to who is strong enough to hold it....

What else am I referring to?

Yes I think that in some ways, for example its not as if the USA is going to give back texas to mexico, or the jews are going to leave Israel and let the muslims have it...

Please clarify how that relates to my point to you.

I was also being facetious when I said all whites out of south africa etc...

I gathered that.

if you read more of my posts

I read your posts and deal with them as they suggest themselves to be dealt with.

instead of just attacking me

Don't play the victim.

you would realize alot of what I say is often sarcasm....

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit; no?

a typical Jewish trait yes? :eek:

No; just predator and prey. I also like playing with my food and in the case of Weinstein; research subject.

And yes my logic is QUITE mish-mash, as I have always said, I have mixed feelings on most all of this,

What being a jew versus your stated principles?

nor am I any sort of expert on the facts.

I don't expect you to be; its a forum and the net. I don't expect you to write an academic dissertation just have a high level of general knowledge and factual awareness.

read the above ....and again, I make no claims.

You did indeed make a very specific claim.

Do you need me to copy and paste it for you?

baloney.

Really; since when?

The europeans massacred the indians and stole the land.

I thought you believed in the right of conquest?

Lets correct our historical view; the Europeans defeated and systematically wiped out the Americanids to a large degree; it is a shame it was not completed but there we go. They did not 'steal' the land; they conquered it. You also cannot steal land from a people with no concept of private land property but a concept of territory. You can however conquer territory; you cannot steal it.

I have no problem with that.

The israelis screamed holocaust after it happened.

Correction; they've been screaming 'holocaust' from the mid-1880's in various forms.

The 'holocaust' (i.e. the homicidal gassing of jews because they were jews) did not happen; it was a camp rumour, that became a theme of Allied (notably Polish) propaganda, which was then adopted after the war as post-facto justification for the start of the war.

It is also in line with British popular thought about 'the hun' in the inter-war years.

Israel was in the works LONG before the holocaust tho.

Quite true; which lends more poinancy to the whole 'caust fabrication being used a justification for the creation of Israel and of the war in general.

You have mostly the evangelicals to thank for this.

Its nothing to do with them in general; they are the donors. Jews are the ones actively soliciting this. I don't see many Zionist Christians asking for my money to 'help needy jews'; a lot of jews do. Even the Christian Zionist donations orgs like IFCJ are headed up by jews who do the rounds with the money box promising salvation if people will give the jews more money.

I personally think Israel can take care of themselves, and should not take any money from the USA.

To wit they'd be quickly attacked and overwhelmed by the Arabs.

Not that I care for the welfare of either. I just loathe jews more.

Fact is there are many jews in the USA that will keep lobbying for support of Israel, and there is not much that can be done about that.

There is; simple solution. Make the United States, Canada, Europe and South Africa; judenfrei including all the mischlinge and 'assimilated jews'.

Hep hep judensau. :)

Dont you, why don't you tell me?
*guesses*
USA tax dollars?

To an extent; more European blood money and goods/services in kind extorted by the jewish diaspora for the jewish state for their supposed 'holocaust'.

I think the Rothschilds and other wealthy jewish families had major agricultural colonies going waaaay before 1948.

What you mean kibbutzim in Palestine pre-1948? The majority of jewish funding; as in funding from jews, went to procuring arms for the jewish militias and terrorist groups, shipping them to Palestine along with as many jews as possible (preferably trained in Zionist camps in Western Europe and North America).

Then why do you support Israel?

I don't, if you are referring to the government of the State of Israel...



There you go saying it the same situation again; it is not. The situations were and are quite different; since America has been a state with stable borders for over a century now that would make it unrealistic to want to 'give it back' (ignoring the entire question of supposed aboriginal authority).[/quote]

my point exacrlt

Israel does not have static borders and is currently still changing them as and when it moves it settlements around; abandoning some, building others. Building more housing for jews in formerly Arab zones of Jersualem and what not. It is in a state of war with the Palestinian people in general; which is caused by both sides hatred of each other.

Cant disagree with that...their borders are all fucked up.








But that does not follow from your ideas on colonisation and aggression; you waged a war of conquest (and still in practice do) and hence you must oppose that to be consistent and non-hypocritical.

Huh? What war did I wage...I am confused. I am no soldier nor politician...

You cannot be pro-right of conquest and anti-aggression/colonisation at the same time.

Sure you can. I wont deny that I contradict my self often...and once again, have very mixed feelings on many of these issues.

I think aggression is wrong...but I think once a nation has been established, and shown their ability to maintain their existence...then it becomes a matter of national strength.
Israel is the perfect example. You will say they are khazars, and maybe we are, I have no idea tbh...
Fact is tho, they have shown time and again that they ARE strong enough to defend themselves, be it with or without support from the west.
That is all the claim they need to the land now.
Yes I contradict my self.
Yes I am probably biased towards Israel in some areas.
Find me a jew that is not tho...

Sorry. That was all I could manage to read...the rest was much too long winded, and I don't have time to reply to the same questions over and over again =p

[QUOTE=Ze'ev;743042]I don't, if you are referring to the government of the State of Israel...

"If"?

I see, so you are not referring to supporting the "state of israel"; which israel do you support then? [it's a simple question, one that does not require a wishy washy, contradictory reply]. Besides that such replies as you have given here are usually the purview of a particular sort of female; one that is given to more than the usual fits of whim, contradictory change of mind. All of the latter are the unique purview of the female of the species; or those whom try to mimic feminine nature; and, I suppose whatever your notion of jew is - however, that claim does not get you a pass here. Not with me.

As a non-Orthodox jew, then what do you care about the rules re reading, studying the talmud, the zohar ect. Besides, I have a sense that you have a more than passive knowing of judaism; hybrid juden are usually quite the zealot when it comes to that. How about starting with the mishna.

[quote]

"If"?

I see, so you are not referring to supporting the "state of israel"; which israel do you support then? [it's a simple question, one that does not require a wishy washy, contradictory reply]. Besides that such replies as you have given here are usually the purview of a particular sort of female; one that is given to more than the usual fits of whim, contradictory change of mind. All of the latter are the unique purview of the female of the species; or those whom try to mimic feminine nature; and, I suppose whatever your notion of jew is - however, that claim does not get you a pass here. Not with me.

I support the right of all peoples, and nations to exist peacefully, including Jews, and including the State of Israel.
I do not however agree with many of said State's policies.
I am not asking for a "pass" anyhow, certainly not from you =-)

As a non-Orthodox jew, then what do you care about the rules re reading, studying the talmud, the zohar ect. Besides, I have a sense that you have a more than passive knowing of judaism; hybrid juden are usually quite the zealot when it comes to that. How about starting with the mishna.


You asked me, who said I cared? You brought up the zohar, talmud etc...not me.

[quote]

"If"?

I see, so you are not referring to supporting the "state of israel"; which israel do you support then? [it's a simple question, one that does not require a wishy washy, contradictory reply].

Are the Nazi government and the German people of WWII one and the same? One can support the people while not supporting the state.

[quote=EireannGoddess;743083]

Are the Nazi government and the German people of WWII one and the same? One can support the people while not supporting the state.:(:confused::(

How dare
to compare!

Israel is nothing but a crime center, safe haven for jooish criminals worldwide.

The Third German Reich was an example to be followed by all honest nations of the world, benefitting their own instead of international jewry and whose motto should be: "ein Volk ein Reich ein Fuehrer".
A nation in harmony with itself, loved by those worldwide who had not been poisoned by religious and plutocratic lies.

The National Socialist government's unforgivable "crime" was to expose the chaos loving plutocrates and their demagogic "democracies" and that

The world can do
Without the joo.

Historically unique while couragious: Germans questioned the commonly accepted axiom that joos have to play the FIRST FIDDLE.

[quote=EireannGoddess;743083]

Are the Nazi government and the German people of WWII one and the same? One can support the people while not supporting the state.

exactly.
They dont seem to understand that a Jew might infact be critical of aspects of the Israeli government.
A jew and an Israeli are not necisarily the same thing.

Israeli government is criminal and always has been.
Does not make me as a jew a fake jew or self hater to think this tho, because it is the truth!

I am not even an Israeli citizen as I said tho...I am an American....so this for me is nothing more than musings anyhow....although yes, as I said most any jew israeli or not probnably has some sentimental feelings towards Israel.
This does not necessarily mean they agree w/ Israeli state policy however, or every action of every jew, everywhere.

An Aryan is not a nomad living in his environment he creates that environment. Sure driving others off isn't nice but what have you destroyed by doing so? Nothing of great importance. Destroying what an Aryan has created isn't the same as driving a nigger out of his mud hut. We see today that destroying something like this is hurting yourself through instability worldwide for years to come. Destroying White nations is principally not right from a view point of mutual interest. Destroying an African nation makes no difference. It's not so much as right then as what is beneficial. Of course if you're an African savage - that matters very little, which is exactly why it is better to simply get rid of it all by any means available . They care none for what Aryans value and its in this that we see that there is no compatibility between races at all. The Aryan values creation, other races are apathetic living a crass life day after day, week after week, pointless and without any benefit to either man or animal .

I can understand someone calling the jews nomads but I don't see where my people are nomads in any way. We do live in a white nation but most of us are the descendants of slaves and there is no lengthy documentation of Africans barging into white nations the way that jews have. And even while living in white nations we were separate from whites until a couple of decades ago. I agree with David Duke - most black people just wanted advancement in society and were content being separate from white people. It was jews and liberal whites who most strongly insisted on forced integration and multiculturalism. That being said, the general desire of black people to co-exist with whites is no more natural than the white man's acceptance of it. The entire country pulses with artificial ideas and disingenuous slogans, what's puzzling is that everyone seems to have conveniently developed amnesia. It was only a couple of decades ago when a black man could be hung for the most simplistic offenses.

If the values of an African savage differ from yours on another side of the world I don't see why that should be your concern. It is this same unwanted concern and nosiness that has gotten white people in the bind that they're in.

