Discussion:
Bill Maher: If You Celebrated Bin Laden’s_Death,_You’re Not Really A Christian
(too old to reply)
Ubiquitous
2011-05-17 09:34:41 UTC
Permalink
by Glenn Davis

Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.

It wasn’t so much a Christianity-bashing session as it was Maher bashing
what he saw as hypocrisy with lines like, “Capping thine enemy is not
exactly what Jesus would do – it’s what Suge Knight would do,” and
“Martin Luther King gets to call himself a Christian because he actually
practiced loving his enemies, and Gandhi was so fucking Christian he
was Hindu” (okay, that last one bashed Christianity a bit).

Maher pointed out that “non-violence was kind of Jesus’s trademark,”
and couldn’t reconcile it with the factoid that “more evangelical
Christians than any other religion” support torture (for the record,
these seem to be the numbers [1] Maher was talking about, but that
same link also says, “[P]arty and ideology are much better predictors
of views on torture than are religion and most other demographic
factors”).

And Maher didn’t absolve our black ninja gangster president [2] from his
criticism, either: he said he, like so many others, was “missing the
message” on the non-violent teachings of Christianity. Then again,
Maher also once went on record thinking Obama’s not really Christian.
And while Maher made it clear he doesn’t have any personal problem
with celebrating bin Laden’s demise:

“My favorite new government program is surprising violent
religious zealots in the middle of the night and shooting
them in the face”

…he’s also not conflicted. Why not? “[B]ecause I’m a non-Christian…just
like most Christians.” This was much closer to Maher at his best than
when he just goes after religions in general – the specific focus on
the hypocrisy angle made it reminiscent of The Daily Show with more
cursing…and we’re fine with that. Video below, via HBO.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-celebrating-bin-laden-death-not-christian/


[1]: http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/The-Religious-Dimensions-of-the-Torture-Debate.aspx
[2]: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-obama-black-ninja-gangster-president/


--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
f. barnes
2011-05-17 10:37:10 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
> by Glenn Davis
>
> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.


Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you. If one is not a
Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
be no Christians. No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
expected to try to be. And when they fail, as all will, they are
expected to dust themselves off and try again. It's the trying that
counts.

If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.



>
> It wasn’t so much a Christianity-bashing session as it was Maher bashing
> what he saw as hypocrisy with lines like, “Capping thine enemy is not
> exactly what Jesus would do – it’s what Suge Knight would do,” and
> “Martin Luther King gets to call himself a Christian because he actually
> practiced loving his enemies, and Gandhi was so fucking Christian he
> was Hindu” (okay, that last one bashed Christianity a bit).
>
> Maher pointed out that “non-violence was kind of Jesus’s trademark,”
> and couldn’t reconcile it with the factoid that “more evangelical
> Christians than any other religion” support torture (for the record,
> these seem to be the numbers [1] Maher was talking about, but that
> same link also says, “[P]arty and ideology are much better predictors
> of views on torture than are religion and most other demographic
> factors”).
>
> And Maher didn’t absolve our black ninja gangster president [2] from his
> criticism, either: he said he, like so many others, was “missing the
> message” on the non-violent teachings of Christianity. Then again,
> Maher also once went on record thinking Obama’s not really Christian.
> And while Maher made it clear he doesn’t have any personal problem
> with celebrating bin Laden’s demise:
>
>         “My favorite new government program is surprising violent
>         religious zealots in the middle of the night and shooting
>         them in the face”
>
> …he’s also not conflicted. Why not? “[B]ecause I’m a non-Christian…just
> like most Christians.” This was much closer to Maher at his best than
> when he just goes after religions in general – the specific focus on
> the hypocrisy angle made it reminiscent of The Daily Show with more
> cursing…and we’re fine with that. Video below, via HBO.http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-celebrating-bin-laden-death-not...
>
> [1]:http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/The-Religious-Dimensions-o...
> [2]:http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-obama-black-ninja-gangster-pres...
>
> --
> "If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
> 21st century."
Dano
2011-05-17 14:15:04 UTC
Permalink
"f. barnes" wrote in message
news:59e23c33-29da-4570-97c1-***@e35g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...

On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
> by Glenn Davis
>
> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.


Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you. If one is not a
Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
be no Christians. No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
expected to try to be. And when they fail, as all will, they are
expected to dust themselves off and try again. It's the trying that
counts.

If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.

================================================

I appreciate your sentiment. I really do. But his point is just as valid
as yours. I don't mourn Bin Laden. IMO he was every bit a soldier. But
one without honor. A true war criminal. You don't execute non combatants
even if the other side commits such atrocities. He was without a shred of
the slightest doubt, not only a combatant, but a mastermind...a leader. I'm
glad he's dead. I have no problem at all with the action that took him out.
But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of many who call themselves
Christians should be disturbing to any who call themselves that. That is
most certainly NOT "Christian" behavior. And this is FAR from the only
example. What is the point if you aren't even willing to TRY to follow
Christ's example?
TBone
2011-05-18 16:05:18 UTC
Permalink
On 5/17/2011 10:15 AM, Dano wrote:
> "f. barnes" wrote in message
> news:59e23c33-29da-4570-97c1-***@e35g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
>> by Glenn Davis
>>
>> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
>> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
>> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
>> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
>> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
>> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>
>
> Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you. If one is not a
> Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
> be no Christians. No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
> expected to try to be. And when they fail, as all will, they are
> expected to dust themselves off and try again. It's the trying that
> counts.
>
> If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
> Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.
>
> ================================================
>
> I appreciate your sentiment. I really do. But his point is just as valid
> as yours. I don't mourn Bin Laden. IMO he was every bit a soldier. But
> one without honor. A true war criminal. You don't execute non combatants
> even if the other side commits such atrocities.

so Obama is a war criminal according to you


He was without a shred
> of the slightest doubt, not only a combatant, but a mastermind...a
> leader. I'm glad he's dead. I have no problem at all with the action
> that took him out. But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of
> many who call themselves Christians should be disturbing to any who call
> themselves that. That is most certainly NOT "Christian" behavior. And
> this is FAR from the only example. What is the point if you aren't even
> willing to TRY to follow Christ's example?
Dano
2011-05-18 17:11:30 UTC
Permalink
"TBone" wrote in message
news:4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se...

On 5/17/2011 10:15 AM, Dano wrote:
> "f. barnes" wrote in message
> news:59e23c33-29da-4570-97c1-***@e35g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
>> by Glenn Davis
>>
>> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
>> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
>> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
>> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
>> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
>> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>
>
> Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you. If one is not a
> Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
> be no Christians. No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
> expected to try to be. And when they fail, as all will, they are
> expected to dust themselves off and try again. It's the trying that
> counts.
>
> If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
> Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.
>
> ================================================
>
> I appreciate your sentiment. I really do. But his point is just as valid
> as yours. I don't mourn Bin Laden. IMO he was every bit a soldier. But
> one without honor. A true war criminal. You don't execute non combatants
> even if the other side commits such atrocities.

so Obama is a war criminal according to you

==================================

Are you claiming Bin Laden was a "non-combatant"? That's absurd.
TBone
2011-05-18 17:16:03 UTC
Permalink
On 5/18/2011 1:11 PM, Dano wrote:
> "TBone" wrote in message
> news:4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se...
>
> On 5/17/2011 10:15 AM, Dano wrote:
>> "f. barnes" wrote in message
>> news:59e23c33-29da-4570-97c1-***@e35g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
>>> by Glenn Davis
>>>
>>> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
>>> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
>>> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
>>> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
>>> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
>>> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>>
>>
>> Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you. If one is not a
>> Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
>> be no Christians. No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
>> expected to try to be. And when they fail, as all will, they are
>> expected to dust themselves off and try again. It's the trying that
>> counts.
>>
>> If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
>> Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.
>>
>> ================================================
>>
>> I appreciate your sentiment. I really do. But his point is just as valid
>> as yours. I don't mourn Bin Laden. IMO he was every bit a soldier. But
>> one without honor. A true war criminal. You don't execute non combatants
>> even if the other side commits such atrocities.
>
> so Obama is a war criminal according to you
>
> ==================================
>
> Are you claiming Bin Laden was a "non-combatant"? That's absurd.

so you're saying that no civies have been killed while Obammy wuz pres?
u must be a Obamoron.
Dano
2011-05-18 19:09:41 UTC
Permalink
"TBone" wrote in message
news:4dd3fee8$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se...

On 5/18/2011 1:11 PM, Dano wrote:

>
> so Obama is a war criminal according to you
>
> ==================================
>
> Are you claiming Bin Laden was a "non-combatant"? That's absurd.

so you're saying that no civies have been killed while Obammy wuz pres?
u must be a Obamoron.

===================================

Well you certainly have identified what YOU are. I'll happily leave it
there. Anyone who would give anything further that you have to say after
that isn't worth talking with anyway. Bye bye...
Thanatos
2011-05-19 04:40:09 UTC
Permalink
In article <4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se>,
TBone <***@t.invalid> wrote:

> > But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of
> > many who call themselves Christians should be disturbing to any who call
> > themselves that.

Who exactly was "wild-eyed with blood lust" that you know for certain is
a Christian?
Mason Barge
2011-05-19 16:52:08 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:40:09 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se>,
> TBone <***@t.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of
>> > many who call themselves Christians should be disturbing to any who call
>> > themselves that.
>
>Who exactly was "wild-eyed with blood lust" that you know for certain is
>a Christian?

Anyone can call himself a Christian. I'm guessing some very violent white
supremacists do so.
Patriot Games DemocRATHallofShame.Com©
2011-05-20 12:49:32 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 May 2011 12:52:08 -0400, Mason Barge <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:40:09 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:
>>In article <4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se>,
>> TBone <***@t.invalid> wrote:
>>> > But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of
>>> > many who call themselves Christians should be disturbing to any who call
>>> > themselves that.
>>Who exactly was "wild-eyed with blood lust" that you know for certain is
>>a Christian?
>Anyone can call himself a Christian.

Including the Muslim PresiChimp...

>I'm guessing some very violent white supremacists do so.

And some very violent black Muslims do to.

--
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame©!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/

5/14/11: Galleries Updated! Nearly 2,000 New Cartoons, Pics...
Smaller thumbs, pagination.

4/8/11: Clipboard Manager v3.5.1! (Still FREE!)
Added Spam Warnings!

FREE Windows® Screensavers! Muzzy Screensaver, 15Mb; DemocRAT Screensaver, 18Mb!

FREE Windows® Gadgets! Including: Bumpersticker Slideshow, Obama
Cartoon Slideshow, Take Back America 2010 & 2012!, Are DemocRATs
Ugly?, Is Helen Thomas Ugly?, Is Nancy Pelosi Ugly?, Disco Muzzy
(1 & 2)!, Obama's Lies!, "Uh-Oh! Something's Burning!", and the
Racial Slur Database.

Learn the TRUTH about: BSWS, Bob LeChevalier, Bret Cahill, Brian Wraith,
Chom Noamsky, Clams Casino, Cop Welfare, Curly Surmudgeon, Dakota,
Dave Fritzinger, David Johnston, Freestyle, Gandalf Grey, Iarnrod,
Igor, Joe Steel, Juanjo, Kevin Cunningham, Kurt Lochner, Lorad,
Lamont Cranston, Lookout, Lickin Ass' and Fakin' Names, Malcolm Abel,
Lubow, Major Debacle, Michael Coburn, Mitchel Holman, Phlip, Peter
Principle, Ramon Herrera, Ramrod, Ray Fischer, Rightardia, RobW, Rod
Speed, Roneal, Sanders Kaufman, Scotius, Sid9, SilentOtto, Siobhan
Medeiros, Snakehawk, Spike Lee, Stile4aly, Tab182, Tater Gumfries,
Tim Crowley, Tim Howard, Tom Sr.
Dano
2011-05-21 18:38:51 UTC
Permalink
"Mason Barge" wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...

On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:40:09 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se>,
> TBone <***@t.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of
>> > many who call themselves Christians should be disturbing to any who
>> > call
>> > themselves that.
>
>Who exactly was "wild-eyed with blood lust" that you know for certain is
>a Christian?

Anyone can call himself a Christian. I'm guessing some very violent white
supremacists do so.

========================

I guess Thanny stopped watching the news...even on Fox. Otherwise he might
have noticed the shots of crowd scenes all over America.
Thanatos
2011-05-21 19:22:09 UTC
Permalink
In article <ir90rp$jtl$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> "Mason Barge" wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:40:09 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <4dd3ee54$0$1070$***@read01.usenet4all.se>,
> > TBone <***@t.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> > But the celebrations...the wild eyed blood lust of
> >> > many who call themselves Christians should be disturbing to any who
> >> > call
> >> > themselves that.
> >
> >Who exactly was "wild-eyed with blood lust" that you know for certain is
> >a Christian?
>
> Anyone can call himself a Christian. I'm guessing some very violent white
> supremacists do so.
>
> ========================
>
> I guess Thanny stopped watching the news...even on Fox. Otherwise he might
> have noticed the shots of crowd scenes all over America.

So by seeing a bunch of people in a crowd, you can tell they're
Christian?

What an amazing talent you have!

[I also suspect your definition of "wild-eyed with blood lust" is
somewhat different from that of the rest of the English-speaking world.]
SilentOtto
2011-05-17 16:12:33 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 6:37 am, "f. barnes" <***@centurytel.net> wrote:
> On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
>
> > by Glenn Davis
>
> > Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
> > positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
> > why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
> > Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
> > Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
> > love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>
> Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you.  If one is not a
> Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
> be no Christians.  No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
> expected to try to be.  And when they fail, as all will, they are
> expected to dust themselves off and try again.  It's the trying that
> counts.
>
> If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
> Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.