And this is where we somewhat split. You speak of for example boxing where you can principally go below the legs and that is fine and well in a fight however not in boxing. It's the same reason as to why you play classical football with two goals or why you dribble in basketball or why you put skates on when you play hockey. Its when you keep these things orderly that you can determine as to who specifically has the best skill in this. Its for this same reason that you cannot say for certain as to who is the better thief among roughly the same skilled thieves but you can say who is the better scientist. Why? Because science has structure within which people work, its this beautiful web of works that keeps growing outwards whereas thievery is simply a toss of a die- luck. If a person came home too soon, if there is a lock too many, if the loot is too small, all of these things do not depend at all on the thief but they directly relate to how successful he is. A thief finds himself merely thrown by the waves to opportunity or death . Obviously, a thief can be skilled, very skilled but he can run out of luck and he wont be immortalized in any sort of fashion. He does not stand on anothers shoulders and the art will never be improved beyond a few technical improvements that will be quickly canceled out by technical improvements in the guard. The structured arts do not suffer such problems.

I think that you've carried the analogy to another plane. I don't see where basketball, hockey, and football could be considered immoral, they're games, rough games at times, but games nonetheless. Boxing is more like outright fighting, and I'm sure that's why the boxing analogy was used. Much like Marcus Eli Ravage, he was trying to highlight how little the white man has really changed. You're still the bloodthirsty colosseum fighters, it's just that you've prettied the game up with some rules. I've wearied of people talking about how whites are so generous and merciful because these emotions are merely ideas that were imposed upon you. They're as foreign to your hearts as vegetables are to a tiger and when you can shuck off these façades I believe that you will be much happier. This is not to say that you are compassion-less or incapable of unselfish thoughts, it is to say that you do not naturally harbor these feelings for non-whites.

People frown at white nationalism and national socialism as if these ideas are foreign to your hearts. But in all actuality, it's the only thing that you know, whether you accept it or not. White nationalism is not some new idea implanted into the minds of whites, it's the dormant warrior buried beneath Christianity and multiculturalism. When you had gods who were more like yourselves you didn't have these moral struggles. Take Zeus, the Greek king of gods for example. He was a conquerer/usurper, like his father before him, and his father before him, and he also raped women and goddesses; an immortalized and omniscient reflection of the conquistador. Pillage and plunder.

A Jew - he is a thief, he has no excellence in anything and his survival is not that of human survival for if his host dies the Jew too shall perish. In fact if the White Man stops existing the rest of the world too shall slowly perish and it will all be for naught. This is exactly the reason why the Aryan has more of a right to exist, his existence is meaningful in that he creates something greater than himself and that he creates structure within which other Aryans can build on his previous greatness and in such a way the Aryan tames the universe around him whereas the others simply seek to interact with the Aryan's makings in the only way they can - through destruction and exploitation. It thus becomes obvious that the Aryan's existence is so unique that it deserves saving at all costs. But its obviously impossible to explain the importance of creation to those who can't create just as its impossible to explain what dreams are to those who cant dream or calculus to a dog who can't even speak your language. The problem simply is that an Aryan is superior and he should know that he is superior, being equal drains him of his natural tonic power.

This is where we split. I don't believe that there are ethereal gods that have an inescapable sway over our lives, and likewise, I don't believe that there are gods made of flesh. The world survived before the white man emerged from his murky origins, and I believe that if the white man vanishes the world will go on. You do have the right to relinquish your ego and speak of Aryan achievements but I don't consider you some all mighty judge who has the right to say who shall live and die on the basis of superiority. As I explained earlier, blacks had the least say, and most likely the least desire when it came to interacting "with the Aryan's makings". I don't have any problems with our races separating and allowing you to experience the full effect of your natural tonic power.

The jew is a thief, and the white man is a conquerer. In the end, the result of their actions are basically the same. I despise snakes, and I would rather be bested in battle than have someone sneak up while I'm sleeping and take what is mine, but the conquerer still can't be excused, though many will argue that he should be. And that is where your etiquette usually comes in. The jew wages a silent and genocidal war with his propaganda. And you want to strangle the life out of him, which is justified, but you're bound by the rules that you accepted from him. Ravage said something to the extent of "you don't hate us because we killed your Savior, you hate us because we gave him to you".

As for survival-
Obviously survival is that of prime importance, it is of prime importance to all animals but what is the purpose of a mud surviving? What is his reason for existing? His only reason for existing is parasitism and even a parasite greatly hates another parasite. If a parasite could think it would first of all hate those who are parasites to it thus understanding the negativity of this parasitism. Blacks and Jews understand what they are doing but out of the base want to survive they are doing what they hate, in such a way Blacks and Jews both exist in eternal hate that is imprinted on its host. A miserable existence it is, to be unnaturally existing.

We split here as well. I can see where the jew is guilty of parasitism but I honestly don't see where mongoloids and Africans have historically latched on to you, or interacted with you for that matter. It's actually the contrary.

Again, I don't believe in gods, or divine blueprints. I don't believe that the white man was put here to bring light to all of the nations anymore than I believe that the jew was. I don't know why you're here anymore than I know why I'm here but I do accept the fact that you have underwent certain mutations that required you to become great builders.

Originally posted by Ze'ev:

A jew and an Israeli are not necisarily the same thing.

...I am an American....so this for me is nothing more than musings anyhow....although yes, as I said most any jew israeli or not probnably has some sentimental feelings towards Israel.

Learn how to use the damn quote function correctly, and quit attributing the kike "Slammin" posts to me. You've been on forums long enough to know better, so I think you're doing it deliberatly; at least preview your replies before posting, nitwit.

BTW, you're not an American; you're a wannabe kike with 'sentimentmal' feelings toward the terrorist state of israel. Why don't you just convert.

Where's my answer to my query about the mishna. Conservative kikes should know it; I wouldn't expect a reform jew to know; but you told me you are a Cons. jew. I'll rephrase it, why are juden so concerned about the foreskin of trees?

The mishna is not off-limits to you; it's a book of laws, more important to jews than their torah.

[quote=Ze'ev;743197

...I am an American....although yes, as I said most any jew, israeli or not probnably has some sentimental feelings towards Israel..[/quote]

Learn how to use the quote function nitwit; and stop attributing the jew Slammin's post to me

Just preview before you post. BTW, to you have my answer to the jewish obsession with the "foreskins of trees"?

As a cons. jew, you should know. Had you stated you were an agnotic reform jew, I would better understand your reluctance and claimed ignorance to the mishna (the are no orthodox judaic laws against the study of that which you can hide behind)

I don't, if you are referring to the government of the State of Israel...

When I say Israel I mean the Israeli state; including its jewish and; to a lesser extent, non-jewish citizenry. I don't use 'Israel' in the sense that religious juden and some Protestant sects use it to describe the jews as a race.

my point exacrlt

Cant disagree with that...their borders are all fucked up.

So therefore you concede that there is no basis on which you can compare the situation in the North America and that in Israel.

Huh? What war did I wage...I am confused. I am no soldier nor politician...

You want to be a biological; rather than simply a spiritual, jew so I will treat you as such; you means your people the jewish race. Its quite simple.

You bear responsibility because you wish to be a jew and hence will be treated as such and if you are in fact a biological jew then you are just as guilty since you have defended Israel and its actions unconditionally on the basis of your stated philosophy you partake in the actions by association of the Israeli state.

If you are wondering; I have no problem with the principle of collective punishment either and nor do I care what the Israelis do to the Arabs.

Sure you can. I wont deny that I contradict my self often...and once again, have very mixed feelings on many of these issues.

Then we can assume that you have no fixed position on anything and are acting as Revilo Oliver once (incorrectly I might add) described Communist actions when he said (paraphrasing); a Communist has only one answer to any question. The answer is that which furthers the cause of Communism the most at that given moment in time.

You are an example of such an individual as far as I can see; but substituting Communist for jew and 'cause of Communism' for 'the jewish cause'.

I think aggression is wrong...but I think once a nation has been established, and shown their ability to maintain their existence...then it becomes a matter of national strength.

That is a logical contradiction since it does not follow; if a nation is the result of aggression; which they always are, then you are justifying an act of aggression post-facto by suggesting that because it exists in the here and now it is fine. You are either opposed to aggression or you are opposed to the right of conquest; you choose. You cannot have your cake and eat it.

I suspect that your definition and thought comes out of your need as a want-to-be jew to justify Israel's existence and past aggression. In fact; its a similar argument to the ones one will read in such pop politics books as 'Why blame Israel?' etc.

You are shifting definitions in order to suit Israel in my view; which again is one of THE classic tactics of the jew in debate, argument or mere exchanges of views. One that Dershy specialises in I might add.

Israel is the perfect example.

Of what exactly? We've already discussed that taking away US aid as well as the guilt money from Europe would destroy Israel in the medium to long run. They'd have to fight a series of six day war's to win that particular fight.

You will say they are khazars, and maybe we are, I have no idea tbh...

That's a lie; I said you [as in Ashkenazis] were racial mongrels not that you were Khazars. Although; they are obviously and acknowledged to be varying percentage of the Ashkenazi ancestry. I did not state that you were Khazar or Ashkenazi jews were Khazar or that all jews are Khazar.

Fact is tho, they have shown time and again that they ARE strong enough to defend themselves, be it with or without support from the west.

Really; tell me a major war that Israel has fought without substantial help from the Diaspora, guilt money, Western intelligence and US dollars?

You won't be able to because there is no such war. Israel's strategic position is based on the power of the Diaspora to a large extent which is why there is so much talk in Tel Aviv and in the Israeli papers lately (as there has been sporadically for some years) about 're-defining the relationship with the Diaspora' because the Israeli government knows damn well it is very reliant on its Diaspora for assistance. Israel wants to have indepedent capacity but it does not and the Diaspora although nominally in favour of this does not want to change its attitude to Israeli (as attested to by the jewish papers in Europe and North America).

That is all the claim they need to the land now.

I don't dispute their claim; since I think Israel is a useful innovation personally. I just wish all your parasitic and pornographic race would go live there and live us alone.

Yes I contradict my self.

We know that; you've said it more than a couple of times.

Yes I am probably biased towards Israel in some areas.

'Some areas'?

Find me a jew that is not tho...

Precisely the point; you were harping on about being 'an American' earlier and how you were 'more American than jew'. So we can take it from this that because of your supposed jewish ancestry that you are not loyal to the United States and therefore not actually American but rather a jew living in America.