The operative word in your comment is "try", rightard.

I don't see a hell of a lot of trying going on, and it's not just me
who doesn't see it.

You guys don't just not practice Christian values...

You actively attack anyone who does.

People who advocate for the poor? COMMIES!!!!

People who advocate against violence? Namby pampy liberals singing
Kumbaya!!!

Christ says "Turn the other cheek" and you rightards say "Where's my
Gun?" and call anyone who suggests restraint a "terrorist loving, anti-
American traitor".

Most of you rightards are using Christianity for nothing more as a
means to delineate "Us" from "Them", and the one's that aren't are
planning on using redemption as a "get out of jail free" card.

There's a reason that Ghandi was reported to have once said "If it
weren't for Christians, I'd be a Christian."

Heh heh...

Christian rightards...

Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.





> > It wasn’t so much a Christianity-bashing session as it was Maher bashing
> > what he saw as hypocrisy with lines like, “Capping thine enemy is not
> > exactly what Jesus would do – it’s what Suge Knight would do,” and
> > “Martin Luther King gets to call himself a Christian because he actually
> > practiced loving his enemies, and Gandhi was so fucking Christian he
> > was Hindu” (okay, that last one bashed Christianity a bit).
>
> > Maher pointed out that “non-violence was kind of Jesus’s trademark,”
> > and couldn’t reconcile it with the factoid that “more evangelical
> > Christians than any other religion” support torture (for the record,
> > these seem to be the numbers [1] Maher was talking about, but that
> > same link also says, “[P]arty and ideology are much better predictors
> > of views on torture than are religion and most other demographic
> > factors”).
>
> > And Maher didn’t absolve our black ninja gangster president [2] from his
> > criticism, either: he said he, like so many others, was “missing the
> > message” on the non-violent teachings of Christianity. Then again,
> > Maher also once went on record thinking Obama’s not really Christian.
> > And while Maher made it clear he doesn’t have any personal problem
> > with celebrating bin Laden’s demise:
>
> >         “My favorite new government program is surprising violent
> >         religious zealots in the middle of the night and shooting
> >         them in the face”
>
> > …he’s also not conflicted. Why not? “[B]ecause I’m a non-Christian…just
> > like most Christians.” This was much closer to Maher at his best than
> > when he just goes after religions in general – the specific focus on
> > the hypocrisy angle made it reminiscent of The Daily Show with more
> > cursing…and we’re fine with that. Video below, via HBO.http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-celebrating-bin-laden-death-not...
>
> > [1]:http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/The-Religious-Dimensions-o...
> > [2]:http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-obama-black-ninja-gangster-pres...
>
> > --
> > "If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
> > 21st century."
AC
2011-05-17 19:10:54 UTC
Permalink
f. barnes wrote:
> On May 17, 4:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
>> by Glenn Davis
>>
>> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
>> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
>> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
>> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
>> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
>> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>
>
> Maher doesn't understand, and neither do you. If one is not a
> Christian unless he is perfect then there are no Christians, there can
> be no Christians. No Christian expects to be perfect, but they are
> expected to try to be. And when they fail, as all will, they are
> expected to dust themselves off and try again. It's the trying that
> counts.
>
> If Maher wants to sneer at Christians because none are perfect then
> Christians will just feel sad at his ignorance, his perfect ignorance.

Indeed. Paedophile priests get forgiven by even god. christians can do
what ever they like, claim they are "trying" and get forgiven. Its like
a reset Star Trek plot.

What happened was perfectly christian in every way, eye for an eye,
crusading, self serving, and arrogant.

--
AC
Patriot Games DemocRATHallofShame.Com©
2011-05-17 14:40:01 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 17 May 2011 04:34:41 -0500, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous)
wrote:

An atheist dictating the requirements of being a Christian...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

--
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame©!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/

5/14/11: Galleries Updated! Nearly 2,000 New Cartoons, Pics...
Smaller thumbs, pagination.

4/8/11: Clipboard Manager v3.5.1! (Still FREE!)
Added Spam Warnings!

FREE Windows® Screensavers! Muzzy Screensaver, 15Mb; DemocRAT Screensaver, 18Mb!

FREE Windows® Gadgets! Including: Bumpersticker Slideshow, Obama
Cartoon Slideshow, Take Back America 2010 & 2012!, Are DemocRATs
Ugly?, Is Helen Thomas Ugly?, Is Nancy Pelosi Ugly?, Disco Muzzy
(1 & 2)!, Obama's Lies!, "Uh-Oh! Something's Burning!", and the
Racial Slur Database.

Learn the TRUTH about: BSWS, Bob LeChevalier, Bret Cahill, Brian Wraith,
Chom Noamsky, Clams Casino, Cop Welfare, Curly Surmudgeon, Dakota,
Dave Fritzinger, David Johnston, Freestyle, Gandalf Grey, Iarnrod,
Igor, Joe Steel, Juanjo, Kevin Cunningham, Kurt Lochner, Lorad,
Lamont Cranston, Lookout, Lickin Ass' and Fakin' Names, Malcolm Abel,
Lubow, Major Debacle, Michael Coburn, Mitchel Holman, Phlip, Peter
Principle, Ramon Herrera, Ramrod, Ray Fischer, Rightardia, RobW, Rod
Speed, Roneal, Sanders Kaufman, Scotius, Sid9, SilentOtto, Siobhan
Medeiros, Snakehawk, Spike Lee, Stile4aly, Tab182, Tater Gumfries,
Tim Crowley, Tim Howard, Tom Sr.
Barry Bruyea
2011-05-17 15:33:14 UTC
Permalink
Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.



On Tue, 17 May 2011 04:34:41 -0500, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous)
wrote:

>by Glenn Davis
>
>Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
>positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
>why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
>Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
>Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
>love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>
>It wasn’t so much a Christianity-bashing session as it was Maher bashing
>what he saw as hypocrisy with lines like, “Capping thine enemy is not
>exactly what Jesus would do – it’s what Suge Knight would do,” and
>“Martin Luther King gets to call himself a Christian because he actually
>practiced loving his enemies, and Gandhi was so fucking Christian he
>was Hindu” (okay, that last one bashed Christianity a bit).
>
>Maher pointed out that “non-violence was kind of Jesus’s trademark,”
>and couldn’t reconcile it with the factoid that “more evangelical
>Christians than any other religion” support torture (for the record,
>these seem to be the numbers [1] Maher was talking about, but that
>same link also says, “[P]arty and ideology are much better predictors
>of views on torture than are religion and most other demographic
>factors”).
>
>And Maher didn’t absolve our black ninja gangster president [2] from his
>criticism, either: he said he, like so many others, was “missing the
>message” on the non-violent teachings of Christianity. Then again,
>Maher also once went on record thinking Obama’s not really Christian.
>And while Maher made it clear he doesn’t have any personal problem
>with celebrating bin Laden’s demise:
>
> “My favorite new government program is surprising violent
> religious zealots in the middle of the night and shooting
> them in the face”
>
>…he’s also not conflicted. Why not? “[B]ecause I’m a non-Christian…just
>like most Christians.” This was much closer to Maher at his best than
>when he just goes after religions in general – the specific focus on
>the hypocrisy angle made it reminiscent of The Daily Show with more
>cursing…and we’re fine with that. Video below, via HBO.
>http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-celebrating-bin-laden-death-not-christian/
>
>
>[1]: http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/The-Religious-Dimensions-of-the-Torture-Debate.aspx
>[2]: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-obama-black-ninja-gangster-president/
Dano
2011-05-17 21:06:16 UTC
Permalink
"Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...

Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.

====================================

What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?

What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?

Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about things
you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an fool.
Uno Hu
2011-05-18 00:14:02 UTC
Permalink
"Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me

> "Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
>
> Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
> ====================================
>
> What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
> What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
> Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
things
> you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an
fool.
>

Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.

He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.
Dano
2011-05-18 06:51:00 UTC
Permalink
"Uno Hu" wrote in message
news:***@giganews.com...



"Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me

> "Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
>
> Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
> ====================================
>
> What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
> What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
> Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
things
> you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an
fool.
>

Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.

He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.

==================================

He has EXACTLY the same rights as you...and you are an avowed moron
obviously.
SilentOtto
2011-05-18 09:43:23 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 8:14 pm, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
> "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Barry Bruyea"  wrote in message
> >news:***@4ax.com...
>
> > Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
> > ====================================
>
> > What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
> > What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
> > Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
> things
> > you are utterly clueless about.  You only make yourself look like an
> fool.
>
> Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
> catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
>
> He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.

Oh... Well...

You, who is an admitted right winger, and perennial assailant of the
Democrat party - has not the right to suggest anything about President
Obama.

Suck on that, rightard.

Heh heh...

Religious rightards...

Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
Martin Phipps
2011-05-18 13:48:12 UTC
Permalink
On May 18, 8:14 am, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
> "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Barry Bruyea"  wrote in message
> >news:***@4ax.com...
>
> > Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
> > ====================================
>
> > What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
> > What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
> > Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
> things
> > you are utterly clueless about.  You only make yourself look like an
> fool.
>
> Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
> catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
>
> He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.

"Admitted" atheist?

Are you an "admitted" Christian or are you too ashamed?

Because, frankly, you should be.

Martin
Dano
2011-05-18 15:55:11 UTC
Permalink
"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
news:40a4fc53-5f38-4a15-9170-***@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

On May 18, 8:14 am, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
> "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
> >news:***@4ax.com...
>
> > Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
> > ====================================
>
> > What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
> > What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
> > Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
> things
> > you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an
> fool.
>
> Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
> catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
>
> He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.

"Admitted" atheist?

Are you an "admitted" Christian or are you too ashamed?

Because, frankly, you should be.

============================

Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
religion?
Mason Barge
2011-05-18 21:11:40 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 May 2011 11:55:11 -0400, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>"Martin Phipps" wrote in message
>news:40a4fc53-5f38-4a15-9170-***@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>On May 18, 8:14 am, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
>> "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
>> >news:***@4ax.com...
>>
>> > Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>>
>> > ====================================
>>
>> > What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>>
>> > What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>>
>> > Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
>> things
>> > you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an
>> fool.
>>
>> Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
>> catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
>>
>> He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.
>
>"Admitted" atheist?
>
>Are you an "admitted" Christian or are you too ashamed?
>
>Because, frankly, you should be.
>
>============================
>
>Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
>opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
>religion?

Pretty much the human condition.
Thanatos
2011-05-19 04:44:55 UTC
Permalink
In article <ir0q4t$lj9$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
> opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
> religion?

Why limit that to Christians? I can't be sure, but I don't recall you,
for example, ever leveling that criticism at Muslims with such
enthusiasm, even though it's just as true of them as it is Christians.
Mason Barge
2011-05-19 16:59:08 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:44:55 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <ir0q4t$lj9$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
>> opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
>> religion?
>
>Why limit that to Christians? I can't be sure, but I don't recall you,
>for example, ever leveling that criticism at Muslims with such
>enthusiasm, even though it's just as true of them as it is Christians.

Don't make Communists feel left out :)
Dano
2011-05-19 18:08:57 UTC
Permalink
"Mason Barge" wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...

On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:44:55 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <ir0q4t$lj9$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
>> opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
>> religion?
>
>Why limit that to Christians? I can't be sure, but I don't recall you,
>for example, ever leveling that criticism at Muslims with such
>enthusiasm, even though it's just as true of them as it is Christians.

Don't make Communists feel left out :)

================================

Funny. I thought we were talking specifically Christians. Maybe we should
ask about Satanists too?

Interesting how the rightards always like to deflect isn't it? Typical
Thanny...it's a reason why he is my killfile.

Oh...and BTW...it's amazing that someone should claim Muslims are spared ANY
criticism. Ridiculous.
Thanatos
2011-05-19 18:46:21 UTC
Permalink
In article <ir3mbo$4qg$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> "Mason Barge" wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:44:55 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <ir0q4t$lj9$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
> >> opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
> >> religion?
> >
> >Why limit that to Christians? I can't be sure, but I don't recall you,
> >for example, ever leveling that criticism at Muslims with such
> >enthusiasm, even though it's just as true of them as it is Christians.
>
> Don't make Communists feel left out :)
>
> ================================
>
> Funny. I thought we were talking specifically Christians. Maybe we should
> ask about Satanists too?
>
> Interesting how the rightards always like to deflect isn't it? Typical
> Thanny...it's a reason why he is my killfile.
>
> Oh...and BTW...it's amazing that someone should claim Muslims are spared ANY
> criticism. Ridiculous.

I said they've been spared criticism by *you* and they have. Ironic that
you bring up deflection, but you're the king of deflection and apologism
whenever one of those psychopathic barbarians goes on a murder spree.
Thanatos
2011-05-19 18:47:21 UTC
Permalink
In article <ir3mbo$4qg$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> "Mason Barge" wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:44:55 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <ir0q4t$lj9$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
> >> opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
> >> religion?
> >
> >Why limit that to Christians? I can't be sure, but I don't recall you,
> >for example, ever leveling that criticism at Muslims with such
> >enthusiasm, even though it's just as true of them as it is Christians.
>
> Don't make Communists feel left out :)
>
> ================================
>
> Funny. I thought we were talking specifically Christians. Maybe we should
> ask about Satanists too?
>
> Interesting how the rightards always like to deflect isn't it? Typical
> Thanny...it's a reason why he is my killfile.