Sorry. That was all I could manage to read...the rest was much too long winded,

I am 'long-winded' because I like accuracy and I also write how I think. Your excuses also confirm my thesis about you in that you are unable to comprehend ideas, points and systems of thought that are discussed at length.

and I don't have time to reply to the same questions over and over again =p

Well it would help if you answered the questions, arguments and staked out something of a coherant position.

In short; you lack a spine.

I can understand someone calling the jews nomads but I don't see where my people are nomads in any way. We do live in a white nation but most of us are the descendants of slaves and there is no lengthy documentation of Africans barging into white nations the way that jews have. And even while living in white nations we were separate from whites until a couple of decades ago. I agree with David Duke - most black people just wanted advancement in society and were content being separate from white people.
If you closely follow the history of the black you will see the typical shortcomings of this being. The Black is both short sighted and he only cares for instant gratification. Generally, the invasions the Black did participate in especially that of the Iberian Peninsula were purely by coincidence for the black. Ultimately the Moors lost because the black was so short sighted and easy for Charlamagne to deter. Blacks are perfect tools for the Jews because they have no plans of their own and only need to be gratified at this moment. They also are fast to forget so only a few Blacks will ever make the connection of their position to a Jew.

It was jews and liberal whites who most strongly insisted on forced integration and multiculturalism.
The Negro could really care less as long as he had his bananas, KFC and hut to live in.

That being said, the general desire of black people to co-exist with whites is no more natural than the white man's acceptance of it. The entire country pulses with artificial ideas and disingenuous slogans, what's puzzling is that everyone seems to have conveniently developed amnesia. It was only a couple of decades ago when a black man could be hung for the most simplistic offenses.
I can agree with you on that. Generally most people do it out of necessity, as much as the Aryan creates his environment he is defined by it when it is not his.


If the values of an African savage differ from yours on another side of the world I don't see why that should be your concern.
Simply because Africa's resources can put a lot of problems on hold. When Europeans went there it was not the Niggers they wanted but the resources in the rich rock. Why? Necessity.

It is this same unwanted concern and nosiness that has gotten white people in the bind that they're in.
It's really something you cannot escape. A White Man's life and destiny begins with the creation of his town, then the shaping of his environment, finally he understands that to be sovereign he must expand so that other Whites who have made towns do not disrupt him. If his town is that of Rome it expands, and expands , and expands. Why? Out of competition and as he creates more so too he needs more. What happened in Africa with the Blacks was mere necessity. If the Reds were competent workers the Blacks would never be needed and if the Blacks didn't want what the White Man had they wouldn't have done it. As it was the Blacks had slaves but because the Blacks had nothing to do with them they were willing to trade them for all sorts of pretty thing-a-ma-bobs that interested the Black but had no use to the White. I myself read some books on the existence of the Black in Africa, from the view point of the Black and from the view point of the colonials. It quickly becomes clear to me that they are beings who have never been concerned with the question of to be or not to be. They are beings who just need a banana tree to live under, a female to screw and a few other negroes to communicate with. This base savagery is ultimately the curse of inhumanity. In the Book "Heart of Darkness" we see what a Dark Heart beats in Africa and all that come in contact with it go mad. Ultimately the Black is a phenomenon that a White finds repulsive, so repulsive that the only way to coexist with it is to become it. The Black eats his foes, cuts his women apart, believes in the basest of things and practices every vice he knows. He has no God - he is not a creator so its beyond his imagination as to what creates him. He is a scourge to all other life - hated by animals and humans alike, his existence an unnatural phenomenon that with the seeds of the destruction he sows. Whether he destroys the White Man, the Yellow or himself doesn't really matter to him.


I think that you've carried the analogy to another plane. I don't see where basketball, hockey, and football could be considered immoral, they're games, rough games at times, but games nonetheless. Boxing is more like outright fighting, and I'm sure that's why the boxing analogy was used. Much like Marcus Eli Ravage, he was trying to highlight how little the white man has really changed. You're still the bloodthirsty colosseum fighters, it's just that you've prettied the game up with some rules.
The gladiator games were principally for the Romans to see and feel power without participating in it. The Aryan is a fighter but he is a fighter after he is many other things and games are made for the specific purpose of practicing that competitive spirit.

I've wearied of people talking about how whites are so generous and merciful because these emotions are merely ideas that were imposed upon you. They're as foreign to your hearts as vegetables are to a tiger and when you can shuck off these façades I believe that you will be much happier. This is not to say that you are compassion-less or incapable of unselfish thoughts, it is to say that you do not naturally harbor these feelings for non-whites.
I agree.

People frown at white nationalism and national socialism as if these ideas are foreign to your hearts. But in all actuality, it's the only thing that you know, whether you accept it or not. White nationalism is not some new idea implanted into the minds of whites, it's the dormant warrior buried beneath Christianity and multiculturalism. When you had gods who were more like yourselves you didn't have these moral struggles. Take Zeus, the Greek king of gods for example. He was a conquerer/usurper, like his father before him, and his father before him, and he also raped women and goddesses; an immortalized and omniscient reflection of the conquistador. Pillage and plunder.
Zeus was tempered but he was also a great creator and judge. As far as it went it was hard to imagine something more virtuous than him.



This is where we split. I don't believe that there are ethereal gods that have an inescapable sway over our lives, and likewise, I don't believe that there are gods made of flesh.
I don't either.

The world survived before the white man emerged from his murky origins, and I believe that if the white man vanishes the world will go on.
The animal world is independent of the Aryan, the other sentient beings will perish.

You do have the right to relinquish your ego and speak of Aryan achievements but I don't consider you some all mighty judge who has the right to say who shall live and die on the basis of superiority.
Until I have the power to do so I don't consider myself that either. I honestly don't believe in convincing anyone of our superiority because like I said its impossible to teach them these things. I am simply telling you that there shall be no peace.

As I explained earlier, blacks had the least say, and most likely the least desire when it came to interacting "with the Aryan's makings". I don't have any problems with our races separating and allowing you to experience the full effect of your natural tonic power.
You're admirable in that your dreams are noble but will never come to fruition. A few like you will try to implement a solution while quelling the stormy masses but then a Jessi Jackson or Farakanh will come and begin the blame game. Blacks, who would rather have someone else to blame and not willing to give up their banana tree will follow them. You're trapped either way - if it is the will of your people then you are an uncle Tom, if it is the wrath of the West then you are doomed. It must be hard to want something so difficult.

The jew is a thief, and the white man is a conquerer. In the end, the result of their actions are basically the same. I despise snakes, and I would rather be bested in battle than have someone sneak up while I'm sleeping and take what is mine, but the conquerer still can't be excused, though many will argue that he should be. And that is where your etiquette usually comes in. The jew wages a silent and genocidal war with his propaganda. And you want to strangle the life out of him, which is justified, but you're bound by the rules that you accepted from him. Ravage said something to the extent of "you don't hate us because we killed your Savior, you hate us because we gave him to you".
Its one thing to be a parasite and another thing to grow. Why does a Jew do these things? Its unclear because any reasonable person will see that he is damning himself to doom along with his host. But the Jew he desires to weaken, to destroy, the Jew is in fact a being that's quite senseless and trying to understand him can make someone go mad. There are a few Jews who rise and speak of the madness that they themselves had a part of and these are about the only Jews one will ever understand. However, I have already explained to you the situation in Africa and I think the fact that all of Africa was colonized by different countries shows how divided this continent is. Africans by principal can only be used to power as they have none of their own. As for the slaves - Arabs enslaved you thousands of years before the White man even came however a lot of the culture that has thrived in Africa can be directly attributed to them. Consider that.



We split here as well. I can see where the jew is guilty of parasitism but I honestly don't see where mongoloids and Africans have historically latched on to you, or interacted with you for that matter. It's actually the contrary.
Africans have been at direct fault during the Battle against the Moors as well as the mongrelization of Portugal. They have also been at fault in the attacks against Italy.
The mongoloids have been at fault multiple times, here is but a taste
- The Huns
- The Magyars
- The Turks
- The Khazars
- The Mongols
If you consider other Asian powers the list only grows.

Again, I don't believe in gods, or divine blueprints. I don't believe that the white man was put here to bring light to all of the nations anymore than I believe that the jew was. I don't know why you're here anymore than I know why I'm here but I do accept the fact that you have underwent certain mutations that required you to become great builders.
It's an extreme unlikelihood that life will develop somewhere and even more so unlikely that intelligent life will develop and even more so unlikely that it will develop to be a creator. These factors combined make the Aryan an extremely unique being. I don't latch onto a "I don't know so I will be merciful" ideology , whether by God or Nature the Aryan has the divine right, he is the God he represents. It's unclear as to how much our ancestors are to blame however I don't play the blame game, my concern is how to fix it. Naturally, the only way I see how to prevent others from making the same mistakes is by stopping them from doing them. Whether materially or mindfully.

Learn how to use the damn quote function correctly, and quit attributing the kike "Slammin" posts to me. You've been on forums long enough to know better, so I think you're doing it deliberatly; at least preview your replies before posting, nitwit.

BTW, you're not an American; you're a wannabe kike with 'sentimentmal' feelings toward the terrorist state of israel. Why don't you just convert.

Where's my answer to my query about the mishna. Conservative kikes should know it; I wouldn't expect a reform jew to know; but you told me you are a Cons. jew. I'll rephrase it, why are juden so concerned about the foreskin of trees?

The mishna is not off-limits to you; it's a book of laws, more important to jews than their torah.

sorry what exactly was your question?

Precisely the point; you were harping on about being 'an American' earlier and how you were 'more American than jew'. So we can take it from this that because of your supposed jewish ancestry that you are not loyal to the United States and therefore not actually American but rather a jew living in America.

Wrong sir. I am an American first, and I have some sentimental feelings about Israel, just as a German American would have feelings for Germany, or Italian American have feelings for Italy.
It is really no different IMO.
I understand you point tho...





Well it would help if you answered the questions, arguments and staked out something of a coherant position.

In short; you lack a spine.