Actually, the reason I'm in your killfile is you're a coward who
couldn't stand having your bullshit called out for what it truly is.
Mason Barge
2011-05-19 21:43:59 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 19 May 2011 14:08:57 -0400, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>"Mason Barge" wrote in message
>news:***@4ax.com...
>
>On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:44:55 -0700, Thanatos <***@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <ir0q4t$lj9$***@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Ironic isn't it? That so many so-called "Christians" act in direct
>>> opposition to the very core principles espoused by the founder of their
>>> religion?
>>
>>Why limit that to Christians? I can't be sure, but I don't recall you,
>>for example, ever leveling that criticism at Muslims with such
>>enthusiasm, even though it's just as true of them as it is Christians.
>
>Don't make Communists feel left out :)
>
>================================
>
>Funny. I thought we were talking specifically Christians. Maybe we should
>ask about Satanists too?

I had a Satanist who used to live next door to me. I saw her not commit
adultery dozens of times! And she nevered murdered hardly anyone!!!1!

Hypocritical bitch.
Thanatos
2011-05-19 04:42:55 UTC
Permalink
In article
<40a4fc53-5f38-4a15-9170-***@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Martin Phipps <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On May 18, 8:14 am, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
> > "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me

> > > "Barry Bruyea"  wrote in message
> > >news:***@4ax.com...
> >
> > > Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
> >
> > > ====================================
> >
> > > What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
> >
> > > What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
> >
> > > Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
> > things
> > > you are utterly clueless about.  You only make yourself look like an
> > fool.
> >
> > Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
> > catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
> >
> > He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.
>
> "Admitted" atheist?
>
> Are you an "admitted" Christian or are you too ashamed?
>
> Because, frankly, you should be.

Yeah, no kidding. Why should atheism be categorized as something which
needs admitting to, as if it's something shameful or criminal?
Siobhan Medeiros
2011-05-19 07:56:28 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 5:14 pm, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
> "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:iquo06$ch1$***@dont-email.me
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Barry Bruyea"  wrote in message
> >news:***@4ax.com...
>
> > Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
> > ====================================
>
> > What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
> > What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
> > Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about
> things
> > you are utterly clueless about.  You only make yourself look like an
> fool.
>
> Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
> catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
>
> He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.

Is he? I remember him saying that he believed there was a God. He's
probably just anti-organized religion.
Ubiquitous
2011-05-19 09:23:38 UTC
Permalink
***@gmail.com wrote:
>On May 17, 5:14 pm, "Uno Hu" <***@cs.com> wrote:
>> "Dano" <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> Maher - who is an admitted atheist- and perennial assailant of the
>> catholic church - has not right to suggest anything of the church.
>>
>> He's a cheap hypocrtical clown.
>
>Is he? I remember him saying that he believed there was a God. He's
>probably just anti-organized religion.

Bill Mahr is either a fool or craves the brief attention he gets after
saying foolish or outright stupid things - The jury is still out on which.

--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Barry Bruyea
2011-05-18 10:14:38 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 17 May 2011 17:06:16 -0400, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>"Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
>news:***@4ax.com...
>
>Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
>====================================
>
>What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
>What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
>Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about things
>you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an fool.


Rant on, idiot, then you'll have an excuse to take another prozac.
Dano
2011-05-18 14:33:38 UTC
Permalink
"Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...

On Tue, 17 May 2011 17:06:16 -0400, "Dano" <***@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>"Barry Bruyea" wrote in message
>news:***@4ax.com...
>
>Big surprise here, given that Maher doesn't believe in anything.
>
>====================================
>
>What the fuck exactly is it that YOU believe in?
>
>What WOULD have Jesus thought of killing this guy?
>
>Try to wrap your head around the point before you prattle on about things
>you are utterly clueless about. You only make yourself look like an fool.


Rant on, idiot, then you'll have an excuse to take another prozac.

===================================

Lack of an answer is noted moron. You are one fine example of a
"Christian".
Sean Walsh
2011-05-17 16:58:22 UTC
Permalink
So the crux of this diatribe on Bill's part is that when he saw the
cheering masses, (a) he was upset, (b) he was jaded about celebrating
the death of a fucking mass murderer, and (c) his mind and thought
process went right to his usual "fuck Christians" mentality.

What a sad man he is.

--
Sean
Dano
2011-05-17 21:03:40 UTC
Permalink
"Sean Walsh" wrote in message
news:3e1b0e89-e23a-4ae7-9b9a-***@s14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...

So the crux of this diatribe on Bill's part is that when he saw the
cheering masses, (a) he was upset, (b) he was jaded about celebrating
the death of a fucking mass murderer, and (c) his mind and thought
process went right to his usual "fuck Christians" mentality.

What a sad man he is.

====================================

I don't agree with everything he says or stands for...BUT...I seriously
doubt he's a "sad" man. He looks like he has a pretty cool life to me.

Now. Since I guess you're a big "Christian" values type...where do YOU
suppose Jesus Christ would have come down on this whole "hit squad" approach
to "taking out" our enemy?
trotsky
2011-05-17 22:52:59 UTC
Permalink
On 5/17/11 11:58 AM, Sean Walsh wrote:
> So the crux of this diatribe on Bill's part is that when he saw the
> cheering masses, (a) he was upset, (b) he was jaded about celebrating
> the death of a fucking mass murderer, and (c) his mind and thought
> process went right to his usual "fuck Christians" mentality.
>
> What a sad man he is.


Celebrating a death is a far cry from turning the other cheek.

The idiots are coming out in droves!
Not Sure
2011-05-17 22:54:19 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 3:52 pm, trotsky <***@email.com> wrote:
> On 5/17/11 11:58 AM, Sean Walsh wrote:
>
> > So the crux of this diatribe on Bill's part is that when he saw the
> > cheering masses, (a) he was upset, (b) he was jaded about celebrating
> > the death of a fucking mass murderer, and (c) his mind and thought
> > process went right to his usual "fuck Christians" mentality.
>
> > What a sad man he is.
>
> Celebrating a death is a far cry from turning the other cheek.
>
> The idiots are coming out in droves!

Oh? Have you finally come out? :)
Martin Phipps
2011-05-18 13:45:47 UTC
Permalink
On May 18, 12:58 am, Sean Walsh <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> So the crux of this diatribe on Bill's part is that when he saw the
> cheering masses, (a) he was upset, (b) he was jaded about celebrating
> the death of a fucking mass murderer, and (c) his mind and thought
> process went right to his usual "fuck Christians" mentality.
>
> What a sad man he is.

Nah. If he wants to fuck Christians he can go to any bar in Manila.

He was just telling it like it is. And you don't like that.

Martin
Mason Barge
2011-05-17 20:20:41 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 17 May 2011 04:34:41 -0500, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:

>by Glenn Davis
>
>Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
>positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
>why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
>Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
>Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
>love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.

Maher is showing his lack of depth. He needs to read Thomas Aquinas
before pretending to be a theologian.
Topaz
2011-05-18 00:57:54 UTC
Permalink
The West is the White race.

The goal of America is to destroy the White race. The
multi-culture and pluralism they push is only at the expense of
Whites. No one is trying to push multi-culture in China or Japan or
anyplace but on the Whites. And they promote racial intermarriage.
If things continue as they are the White race is doomed.

And who is doing all of this? It is the USA government and the
media, in other words the Jews.

Many Whites are traitors. They support the USA government and their
own destruction. We should look for allies. And anyone who wants to
remove the Jews from power is our ally. In the past the Japanese were
our allies. Today it is the Muslims.

Osama bin Laden
September 24th statement published in Pakistan

"I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We
are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United
States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic
freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose
first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the
American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced
to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the
punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it
is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the
U.S. is not uttering a single word."



http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Michael Ejercito
2011-05-18 15:41:43 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 5:57 pm, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>    The West is the White race.
>
>     The goal of America is to destroy the White race. The
> multi-culture and pluralism they push is only at the expense of
> Whites. No one is trying to push multi-culture in China or Japan or
> anyplace but on the Whites.
Maybe you can ask a Malay about that.

>And they promote racial intermarriage.
> If things continue as they are the White race is doomed.
>
>   And who is doing all of this? It is the USA government and the
> media, in other words the Jews.
>
>   Many Whites are traitors. They support the USA government and their
> own destruction. We should look for allies. And anyone who wants to
> remove the Jews from power is our ally. In the past the Japanese were
> our allies. Today it is the Muslims.
>
> Osama bin Laden
> September 24th statement published in Pakistan
>
> "I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We
> are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United
> States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic
> freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose
> first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the
> American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced
> to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the
> punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it
> is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the
> U.S. is not uttering a single word."
Your hero Bin Laden was killed on Yom HaShoah.

>
> http://www.ihr.org/   http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
>
> http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
You are a Nazi.

As a Nazi, you are, above all else, a craven coward.

You are afraid to compete with others as equals because you know
you can not measure up.

You are afraid of your own inadequacy, so you want to murder your
betters.

You are afraid of the truth, so you want to murder those who would
tell it.

You are afraid of history, so you want to murder the past, to wipe
out the knowledge of the degeneracy, cowardice and failure of
National
Socialism.

Finally, you are afraid of the power of educated, informed adults.
Freedom of choice terrifies you... which is why you choose minor
children as sexual partners. You can not interact with competent
adults in a consensually sexual
way. You need to be able to impose yourself on a helpless victim, be
it a prepubescent
boy, or a patient in a mental hospital.

That is what you are, a Nazi, and there is nothing polite or
honest about it.

Michael
Topaz
2011-05-19 23:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Here is a quote from "The Battle for Berlin" by Joseph Goebbels:

We had no idea of the danger that threatened us then. I myself did not
yet know Marxism well enough to foresee the possible consequences. I
shrugged my shoulders as I read the dark prose of the red press and
awaited expectantly the decisive evening.
Around 8 p.m. we drove in an old rusty car from the city center to
Wedding. A cold gray mist hung under a starless sky. Our hearts were
bursting with impatience and expectation.
As we drove down Müllerstraße it was already clear that the evening
did not bode well. Groups of dark figures stood on every street
corner. They apparently planned to teach our party members a bloody
lesson before they even got to the meeting.

Dark masses of people stood outside the Pharus Hall, expressing their
rage and hate with loud and impudent threats.

The leader of the protective forces cleared a way for us and reported
briefly that the hall had been packed since 7:15 p.m. and had been
closed by police. About two-thirds of the audience were Red Front
Fighters. That was what we wanted. There would be a decision. We were
ready to give it all we had.

Entering the hall, we encountered a warm, stiffling aroma of beer and
tobacco. The hall was hot. A lively roar of voices filled the hall.
People were packed in tightly. We reached the podium only with
difficulty.

No sooner was I recognized than hundreds of voices filled with rage
and revenge thundered in my ears: "Bloodhound! Murder of Workers!"
Those were the mildest words they shouted. But a welcoming group of
some party members and S.A. Men answered with passion. Excited battle
cries sounded from the platform. I saw immediately that we were a
minority, but a minority determined to fight, and therefore win.

It was still our custom then for an S.A. leader to chair all of the
party's public meetings. Here too. Tall as a tree he stood up front
and asked for silence with his upraised arm. That was easier said than
done. Mocking laughter was the answer. Insults flew toward the
platform from every corner of the room. People growled and screamed
and raged. There were world revolutionaries scattered about who
apparently had gained the courage they needed by drinking. It was
impossible to quiet the hall. The class-conscious proletariat had not
come to discuss but to fight, to break things up, to put an end to the
Fascist specter with callused workers' fists.

We were not uncertain, even for a moment. We also knew that if the
enemy did not succeed this time in what he had threatened, the future
success of the movement in Berlin was assured.

Fifteen or twenty S.A. and S.S. men stood before the platform in
uniforms and arm bands, an impudent and direct provocation to the Red
Front Fighters. Behind me was a select group of reliable people ready
at any moment to risk their lives to defend me from the onrushing red
mob with brutal force.
The Communists made an obvious mistake in their tactics. They had
scattered small groups throughout the hall, but clumped most of the
rest in the right rear of the hall. I recognized immediately that
there was the center of unrest, and if anything was to be done, we
first had to deal ruthlessly with them. Whenever the chair tried to
open the meeting, a dark chap stood up on a stool and shouted "Point
of Order!" Hundreds of others yelled the same after him.

If one takes from the mass their leader or also their seducer, they
are leaderless and easily controlled. Our tactic therefore was to
silence this cowardly troublemaker at any cost. He felt secure back
there, surrounded by his comrades. We tried to do this peacefully a
few times. The chair shouted over the uproar: "There will be
discussion afterward! But we determine the rules of order!"

That was an ineffective attempt at an unsuitable object. The screamer
wanted to throw the meeting into confusion by his endless shouts and
bring things to the boiling point. Then a general melee would result.

As our efforts to bring the meeting to order peacefully proved
unsuccessful, I took the head of the defensive forces to the side, and
immediately after groups of his men slipped through the thundering
Communist masses. Before the astonished and surprised Red Front troops
realized what was happening, our comrades had hauled the troublemaker
down from his stool and brought him through the raging crowd to the
podium. That was unexpected, but what followed was no surprise. A beer
glass flew through the air and crashed to the floor. That was the
signal for the first major meeting hall battle. Chairs were broken and
legs ripped from tables. Glasses and bottles suddenly appeared and all
hell broke loose. The battle raged for ten minutes. Glasses, bottles,
table and chair legs flew randomly through the air. A deafening roar
rose; the red beast was set free and wanted its victims.