If you want to think that, that is fine. I am not going to overly concern myself w/ peoples opinion of me on the internet!
However, I can't disagree, and have stated many times that I do indeed have quite mixed feelings on a lot of this, and make no claims to have any coherent positions!

sorry what exactly was your question?

Would you consider your inability to read/pay attention a mental illness or a "feature" of diversity?

She has really not made it very clear what her question is.
She keeps bringing up the Jewish books, and asking me to discuss...but no specific question was posed that I saw.
Then she cant seem to make up her mind if I am reform, conservative, or not even really a jew.
I am doing my best to follow here, but between karls 25 paragraph posts, and Eiranns completely incoherent posts where she is apparently asking me a question but isn't, it is not so easy to keep up for me!

She has really not made it very clear what her question is.
She keeps bringing up the Jewish books, and asking me to discuss...but no specific question was posed that I saw.
Then she cant seem to make up her mind if I am reform, conservative, or not even really a jew.
I am doing my best to follow here, but between karls 25 paragraph posts, and Eiranns completely incoherent posts where she is apparently asking me a question but isn't, it is not so easy to keep up for me!

I was quite specific; so was Herr Radl [ he is not "Karl" to you, show some respect]

I figured a self-proclaimed jew would be able to discuss the mishna, a long screed on jewish law pertaining to holy days ect. You, yourself, stated that you are 100% khazar and that you were of the conservative sect of juden.

I live in NYC, surrounded by jews, and well know that the Cons. juden are but a beard away from being orthodox. There's some differences as to how to worship your desert god [taking you at your own word, that you are indeed a kike]. Other than that, there's little difference, except in dress and appearance between an ortho. jew and a conservative,

Had you stated you were an agnostic, a reform jew, then I would not expect much of you re the myriad jewish writings such as the talmud, mishna, zohar and kabbala. Those jews think they're White and know nothing at all.

"The Foreskin of Trees" as mentioned in the mishna, happens to consist of three full chapters. My query about it is easy for any jew to answer. Instead, you evade; whatever you are, you are an ignoramus and a liar.

I was quite specific; so was Herr Radl [ he is not "Karl" to you, show some respect]

I figured a self-proclaimed jew would be able to discuss the mishna, a long screed on jewish law pertaining to holy days ect. You, yourself, stated that you are 100% khazar and that you were of the conservative sect of juden.

I live in NYC, surrounded by jews, and well know that the Cons. juden are but a beard away from beig orthodox. There's some differences as to how to worship your desert god [taking you at would that you are indeed a kike]. Other than that, there's little difference, except in dress and appearance between an ortho. jew and a conservative,

Had you stated you were an agnostic, a reform jew, then I would not expect much of you re the myriad jewish writings such as the talmud, mishna, zohar and kabbala. Those jews think they're White and know nothing at all.

"The Foreskin of Trees" as mentioned in the mishna, happens to consist of three full chapters. My query about it is easy for any jew to answer. Instead, you evade; whatever you are, you are an ignoramus and a liar.

Since you seem to be slow, I will explain once again. I was raised CONSERVATIVE.
Yes I had a bar mitzvah, but my family was not very religious at all. I do not practice the religion of Judaism today, and have not in many years.
I consider myself an agnostic.
I have never studied talmud, mishna, zohar, or kabbala, and from the sound of it, you probably know more about them than I do!
As for "The foreskin of Trees" I am not familiar with it...what soever, and as I said, have never studied the mishna or any of those books.

You must realize that while yes Conservative Judaism's is certainly closer to Orthodoxy than Reform is, not every Conservative jew maintains the same level of practice, nor necessarily shares all the same exact views or beliefs.

Wrong sir. I am an American first, and I have some sentimental feelings about Israel, just as a German American would have feelings for Germany, or Italian American have feelings for Italy.
It is really no different IMO.

No; I think you are aware it is quite different. A 'German American' is an American first not an American second. You are a jew (apparently) first and an American second; just look at what you write and how you think. One of the only consistent things is; what is good for Israel? How can I excuse Israel? How can I bind America to Israel?

You are trying to equate ethnicity (German, English, Scottish etc) with race (Aryan, jew etc); stop trying to weasel your way out of admitting/conceding you are (supposedly) a jew first and everything else second and that your loyalty is to your fellow jews (and Israel) not to America.

The jew is anything which serves jewish interests at that moment in time.

I understand you point tho...

Of course you do; and you are very well aware it is not the same thing.

If you want to think that, that is fine. I am not going to overly concern myself w/ peoples opinion of me on the internet!

Freud again; you obviously are otherwise you wouldn't keep having to state that you; 'really don't care about other peoples opinions' when you have admitted to us earlier that you indeed do in that you wish to foster a bad opinion of yourself in order to get 'red' gems.

Or perhaps is this your way of gaining 'respect' among your fellow jews; which is why you wished to court faceless' and more recently Weinstein's good opinion by helping them out/encouraging them when they dig themselves into yet another monstrously sized hole in the ground.

However, I can't disagree, and have stated many times that I do indeed have quite mixed feelings on a lot of this, and make no claims to have any coherent positions!

So if you have no coherant postions; why are you here? Why aren't you out being 'an American'; obviously you do have coherant positions and logic as we have discussed but you don't want to get into that because it wouldn't earn you bragging rights with juden friends.

No; I think you are aware it is quite different. A 'German American' is an American first not an American second. You are a jew (apparently) first and an American second; just look at what you write and how you think. One of the only consistent things is; what is good for Israel? How can I excuse Israel? How can I bind America to Israel?

You are trying to equate ethnicity (German, English, Scottish etc) with race (Aryan, jew etc); stop trying to weasel your way out of admitting/conceding you are (supposedly) a jew first and everything else second and that your loyalty is to your fellow jews (and Israel) not to America.

But that is not true...my loyalty is to my country, and frankly to all fellow human beings first.




Freud again; you obviously are otherwise you wouldn't keep having to state that you; 'really don't care about other peoples opinions' when you have admitted to us earlier that you indeed do in that you wish to foster a bad opinion of yourself in order to get 'red' gems.

wow man lol. Yes, I like red gems. Go ahead and give me some positive karma to make me mad :rofl

Or perhaps is this your way of gaining 'respect' among your fellow jews; which is why you wished to court faceless' and more recently Weinstein's good opinion by helping them out/encouraging them when they dig themselves into yet another monstrously sized hole in the ground.
huh? I have argued with faceless more than any of you lol.
Ignoramus!
as for Katie, I spoke with her a couple times on PM, and came to her defense when I saw a male calling her quite vile and classless names, as I would come to any females defense in that instance, no matter their ethnicity.



So if you have no coherant postions; why are you here? Why aren't you out being 'an American'; obviously you do have coherant positions and logic as we have discussed but you don't want to get into that because it wouldn't earn you bragging rights with juden friends.

I have been as clear about my positions as I can, and I realize they are not always coherent, and often do contradict each other.
What more can I say? :rolleyes:

You must realize that while yes Conservative Judaism's is certainly closer to Orthodoxy than Reform is, not every Conservative jew maintains the same level of practice, nor necessarily shares all the same exact views or beliefs.

Then you admit that you arre a lying windbag, and do you realise that you have merely re-worded that which I have already stated.

Idk which is worse, a wannabe kike or an admitted jew. You seem to be neither. How is it that a Gentile and Aryan woman knows more about the juden that you yourself. If you are an actual jew and not a spiritual jew, then no wonder the jews on phora have no respect for you; if you are a spiritual jew; then you have the respect of neither Gentile nor jew.

You cannot even discuss the jew's claim to holocaust, coward. You have nothing to say because you are afraid you might slip and fall off of that tightrope you are walking.

If you closely follow the history of the black you will see the typical shortcomings of this being. The Black is both short sighted and he only cares for instant gratification. Generally, the invasions the Black did participate in especially that of the Iberian Peninsula were purely by coincidence for the black. Ultimately the Moors lost because the black was so short sighted and easy for Charlamagne to deter. Blacks are perfect tools for the Jews because they have no plans of their own and only need to be gratified at this moment. They also are fast to forget so only a few Blacks will ever make the connection of their position to a Jew.

I've made similar observations myself, especially of the jew's involvement in Hip Hop. Most of these rappers don't care to acknowledge the pitiful examples they set for the youth or future generations, the jew just hands them their checks and that's that. Rabbi Mark Schneier has the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding whose sole purpose is to promote and crystallize the relationship between blacks and jews. They have the most popular black rappers and the biggest Jewish execs, producers,and label owners attend, to stand as a testament to that 'relationship'. Combine the contentedness with instant gratification, the demagoguery, and the stupidity and that's what you get. But I wouldn't say that it's only blacks, 'The International Jew' has an entire section dedicated to 'Gentile Stupidity', where it is disappointedly expressed that few men in general can ever follow the trail far enough to find the source.

My observation goes beyond that though. I've seen lots of black people, some of them my own family members, act on spur-of-the-moment impulses that had undesired results.

Simply because Africa's resources can put a lot of problems on hold. When Europeans went there it was not the Niggers they wanted but the resources in the rich rock. Why? Necessity.

If you believe that you have the power to take those resources, then, by all means do it. And by power I don't just mean strength, I mean the collective willingness of your race to revert to your primary, conquering mentality.

It's really something you cannot escape. A White Man's life and destiny begins with the creation of his town, then the shaping of his environment, finally he understands that to be sovereign he must expand so that other Whites who have made towns do not disrupt him.

There's nothing in this world that instills enough fear in me that I feel I have to try escaping, including the white man's life and destiny.

If his town is that of Rome it expands, and expands , and expands. Why? Out of competition and as he creates more so too he needs more.

Exactly. Competition, war, and sports are the natural instincts that Christianity has smothered. In this, I totally agree with Samuel; the Gentile's warring nature is not compatible with the pacifistic teachings of Christ and Gentiles have never fully became Christians. So many whites justify their multiculturalism with Christianity and use it to stomp out racism. "We're all brothers and sisters, and Jesus died for all of our sins."

About a week ago a Christian co-worker of mine was talking about how accepting and forgiving Christians are and so I interrupted "Klan members are Christians", and his response was : Well they're not real Christians.

He is a scourge to all other life - hated by animals and humans alike, his existence an unnatural phenomenon that with the seeds of the destruction he sows. Whether he destroys the White Man, the Yellow or himself doesn't really matter to him.

Well of course the negro is an unnatural phenomenon. He was the first man. Mitochondrial DNA tells us that the black man is the oldest and the white man is the youngest, and this space between ages and genetic mutations is enough to justify the obvious differences . I don't see why people are so impatiently expectant and disappointed when it comes to comparing the abilities of the white man's with the African's. It's a simple matter of progressive evolution.

If his town is that of Rome it expands, and expands , and expands. Why? Out of competition and as he creates more so too he needs more.

You admit that there is a competitive spirit in you but you still downplay it. Your sport, your competitive spirit, is you.

Zeus was tempered but he was also a great creator and judge. As far as it went it was hard to imagine something more virtuous than him.

But more importantly, gods like Zeus and Ares were exaggerations of yourselves, whereas Jesus and Jehova are laughable contradictions.

The world survived before the white man emerged from his murky origins, and I believe that if the white man vanishes the world will go on.
The animal world is independent of the Aryan, the other sentient beings will perish.

That is your opinion.

You're admirable in that your dreams are noble but will never come to fruition. A few like you will try to implement a solution while quelling the stormy masses but then a Jessi Jackson or Farakanh will come and begin the blame game.

I seriously doubt that a fully realized racial war could be quelled by myself or any other individual, and I would not spend my strength in such futility.

Blacks, who would rather have someone else to blame and not willing to give up their banana tree will follow them. You're trapped either way - if it is the will of your people then you are an uncle Tom, if it is the wrath of the West then you are doomed. It must be hard to want something so difficult.

At times it can be difficult, having an angry mob closing in on both sides. But I imagine that you're having even more trouble. Your numbers are dwindling, the Jewish propaganda is as powerful as ever, and more third-worlders are flooding in every day. Now that's difficult.



Africans have been at direct fault during the Battle against the Moors as well as the mongrelization of Portugal. They have also been at fault in the attacks against Italy.
The mongoloids have been at fault multiple times, here is but a taste
- The Huns
- The Magyars
- The Turks
- The Khazars
- The Mongols
If you consider other Asian powers the list only grows.

That's not parasitism or coexistence so much as it is conflict. The white man is not always at fault but there are no records of whites getting along peacefully with another race for a long period of time. He must be himself. Kevin J. Walker does a fine job of illustrating that fact.

Whites have an understandable case of racial claustrophobia. Peace is very unlikely.

But that is not true...my loyalty is to my country,

Yes; it is and what I say is true. Your country is Israel since I don't see you describing Israel as massacring the Palestinians you've quite pointedly avoided making such a description.

You are not an American; jude, you are a jew living in America with no loyalty to it beyond your personal and your tribe's advantage.

and frankly to all fellow human beings first.

However; jews consider human being to mean jew rather than the universal sense (although they have constructed a jewish version of natural order in their minds). It was what Rabbi's call their mission of 'divine priesthood' in the context of the race rather than simply refering to themselves as you might try to suggest to excuse it.

wow man lol. Yes, I like red gems. Go ahead and give me some positive karma to make me mad :rofl

You realise how easily even a basic understanding of Freud makes mincemeat of your psychology? Besides if you don't mean something you should not state it; so what is it jew? I've given you your words against your later words; you choose. You can't have your cake and eat it.

huh? I have argued with faceless more than any of you lol.

Really; where?

I am going to take a guess here and say that you will say; private message or personal email. In short; I don't believe you we've already found you are lying little so and so although you don't have quite the talent for it that many biological jews do.

Ignoramus!

Coming from a person who is trying to excuse himself by saying he 'has mixed feelings' and so forth so he cannot form a coherant position on anything that's pretty rich.

Ignoramus should refer you jude for you are quite ignorant of even the most basic jewish arguments in favour of jewry; which I had expected you; giving you the leniant assumption that you had some little quantity of grey matter in the cavity in your skull, to at least repeat.

Besides what is it about you and your 'feelings'?

as for Katie, I spoke with her a couple times on PM, and came to her defense

Precisely my point; did she offer you sex behind the Torah curtain or something?

when I saw a male calling her quite vile and classless names,

You mean when she was saying fuck every three words at posters which earned her more than a little hostility?

Oh and for the record; jews and jewess' get no politeness from me. I am usually very polite as I was brought up to be (ask EG) but you as Yahweh's little darlings do not deserve any kindness or politeness. You are; simply put, a disease and I am not polite to viral infections that are sucking the very blood from the folk and want praise for it.

Is it more than a little co-incidence that when EG suggested that a male jew might be called in to help the illiterate jewish crone out that you suddenly appeared on your clapped out white charger and she [Weinstein] effectively disappeared?

as I would come to any females defense in that instance, no matter their ethnicity.

So why didn't you defend EG or WhiteNightShade then? Why did you only defend Weinstein? You clearly hold a double position and no amount of whining, excuses and statements to the contrary will suggest that you do not. Since actions speak much louder than words; jew.

You are so full of shit jew.

I have been as clear about my positions as I can, and I realize they are not always coherent, and often do contradict each other.
What more can I say? :rolleyes:

What more can you say? That you have no argument and that you therefore concede that you have do not have a positive case to make for jewry because you are unable to form a coherant position.

Yes; it is and what I say is true. Your country is Israel since I don't see you describing Israel as massacring the Palestinians you've quite pointedly avoided making such a description.
Wrong again sir.

You are not an American; jude, you are a jew living in America with no loyalty to it beyond your personal and your tribe's advantage.

Wrong again dipshit.



However; jews consider human being to mean jew rather than the universal sense (although they have constructed a jewish version of natural order in their minds). It was what Rabbi's call their mission of 'divine priesthood' in the context of the race rather than simply refering to themselves as you might try to suggest to excuse it.

Okay. I dont practice Judaism so I would not know if this is true or not....

You realise how easily even a basic understanding of Freud makes mincemeat of your psychology? Besides if you don't mean something you should not state it; so what is it jew? I've given you your words against your later words; you choose. You can't have your cake and eat it.

Lol fuck your self. Yes, I resort to meaningless insults (much like you) and frankly do not really care what you think or say =)

Really; where?

All over the place, both here and on the phora

I am going to take a guess here and say that you will say; private message or personal email. In short; I don't believe you we've already found you are lying little so and so although you don't have quite the talent for it that many biological jews do.

okay...



Coming from a person who is trying to excuse himself by saying he 'has mixed feelings' and so forth so he cannot form a coherant position on anything that's pretty rich.

Who said I was trying to excuse my self? Once again, I give two shits what you, or anyone on the internet thinks for that matter. I state my feelings thats all. I make no claims as to their coherence (learn to spell btw) or validity.


Ignoramus should refer you jude for you are quite ignorant of even the most basic jewish arguments in favour of jewry; which I had expected you; giving you the leniant assumption that you had some little quantity of grey matter in the cavity in your skull, to at least repeat.

Very witty insult. Really!

Besides what is it about you and your 'feelings'?

Huh?



Precisely my point; did she offer you sex behind the Torah curtain or something?

No, I do not even know her, and have argued a bit with her even for that matter (on here via pm)




You mean when she was saying fuck every three words at posters which earned her more than a little hostility?

My guess is she was attacked first, which is of course to be expected on here...
I find it funny when someone responds to hostility with their own hostility, that you get up in arms about it.

Oh and for the record; jews and jewess' get no politeness from me. I am usually very polite as I was brought up to be (ask EG) but you as Yahweh's little darlings do not deserve any kindness or politeness. You are; simply put, a disease and I am not polite to viral infections that are sucking the very blood from the folk and want praise for it.

Fair enough, and refer to the comment directly above this (hostility begets hostility)

Is it more than a little co-incidence that when EG suggested that a male jew might be called in to help the illiterate jewish crone out that you suddenly appeared on your clapped out white charger and she [Weinstein] effectively disappeared?

no Idea...perhaps she has been busy with work/school/family or what ever?
as I said I do not even know her, and have exchanged a few words with her my self.
I will always come to the defense of a female being talked to in that way...even if it was EG (although I am sure I have been rude to her my self...but again, hostility begets more...)



So why didn't you defend EG or WhiteNightShade then? Why did you only defend Weinstein? You clearly hold a double position and no amount of whining, excuses and statements to the contrary will suggest that you do not. Since actions speak much louder than words; jew. You are so full of shit jew.

Read my above. I would defend either of them if I saw someone talking like that to them unprovoked. White NightShade seems quite nice actually, and I do not take EG seriously most of the time.





What more can you say? That you have no argument and that you therefore concede that you have do not have a positive case to make for jewry because you are unable to form a coherant position.

I never claimed to have an argument, or a positive case for "jewry".
Nice try, but wrong again, dipshit.

White nationalism is not some new idea implanted into the minds of whites, it's the dormant warrior buried beneath Christianity and multiculturalism.

This isn't true and it makes no sense.

Nationalism only arose in Europe around the early 1800s and since then its principal affect has been that whites on one side of a river or mountain range have fought the whites on the other side while following colorful cloth tied to a stick.

Even here, on VNN, you can't agree on what is white . . . the Nordics have their own sense of identity . . . the WASPs another . . . the southern Europeans aren't quite sure where they fit . . . whites in Latin America are constantly explaining that they're white . . . and the Russians and eastern Europeans are apparently no longer untermenschen and are now also considered "white."

The truth is that

1. White Nationalism is new

2. It is not Germanic "national socialism" as understood in the 1930s

3. It replaces the historical divisions that kept the Europeans fighting his brothers

dipshit.
Lol fuck your self.
I give two shits
Huh?
I never claimed to have an argument
dipshit.


This is the best post made by Ze'ev yet. I have condensed it, since the remainder was just fluff and filler. He is here to make inarticulate insult; no other reason.

Proving that he has nothing to say. It is the best argument against himself that I have yet read.

Competition, war, and sports are the natural instincts that Christianity has smothered. In this, I totally agree with Samuel; the Gentile's warring nature is not compatible with the pacifistic teachings of Christ and Gentiles have never fully became Christians. So many whites justify their multiculturalism with Christianity and use it to stomp out racism.