At first it looked as if we were lost. The Communist attack was sudden
and explosive, completely unexpected. But soon the S.A. and S.S. men
distributed throughout the hall and in front of the platform recovered
from their surprise and counterattacked with bold courage. It quickly
became clear that although the Communist Party had masses behind it,
these masses became cowards when faced with a firmly disciplined and
determined opponent. They ran. In short order the red mob that had
come to break up our meeting had been driven from the hall. The order
that could not be secured by good will was gained by brute force.

Usually one is not aware of the stages of a meeting hall battle. Only
later does one recall them. I still remember a scene that I will never
forget; on the podium stood a young S.A. man whom I did not know. He
was hurling his missiles into the on-coming red mob. Suddenly a beer
glass thrown from the distance hit him on the head. A wide stream of
blood ran down his face. He sank with a cry. After a few seconds he
stood up again, grabbed water bottle from the table and threw it into
the hall, where it clattered against the head of an opponent.

The face of this young man is engraved in my memory. This
lightening-fast moment is unforgettable. This gravely-wounded S.A. man
would soon, and indeed for all times, become my most reliable and
loyal comrade.

Only after the red mob had been driven howling, growling and cursing
from the field could one tell how serious and costly the battle had
been. Ten lay in their blood on the platform, most with head injuries,
two with severe concussions. The table and stairs to the platform were
covered in blood. The whole hall resembled a field of ruins.

In the midst of this bloody and ruined wasteland, our tree-high S.A.
leader resumed his place and declared with iron calm: "The meeting
will continue. The speaker has the floor."

Never before or since have I spoken under such dramatic conditions.
Behind me, groaning in pain and bleeding, were seriously injured S.A.
comrades. Around me were broken chair legs, shattered beer glasses and
blood. The whole meeting was icily silent.
We lacked then a medical corps. Since we were in a proletarian
district, we had to have our seriously wounded carried out by
so-called worker volunteers. There were scenes outdoors of
unimaginable inhumanity. The bestial people who were supposedly
fighting for universal brotherhood insulted our poor and defenseless
injured with phases like: "Isn't that pig dead yet?"

Under such conditions it was impossible to give a coherent speech.
Scarcely had I begun to speak when another group of volunteers entered
the hall to carry off a seriously wounded S.A. man on a stretcher. One
of them, encountering the brutal apostles of humanity outside the door
and their unflattering and crude language, shouted for me in
desperation. His voice could be heard loudly and unmistakably on the
platform I interrupted my speech and went through the hall, where
there were still scattered Communist commando groups. Still surprised
by what had happened, they stood quietly and shyly to the side. I bade
farewell to the seriously wounded S.A. comrades.



http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Michael Ejercito
2011-05-20 15:53:28 UTC
Permalink
On May 19, 4:45 pm, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>   Here is a quote from "The Battle for Berlin" by Joseph Goebbels:
A nithing who murdered his children.

>
> We had no idea of the danger that threatened us then. I myself did not
> yet know Marxism well enough to foresee the possible consequences.
They had an idea of the consequences after the Soviets took Berlin.

You are a nithing and they were nithings- homo sapiens by birth,
subhuman BY CHOICE. The
key word is CHOICE. You were born with the same human nature as the
rest of us. Your CHOICES made you nithings.

Bill explains what nithings are.

http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=9446

Define and Dehumanize the Enemy: Jihadists as Nithings or Nidings

by Bill Levinson
It is an ancient principle of magic (which modern people recognize as
stories that reflect a society’s culture and psychology) that
knowledge of a person’s real or True Name delivers power over that
person. What it really means is that, if you know the person’s
psychology, you can gain an advantage over him. It is also well known
that the side that controls the language of an argument controls the
argument. As an example, Hamas terrorists and their enablers refer to
Israel’s military as an “occupation force” and terrorisitic violence
against civilians as “resistance.”

We have long sought a single word that strips the enemy of all
humanity, and reduces him to something less than an animal that is
worthy of nothing less than extermination. As far as we know, the
English language contains no such word, although “dreck” (garbage or
refuse) comes close. “Homo sapiens by BIRTH, subhuman by CHOICE”
describes Islamic supremacists perfectly, but it is a phrase and not a
word. We now propose to refer to Islamic supremacists as nithings or
nidings: a Scandinavian word that strips its object of all humanity.
Webster’s dictionary (1913) defines it as “A coward; a dastard; — a
term of utmost opprobrium.”

We remind readers who object to the dehumanization of Islamic
supremacists that those enemies are already attempting to dehumanize
Jews, and to a lesser degree Christians, with images that could have
come directly from Adolf Hitler. As they have chosen to sow the
dragon’s teeth, our position is that they must now reap their rightful
harvest: the complete hatred and loathing of all civilized human
beings.
nithings

Nithing or niding was more than a common insult, because Scandinavian
culture required its subject to fight a duel with the accuser or
become an outlaw: totally devoid of rights, honor, and even
recognition as a human being. Per the Wikipedia entry,

The actual meaning of the adjective argr or ragr [= Anglo-Saxon
earg] was the nature or appearance of effeminacy, especially by
obscene acts. Argr was the worst, most derogatory swearword of all
known to the Norse language. According to Icelandic law, the accused
was expected to kill the accuser at once. …If the accused did not
retort by violent attack yielding either the accuser to take his words
back or the accuser’s death, he was hence proven to be a weak and
cowardly nithing by not retorting accordingly.

A nithing was devoid of all human rights, and he was considered the
enemy of civilized humanity: a perfect depiction of Islamic
supremacists. The word therefore strips the enemy of all humanity, and
degrades him to the status of a wolf or strangler (per Scandinavian
tradition) or a virulent disease like the Black Plague. Black Plague
is a deadly and contagious disease whose vector consists of plague-
carrying rats, while the Green Plague of militant “Islam” is a deadly
and contagious ideology that is spread by bipedal rats: nidings or
nithings, non-humans that raise violent hands to all of civilized
Humanity.

The immediate consequence of being proven a nithing was
outlawing. The outlawed did not have any rights, he was exlex (Latin
for “outside of the legal system”), in Anglo-Saxon utlah, Middle Low
German uutlagh, Old Norse utlagr. Just as feud yielded enmity among
kinships, outlawry yielded enmity of all humanity.[63] …”Yet that is
but one aspect of outlawry. The outlaw is not only expelled from the
kinship, he is also regarded henceforth as an enemy to mankind.”