With the usual DISCLAIMER of: I'm not a Christian . . . let me say that this statement is not true and makes no sense.

Exactly what historical example are you using to conclude that Christianity smothers warfare and competition?

True . . . you can find Christians who will let you slap them silly as they "turn the other cheek." But that is an EXTREME . . . and extremes (fanaticism) can be found everywhere. By definition a fanatic is never representative of the "main stream" of his religion.

If anything, Christianity, like Islam, is a religion that promises "the right path" and is therefore tailor-made for warriors and conquerors who want to impose their beliefs on others.

Christianity is also totally based on interpretation. We don't know what Christ said. We only know what others have told us he said. And that interpretation has been re-interpreted hundreds of times.

Because of its reliance on interpretation, Christianity is inherently malleable and perfect for capitalists, conquerors and empire-builders who need to justify their actions . . . in other words, white Europeans and their American offspring.

As for multiculturalism . . . sure, American Liberals use Christianity to oppose racism. But that's a temporary aberration.

Don't forget the history of Christianity and racialism: For example, the relationship between Christianity and eugenics has always been profound. It was the Roman Catholic Church that launched the Crusades, expelled the Moors and conquered Latin America. It was the American Christian church that supported Southern slavery and the expulsion of the Indian. The Eastern Orthodox Church has always supported the Pogroms as has the European Christian church. The Vatican supported both the Italian and German fascist movements even when it was obvious that they were staunchly anti-semitic.

Like I said above . . . Christianity is malleable. You can twist it to support anything. Multiculturalism is a political movement . . . and it uses Christianity as a justification.

But this too shall pass. You already have a deep division between the black and white Christian church and many churches have split bitterly over faggotry.

Christians will support White Nationalism in huge numbers when they understand what it's about and when God tells them to. :)

This is the best post made by Ze'ev yet. I have condensed it, since the remainder was just fluff and filler. He is here to make inarticulate insult; no other reason.

Proving that he has nothing to say. It is the best argument against himself that I have yet read.

He is incredibly inept for a Jew.

He can't lie worth a damn and when he does he can't dodge worth a damn, he's also so bad at manipulation that Jewish tribals spit on him. I have to say though - I think more like Ze'ev should reproduce so that their race will be doomed. "We're going to kill you now Ze'ev" "I have mixed feelings about that... HURRRGH... mah hart!" *Dies*

This is the best

I have nothing to say.

This is the best post I've seen by EG.

I've edited and condenced it, the rest was just fluf and filler

:rofl

"We're going to kill you now Ze'ev" "I have mixed feelings about that... HURRRGH... mah hart!" *Dies*
ha ha hahahaha. that's a good depiction of Ze'ev. he is no match for your and EG's relentless assault. PS, you are kinda punky and funny, I feel like you lack muscular fortitude, but your writing is non-boring and occasionally brilliant; EG, you are stunningly beautiful (if that pic truly is you), strange that I'm usually more excited by peoples' writing than talking to them in person, but I think with you it'd be the other way around.

ha ha hahahaha. that's a good depiction of Ze'ev.
Thanks. :)

he is no match for your and EG's relentless assault.
Oh come on, give him a go. You'll have him crying and making gay comments in no time.

PS, you are kinda punky and funny, I feel like you lack muscular fortitude, but your writing is non-boring and occasionally brilliant;
Most people who like to sting with words usually are a bit slight (Voltaire for example) but not me. It's more that I never relied on my natural strength to get what I want or get a point across , I would rather save it for a situation that actually requires it.


Also thanks for the compliment, I feel that often I am not always in optimal shape because there's often not much to say.

EG, you are stunningly beautiful (if that pic truly is you), strange that I'm usually more excited by peoples' writing than talking to them in person, but I think with you it'd be the other way around.

I am of the same opinion.

White nationalism is not some new idea implanted into the minds of whites, it's the dormant warrior buried beneath Christianity and multiculturalism.

This isn't true and it makes no sense.

Nationalism only arose in Europe around the early 1800s and since then its principal affect has been that whites on one side of a river or mountain range have fought the whites on the other side while following colorful cloth tied to a stick.

Even here, on VNN, you can't agree on what is white . . . the Nordics have their own sense of identity . . . the WASPs another . . . the southern Europeans aren't quite sure where they fit . . . whites in Latin America are constantly explaining that they're white . . . and the Russians and eastern Europeans are apparently no longer untermenschen and are now also considered "white."

The truth is that

1. White Nationalism is new

2. It is not Germanic "national socialism" as understood in the 1930s

3. It replaces the historical divisions that kept the Europeans fighting his brothers

Hi Joe.

Is it a new idea? I do not think so. Is it a newly and visibly manifested movement? Yes, I think so.

Whites already know blacks are stupid, violent, destructive apelike creatures. -Alex Linder

I feel that white nationalism, for the most part, causes white lemmings to accept their subconscious feelings about non-whites, but for some I suppose it can be a totally 'new' thing.

Exactly what historical example are you using to conclude that Christianity smothers warfare and competition?

The death of Tetramachus, just to name one incident.

True . . . you can find Christians who will let you slap them silly as they "turn the other cheek." But that is an EXTREME . . . and extremes (fanaticism) can be found everywhere. By definition a fanatic is never representative of the "main stream" of his religion.

I agree. But the 'fanatics', as you call them, are still seated at the vertex of righteousness in the eyes of many.

Christianity is also totally based on interpretation. We don't know what Christ said. We only know what others have told us he said. And that interpretation has been re-interpreted hundreds of times.

Being a non-religious person, I have argued this many times. But factuality is the least important ingredient when it comes to manipulating the masses - a fact that is vividly exposed in the Solomon Asch study.

Because of its reliance on interpretation, Christianity is inherently malleable and perfect for capitalists, conquerors and empire-builders who need to justify their actions . . . in other words, white Europeans and their American offspring.

I agree

As for multiculturalism . . . sure, American Liberals use Christianity to oppose racism. But that's a temporary aberration.

Agreed.

Like I said above . . . Christianity is malleable. You can twist it to support anything. Multiculturalism is a political movement . . . and it uses Christianity as a justification.

Good luck trying to wrest it from the strangulating grip of liberalism. :)

But this too shall pass. You already have a deep division between the black and white Christian church and many churches have split bitterly over faggotry.

Christians will support White Nationalism in huge numbers when they understand what it's about and when God tells them to. :)

Maybe..

Wrong again sir.

Wrong again dipshit.

So how am I wrong; jew boy?

Oh do tell; you are a great one for saying 'you are wrong' and 'I don't believe that'; but you never do say how I am wrong or even explain your own thought.

I am undecided whether it is because you can't or because you are a coward.

Perhaps you could shed some light on this subject?

Okay. I dont practice Judaism so I would not know if this is true or not....

If you don't practice something; it doesn't mean you don't know about it.

I don't practice Calvinism; it doesn't mean I don't know something about it or have not read the Institutes. You didn't practice or take part in the supposed 'caust but it doesn't stop you talking about it.

Also my references; so I am told by EG, are usually very obscure so only somebody with some knowledge of the subject matter would likely know what I am on about.

Lol fuck your self. Yes, I resort to meaningless insults (much like you) and frankly do not really care what you think or say =)

Heh; 'meaningless insults'... really? You do realise that if you were really a jude you would have understood how much those 'insults'; although more me having a little fun with a want-to-be to see what the bottom feeder does, mean to jews as jews. Their responses are predictable as are Weinstein's; yours are decidedly different and what I would expect from a gentile trying to be a jude rather than a jude trying to pretend to be a gentile.

Or perhaps you didn't really understand that the jew is a pathology and is not something very easily imitated. Hell; I've tried and I find near impossible to do (for the same reason Weinstein finds my thought completely alien); and I've devoted quite some time to studying jews.

All over the place, both here and on the phora

Alright bring one out then; I've invited you to do so more than enough times. Lets have a nice specific discussion of some part of your thought and the justification for it in terms of current affairs, history and political science.

Who said I was trying to excuse my self? Once again, I give two shits what you, or anyone on the internet thinks for that matter. I state my feelings thats all.

Yes; its all about 'your feelings' isn't it? You obviously do 'give two shits' otherwise you would not be here and you would not be openly soliciting negative rep. I would tell you to stop being a hypocritical retard but I don't think it would be understood since it seems to be a matter of course with you.

I make no claims as to their coherence (learn to spell btw) or validity.

You do make claims to their coherence otherwise you would not put forward your thoughts in the first place. If they are not coherent then you should either put yourself back into the school system, Yeshiva or a mental institution. I'd recommend quiet solace for an Aryan but as you are a want-to-be jew; I doubt you are capable of quiet retreat and proper reflective thought.

If you publish your views; on the internet, in a book and/or article, then you make a positive statement about their validity; regardless of whether they be a positive, negative or neutral view. That is called taking responsibility for what you write; ever heard of it?

I don't apologise to jews for the occasional spelling mistake (I am dyslexic); you have no right to such an apology and I do not make apologia to jews as a rule of thumb. Nor do I believe a spelling mistake detracts from what I write and nor did my university tutors.

So go kvetch somewhere else or for that matter shouldn't you be out finding a cross to whip?

No, I do not even know her, and have argued a bit with her even for that matter (on here via pm)

Then why jump in to defend her all of a sudden? On your clapped out; slightly diseased, white charger; of course.

My guess is she was attacked first, which is of course to be expected on here...

Yeah; like hell.

But let's quote some Katie from a year ago; which is the farthest the search goes back apparently, shall we?

Been watching the history channel, aye? Good for you. A little education for white trash.

I don't know about YOUR God, but MY God is one who despises those who hate. Those who talk like you, witch. Those who hate ALL Jews for what a few Jews did. You don't even know me and yet you label me. So, HRW, YOU are the one who will meet a fiery end. Not me. Boy, would I love to be a fly on the wall when you meet your Maker.

Oh, and BTW, do I detect a hint of envy? You know about us being the Chosen? If you know anyting about Jewish history (reliable sources, not some friggin antisemitic crap or some jewish leftist crap) you would know the meaning of the word CHOSEN. It does NOT mean that we Jews think we are the bomb. It means that we accepted God's laws, the Torah. He Chose Us! And We Chose Him? Get it? It has nothing to do with Jews being special, you moronic WT.

You people make me laugh. Even as I am writing this. This forum has very, very few truly educated, intelligent posters. Mostly young crack-smokin' yahoos who have nothing to do with their time but get on the Net and post anonymous hate trash. That is why you people will NEVER succeed. If you spent half the time educating yourselves that you spend on the Net, you wouldn't have to put others down in order to make yourselves feel important.

And another;

for some fucking reason, when I preview my post, the new pics show up. Then when I post them, the red arrow shows. Perhaps the Mods don't want positive images of Israeli soldiers

And another;

Typical, typical. You evaded my question which means you cannot bring yourself to admit that there were ovens that burned live Jews. Once again, you dimwits prove over and over why you are so hopeless and we Jews so successful at whatever we put our minds to. You, are a total and complete waste of space on this planet. Go away!

No; Weinstein is a little Orthodox mamzer. She's angry because nobody will accept that granddaddy Weinstein got thrown live in an oven by a sadistic SS guard.* Who she secretly fantasizes about (a bit like jews do about gentile; especially Irish and German for some reason, girls).

* Granddaddy Weinstein of course claimed holocaust reparations for atrocities that supposedly killed him, got into trouble for Communist agitation and ran away to Israel only to die a Kahanist loony. But Katie doesn't want to mention that.

And yes that is a little black humoured hyperbole before you pull a Chesler.

I find it funny when someone responds to hostility with their own hostility, that you get up in arms about it.

Why should you find that funny; after all its what your (supposed) tribe does and has done since time immemorial which you are unable to replicate but rather attempt a bland copy of their victim status without the thought and logic that goes behind it. I'd recommend a read of Horowitz's 'Reckless Rites', which lists some of the proverbs about this particular attitude of jews in the second part of the work (around p. 270 as I recall) and gives the notion of the saintly peaceful and meek jews (i.e. the standard line on jewish history created by Roth and a swathe of Israeli historians) a through debunking.

You've also constructed a strawman on the baseless and incorrect assumption that Weinstein came here as a meek, saintly and very polite jewess. It shows how many jewesses you know, have met and/or talked to beyond the standard jewish formalities and conversational formulas i.e. not many or more likely none.

Fair enough, and refer to the comment directly above this (hostility begets hostility)

That it does; my absolute loathing (well its beyond that; but I can't really describe it to you other than you are an alien to me in the true sense of the word) of your race comes from your actions; historic and current. Your hostility to my race is of much longer duration it would seem; pre any serious organised hostility to yourselves and rooted in the idea of the Chosen (as well as your own general infallibility as a race).

History can only be properly understood by recognising that it is a many layered epic; largely sorrowful and not often very heroic, of the rise to civilisation of the purest breeds and the destruction of old inferior mixed breeds by the medium of race war. This process being repeated ad infinitum to the end of time.

no Idea...perhaps she has been busy with work/school/family or what ever?
as I said I do not even know her, and have exchanged a few words with her my self.

Well then how do you explain your sudden entrance when EG suggested that a male jew would arrive on Katie's request and Katie's disappearance (and occasional reappearance with an unintelligent barrage of crap). I am not one to jump to conclusions (being a cynical skeptic at heart); but when you suddenly arrive in a thread and take the place of another; as well as defending her, then that is pretty hard to explain away in terms of the simplest possible explanation (because it makes an unwarranted assumption).

I will always come to the defense of a female being talked to in that way...even if it was EG (although I am sure I have been rude to her my self...but again, hostility begets more...)

Then you contradict yourself; in so far as you set a different standard in that you are willing to come to the aid of Weinstein unconditionally but you do not for EG. Why not; no I am serious if you claim to be such a mannered gentleman as to always come to the defense of any lady no matter the circumstances then I want to see you doing it. Not applying a double standard; perhaps in order to be apply such an idea of your own politeness towards all ladies whether they be jewess, married to a jew, philo-semitic or anti-jewish gentile.

Original hostility does not excuse your action (and it is your choice to come to a place where you know you will have a very hostile reception; this is a responsibility issue again. Something you are not too good with apparently); otherwise you are saying that you firstly do not apply your own stated principle and secondly that you are so completely a creature of your emotions that you cannot control yourself emotionally let alone in terms of your sexuality (etc).

Read my above. I would defend either of them if I saw someone talking like that to them unprovoked. White NightShade seems quite nice actually,

Ah there's your catch; 'unprovoked'. So what do you consider 'provocation'; jew?

Do you consider coming to a forum which is renowned for being extremely 'anti-Semitic' and arguing as a jew to be suitable provocation to hostility? If I went to a jewish forum and said that I am an a National Socialist and that I am a convinced 'anti-Semite' that I would not provoking the jews on that forum? I'd say I was; very blatently actually, but you seem to think not based on what I can make out of your underlying logic.

If not why then do you come here; for I am curious. I already know why but I want to see you say it, be completely non-committal or just avoid the question again.

and I do not take EG seriously most of the time.

I would if I were you. :)

But then as a want-to-be jew you might not understand what I mean by that.

I never claimed to have an argument, or a positive case for "jewry".
Nice try, but wrong again, dipshit.

You do claim to have an argument or you would not have entered the thread otherwise you would be contradicting yourself in a very nihilistic fashion.

If you did not have a positive case for jewry you would not defend them or stand up for them; by posting against the positive case against jewry you de-facto are making a positive case for jewry.

Its all about taking responsibility; something jews have never wanted very much to do with if it is in anyway negative but wish to barge their way in to responsibility for anything positive.

The death of Tetramachus, just to name one incident.


Sorry . . . no idea of who that is. Had to look it up:

The ban of the gladiator games in Rome in 399 AD by Honorius is attributed to the actions of Tetramachus. According to legend, Tetramachus was a Christian who was so disgusted by the gladiatorial practices that he stepped onto the field to denounce the practice and was run through by the Roman combatants. So moved by this action, Honorius subsequently banned all future public gladiator games. (wikipedia)

Martydom. Hmmmm . . .

Christian martydom . . . like Ghandi's nonviolence (and MLK's I suppose :rolleyes:) are effective tactics that do smother violence to some degree because they highlight "injustice."

(By the way, I suspect that the recognition of "injustice" is a European virtue . . . Genghis Khan would probably have sliced off Tetramachus' head and kept on with the games.)

But I'm not sure that this is a valid example. (I will think about it some more however.) My gut feeling is that we're talking about apples and oranges.

I think the issue of smothering competition and warfare refers to the notion that Christians are too "pussified" to do White Nationalism any good.

I just don't see where history supports that idea. Justinian and Constantine slaughtered millions. Charlemagne and his son Pippin, fought the Moors . . . but they also slaughtered Saxon pagans who would not convert to Christianity. Two hundred years later, his descendants led the Crusades, continued fighting the Moors and in 1492, began colonizing latin America where they killed millions of Indians. In the 1500s, Christianity split over Martin Luther's ideas and killed more millions. The Napoleonic Wars, WW1 and WW2 were fought by Christians . . . and of course, Christians were quick to burn "witches" at the stake.

So, I just don't see Christianity as a very peaceful religion. :)

So how am I wrong; jew boy?

Oh do tell; you are a great one for saying 'you are wrong' and 'I don't believe that'; but you never do say how I am wrong or even explain your own thought.

I am undecided whether it is because you can't or because you are a coward.

Perhaps you could shed some light on this subject?



If you don't practice something; it doesn't mean you don't know about it.

I don't practice Calvinism; it doesn't mean I don't know something about it or have not read the Institutes. You didn't practice or take part in the supposed 'caust but it doesn't stop you talking about it.

Also my references; so I am told by EG, are usually very obscure so only somebody with some knowledge of the subject matter would likely know what I am on about.



Heh; 'meaningless insults'... really? You do realise that if you were really a jude you would have understood how much those 'insults'; although more me having a little fun with a want-to-be to see what the bottom feeder does, mean to jews as jews. Their responses are predictable as are Weinstein's; yours are decidedly different and what I would expect from a gentile trying to be a jude rather than a jude trying to pretend to be a gentile.

Or perhaps you didn't really understand that the jew is a pathology and is not something very easily imitated. Hell; I've tried and I find near impossible to do (for the same reason Weinstein finds my thought completely alien); and I've devoted quite some time to studying jews.



Alright bring one out then; I've invited you to do so more than enough times. Lets have a nice specific discussion of some part of your thought and the justification for it in terms of current affairs, history and political science.



Yes; its all about 'your feelings' isn't it? You obviously do 'give two shits' otherwise you would not be here and you would not be openly soliciting negative rep. I would tell you to stop being a hypocritical retard but I don't think it would be understood since it seems to be a matter of course with you.



You do make claims to their coherence otherwise you would not put forward your thoughts in the first place. If they are not coherent then you should either put yourself back into the school system, Yeshiva or a mental institution. I'd recommend quiet solace for an Aryan but as you are a want-to-be jew; I doubt you are capable of quiet retreat and proper reflective thought.

If you publish your views; on the internet, in a book and/or article, then you make a positive statement about their validity; regardless of whether they be a positive, negative or neutral view. That is called taking responsibility for what you write; ever heard of it?

I don't apologise to jews for the occasional spelling mistake (I am dyslexic); you have no right to such an apology and I do not make apologia to jews as a rule of thumb. Nor do I believe a spelling mistake detracts from what I write and nor did my university tutors.

So go kvetch somewhere else or for that matter shouldn't you be out finding a cross to whip?



Then why jump in to defend her all of a sudden? On your clapped out; slightly diseased, white charger; of course.



Yeah; like hell.

But let's quote some Katie from a year ago; which is the farthest the search goes back apparently, shall we?



And another;



And another;



No; Weinstein is a little Orthodox mamzer. She's angry because nobody will accept that granddaddy Weinstein got thrown live in an oven by a sadistic SS guard.* Who she secretly fantasizes about (a bit like jews do about gentile; especially Irish and German for some reason, girls).

* Granddaddy Weinstein of course claimed holocaust reparations for atrocities that supposedly killed him, got into trouble for Communist agitation and ran away to Israel only to die a Kahanist loony. But Katie doesn't want to mention that.

And yes that is a little black humoured hyperbole before you pull a Chesler.



Why should you find that funny; after all its what your (supposed) tribe does and has done since time immemorial which you are unable to replicate but rather attempt a bland copy of their victim status without the thought and logic that goes behind it. I'd recommend a read of Horowitz's 'Reckless Rites', which lists some of the proverbs about this particular attitude of jews in the second part of the work (around p. 270 as I recall) and gives the notion of the saintly peaceful and meek jews (i.e. the standard line on jewish history created by Roth and a swathe of Israeli historians) a through debunking.

You've also constructed a strawman on the baseless and incorrect assumption that Weinstein came here as a meek, saintly and very polite jewess. It shows how many jewesses you know, have met and/or talked to beyond the standard jewish formalities and conversational formulas i.e. not many or more likely none.



That it does; my absolute loathing (well its beyond that; but I can't really describe it to you other than you are an alien to me in the true sense of the word) of your race comes from your actions; historic and current. Your hostility to my race is of much longer duration it would seem; pre any serious organised hostility to yourselves and rooted in the idea of the Chosen (as well as your own general infallibility as a race).

History can only be properly understood by recognising that it is a many layered epic; largely sorrowful and not often very heroic, of the rise to civilisation of the purest breeds and the destruction of old inferior mixed breeds by the medium of race war. This process being repeated ad infinitum to the end of time.



Well then how do you explain your sudden entrance when EG suggested that a male jew would arrive on Katie's request and Katie's disappearance (and occasional reappearance with an unintelligent barrage of crap). I am not one to jump to conclusions (being a cynical skeptic at heart); but when you suddenly arrive in a thread and take the place of another; as well as defending her, then that is pretty hard to explain away in terms of the simplest possible explanation (because it makes an unwarranted assumption).



Then you contradict yourself; in so far as you set a different standard in that you are willing to come to the aid of Weinstein unconditionally but you do not for EG. Why not; no I am serious if you claim to be such a mannered gentleman as to always come to the defense of any lady no matter the circumstances then I want to see you doing it. Not applying a double standard; perhaps in order to be apply such an idea of your own politeness towards all ladies whether they be jewess, married to a jew, philo-semitic or anti-jewish gentile.

Original hostility does not excuse your action (and it is your choice to come to a place where you know you will have a very hostile reception; this is a responsibility issue again. Something you are not too good with apparently); otherwise you are saying that you firstly do not apply your own stated principle and secondly that you are so completely a creature of your emotions that you cannot control yourself emotionally let alone in terms of your sexuality (etc).



Ah there's your catch; 'unprovoked'. So what do you consider 'provocation'; jew?

Do you consider coming to a forum which is renowned for being extremely 'anti-Semitic' and arguing as a jew to be suitable provocation to hostility? If I went to a jewish forum and said that I am an a National Socialist and that I am a convinced 'anti-Semite' that I would not provoking the jews on that forum? I'd say I was; very blatently actually, but you seem to think not based on what I can make out of your underlying logic.

If not why then do you come here; for I am curious. I already know why but I want to see you say it, be completely non-committal or just avoid the question again.



I would if I were you. :)

But then as a want-to-be jew you might not understand what I mean by that.



You do claim to have an argument or you would not have entered the thread otherwise you would be contradicting yourself in a very nihilistic fashion.

If you did not have a positive case for jewry you would not defend them or stand up for them; by posting against the positive case against jewry you de-facto are making a positive case for jewry.

Its all about taking responsibility; something jews have never wanted very much to do with if it is in anyway negative but wish to barge their way in to responsibility for anything positive.

I don't bother because no matter what I say, in your mind I will be wrong as a Juden, or lying.
Its really not worth arguing with you, and I find it to be quite pointless to be honest.
I do agree with one thing you said...that jews who come here should expect to be treated hostile, just as you would be on JTF or another jewish forum.
I still think there is nothing wrong w/ some decorum, and being somewhat civil, but that's just me. Yes I have occasionally dealt insults, but only in retort to being insulted.
In any case, as I said, It is pointless to argue back and forth with you about how jewish I am, or who likes me or dislikes me on the internet, lol.
Frankly I have better things to do w/ my time. I like to come here and read, and occasionally post my thoughts on stuff but thats really it.
Not here to argue or make any cases...

So, I just don't see Christianity as a very peaceful religion. :)

Seeing as it really is a vessel in which the intentions of opportunists are poured, I guess both of us are right. I'm merely speaking of the current, pacifistic puppetry that it's been subjected to.

[quote][quote=Ze'ev;744926]Its really not worth arguing with you, and I find it to be quite pointless to be honest....In any case, as I said, It is pointless to argue back and forth with you about how jewish I am, or who likes me or dislikes me on the internet, lol.


If you truly think that the above is true, then you have missed THE POINT entirely; that of Herr Radl, and others. Self absorbed twit.

Frankly I have better things to do w/ my time. I like to come here and read, and occasionally post my thoughts on stuff but thats really it.

Reading, perhaps; posting your "thoughts", highly doubtful since you mostly whine endlessly about all the insults you take from us.

Not here to argue or make any cases...

Redundant. Your posts have proven this, over and over again. Also, you confuse the term "argue" with debate, which is completely different. Perhaps if you would debate that with which you disagree; you would find less "hostility" and perhaps some self-respect.

I don't bother because no matter what I say, in your mind I will be wrong as a Juden, or lying.

That's not true in the slightest; it is not about you being a jew it is about you being categorically wrong and downright ignorant. We've already discussed what views you've represented and you were unable to enter even the most basic discussion about them. So I hardly think you've proven that no matter what you say I will disagree.

All you need to see that; is the posts I recently made to you when I stated that the Talmudic criticism often used against jews is outlandishly bad and often outright made up. This is not to say there isn't a significant case for the jews to answer about the Talmud, Mishnah Torah, Torah (etc) but that the orthodox case against the jews using Judaism as the medium is not even approaching useful because it can be debunked six-ways-to-sunday by most gentile scholars on Judaism or even a determined Rabbi.

Its really not worth arguing with you, and I find it to be quite pointless to be honest.

Well we have already discovered you can't debate or even argue (which is the pubertal version of debate) for love nor money; where-as I can. Blame my Catholic tutors and my genetics for that.

I do agree with one thing you said...that jews who come here should expect to be treated hostile, just as you would be on JTF or another jewish forum.

Well yes; that's blatently obvious yet you still tried to pull the other one in your recent post by complaining about hostility and trying to excuse Katie's actions by saying 'hostility begets hostility' which although debatable historically and genetically is rather chicken and egg.

I still think there is nothing wrong w/ some decorum, and being somewhat civil, but that's just me. Yes I have occasionally dealt insults, but only in retort to being insulted.

You 'have occasionally dealt insults'? I think it is a little more than occasional and even if it were so; then you by your own thought are provoking that hence you should not be surprised and should act gentile. However you don't and quite frankly I went to have a look back over your posts and I am forced to wonder what you think to act gentile means since I have no seen very much of what I was brought up to understand as polite behaviour from your good self.

I think the posters here could also testify to this; but we'll leave it at that if you like.

In any case, as I said, It is pointless to argue back and forth with you about how jewish I am, or who likes me or dislikes me on the internet, lol.

Then you've missed the entire point; which I'd thought for a while. A jew will always act in a certain pattern or series of patterns when pressed; by jew I mean someone who identifies very much as a jew and has a quantity of blood rather than say a scientist who has some quantity of blood and no actual care about his jewishness. You didn't you acted like a non-jew.

I originally took the tack because you were unable to get into a reasonable exchange of views and kept mulling about your 'feelings' then stating that you were only here to 'comment' which is patently not true (since one knows if one comments on a public forum then ones comment potentially will get commented on thereby a duologue or dialogue develops). There is also the fact that you are quite visibly trying to behave and talk like a jew but you do not think or act like one; more like a bad imitation of one.

Frankly I have better things to do w/ my time.

So then why do you come here? If you don't want to have duologue or dialogue woe betide an argument or if you had the ability; a debate then you would not come to a public forum to do so. If you just wanted to comment on things then a news site or blog would be far better.

I like to come here and read, and occasionally post my thoughts on stuff but thats really it.
Not here to argue or make any cases...

Well as stated thats an oxymoron; if you wanted a non-combative environment to 'just read and comment' then you do not go a well known 'anti-Semitic' forum as a jew and post comments without the expectation of them being answered or attacked.

That's common sense.

May I suggest you use the comment function on Haaretz or write letters to your local jewish newspaper if you really want to do as you say. Or even go Amren; they'll love you there as a 'white jew' (however moronic and unscientific that term is).

So this again begets the question; why are you here?

Yeah - there was no Holocaust

--------------------------

Heinrich Himmler explains the necessity for murdering Jewish women and children, along with men.

"It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was. "

Hear the speech:

Media Player
http://www.stevenlehrer.com/images/sonthofen.wma
Real Player
http://stevenlehrer.com/sonthofen.smil

Yeah - there was no HolocaustFinally, truth from a jew.

Where's that gassed body?

Finally, truth from a jew.

Where's that gassed body?

Why don't you comment on the Himmler speach, kind of damaging don't you think?

[QUOTE=Slamin2;745545]Yeah - there was no Holocaust

--------------------------

Heinrich Himmler explains the necessity for murdering Jewish women and children, along with men.

Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was. "



A great man that Himmler!
Foresaw that jews will - with or without Hitler - attack us children and grandchildren wherever they can.
Why would he want to spare rats, messengers of pestilence and Yaweh, for the next generations? Yaweh oyveh, Shem's spawn, lovers of destruction, pig ("porno")-dogs("cynical") roaming the streets of humans.
Jews are nothing but rodents wearing people's clothes.

I saw a grown up yesterday walking around here with that voracious smile.
Decay loving lunatics.
Money is their main dish, as it is poison to a non jew.
We are busy to provide ourselves with that jew poison but it will wreck
our immune system.
to be or to be parasites, that IS THE QUESTION