The actual definition of a nithing is somewhat more involved and
complex, and it gets into sexual perversions and zoomorphical
transformations (Loki’s transformation of himself into a mare to have
sexual intercourse with a stallion, and thus beget Odin’s horse
Sleipner is probably an example), but the following line is pertinent:
“The nithing used its malicious seid magic to destroy anything owned
and made by man, ultimately the human race and Midgard itself[6], due
to its basically unlimited envy, hate, and malice that were nith.”

“Destruction of everything owned and made by Man” (the Palestinians’
destruction of the greenhouses in Gaza comes to mind immediately) and
“unlimited envy, hate, and malice” describe militant “Islam”
perfectly, and further underscore the application of nithing or niding
to describe it. The propensity for mindless destruction also appears
in Orson Scott Card’s Alvin Maker series, in which a supernatural
enemy is known as the Unmaker: a personification of evil that is the
total antithesis of God the Creator.

The Unmaker is the main antagonist in Orson Scott Card’s
alternate history/fantasy series The Tales of Alvin Maker. Never
directly confronted, it is a supernatural force that breaks apart
matter and aims to destroy and consume everything and everyone. …To
make something is to oppose the Unmaker, but a point often made is
that this is futile. By natural law the Unmaker can tear down faster
than any man can build.

This also is an outstanding definition of militant “Islam” or Islamic
supremacy: an ideology that seeks to destroy everything into which it
comes in contact, and with which no reason, negotiation, or compromise
is possible.

In summary, a nithing or niding is the enemy of Civilization, a
subhuman (through its behavioral choices, and emphatically NOT due to
its racial or ethnic origin) monster with total hatred and malice
toward all human industry and arts, and worthy of nothing but
extermination like any virulent disease. This is the word we will now
apply to Islamic supremacists and their enablers, and we encourage
others to do likewise.
Topaz
2011-05-20 20:17:12 UTC
Permalink
German leaders believed in death before dishonor. They knew the allies
were subhuman monsters:


The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986

"That young girl riding on her bicycle - she must know that on the
day the Russians come she will probably be raped by a dozen soldiers.
When do they come? In days? In weeks? That, we have not told the
Germans. She has a good face - nicely dressed in old but clean and
brightly colored garments - like the daughter of a middle class
American family. I realize that we Americans are holding her at
Dessau. She cannot flee to safety. We will not let her pass our
sentries on the roads. We are turning her and thousands of
others like her over to the Soviet soldiers for their sport. I feel
ashamed."

p.961
"German children look in through the window. We have more food than
we need, but regulations prevent giving it to them. It is difficult to
look at them. I feel ashamed of myself, of my people, as I eat and
watch those children. They are not to blame for the war. They are
hungry children. What right have we to stuff ourselves while they look
on - well-fed men eating, leaving unwanted food on plates, while
hungry children look on."

Berlin Correspondent, The Times, September 10th, 1945

"...Another small boy turned out of Danzig had a scrawled postcard
attached to him stating that his soldier father was long since missing
and that his mother and two sisters had died of hunger."

At this time, Denmark, formerly occupied by the Germans as a means
of denying the allies a North Sea bridgehead was bursting at the seams
with surplus food and was pleading with the allies to put it to good
use. It was refused.


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Dave Heil
2011-05-21 04:27:47 UTC
Permalink
On 5/20/2011 20 17, Topaz wrote:
>
> German leaders believed in death before dishonor. They knew the allies
> were subhuman monsters:

They seemed to be having a race to see which of them could surrender
faster. They seemed easily persuaded by hot food, real coffee, real
cigarettes and the idea that people would stop shooting at them.

They were grateful that the "subhuman monsters" fed them, clothed them
and gave them a warm place to sleep. They were flabbergasted when the
"subhuman monsters" helped them rebuild their country.

You seem to forget all of that.
Topaz
2011-05-21 10:27:47 UTC
Permalink
By Martin Brech

FORTY-FIVE years ago, I witnessed an atrocity: the deliberate
starvation of German POWs by our own army. History, written by the
victors, suppressed all news of this atrocity until James Bacque, a
Canadian author, published his brilliant expose, OTHER LOSSES. This
book is a best seller in Canada, a sensation in Europe, yet is
virtually unavailable (censored?) in the U.S. Our major booksellers
told me their distributors are not handling it. When I prevailed upon
a small, independent bookstore to order direct from Canada, the
publisher told them they would be the only store in New York State to
carry the book. This in 'the land of the free'?"

Fortunately, Pat Buchanan called attention to OTHER LOSSES in his
January 10, 1990 column. He wrote:

"Conclusion: the U.S. Army killed ten times as many Germans in POW
camps as we did on battlefields from Normandy to V.E. day. (German
POWs) had their rations cut below survival level until they were
dying
at rates up to 30% of exposure, starvation and neglect... Red Cross
food trains were turned back and U.S. food shipments sat on the
docks...One French officer said the U.S. camps reminded him of Dachau
and Buchenwald...The book blames Eisenhower. 'The German is a beast,'
Ike had written... But that was not how the Canadians and British
felt, who treated their prisoners justly...It was not the view of
General Mark Clark, nor of Patton...Ignoring the book is not enough."

Pat Buchanan's courageous column inspired me to help end the cover-up
of the atrocity I had witnessed. I wrote letters to several
newspapers
which were, of necessity, short and incomplete. Now I would like to
finally free more of my painful memories, hoping to be heard, so that
this will help us to acknowledge our share in the "banality of evil",
cleansing ourselves with the truth. Perhaps we as a nation may then
put this behind us with some integrity and with some hope for
redemption.

In October 1944, at age eighteen, I was drafted into the army while a
student at the NYS College of Forestry. Largely due to the "Battle of
the Bulge", my training was cut short, my furlough cut in half, and I
was then immediately sent overseas. Upon arrival in Le Havre, France,
we were quickly loaded into boxcars and shipped to the front. By the
time we reached it, I had developed mononucleosis severely enough to
be sent to a hospital in Belgium.

By the time I left the hospital, the unit I had trained with in
Spartenburg, South Carolina was so deeply into Germany that I warn
placed in a "repo depo" (a replacement depot) despite my protests. I
then lost interest in which units I was assigned to because
non-combat
units were generally not respected. My separation qualification
record
states that I served mostly with the 14th Infantry Regiment, during
which time I guarded prisoners of war and served as an interpreter.
During my seventeen month stay in Germany, I was transferred to other
outfits also.

In late March or early April 1945, I was assigned to help guard a POW
camp near Andernach along the Rhine. I had four years of high school
German, so I was able to talk to the prisoners, although this was
forbidden.

Gradually, however, I was used as an interpreter and asked to ferret
out the S.S. (I found none.)

In Andernach, between 50,000 and 65,000 prisoners, ranging in age
from
very young teens to very old men, were crowded together in an open
field surrounded by barbed wire. The women were kept in a separate
enclosure which I did not see until later. The men I guarded had no
tents or other shelter, no blankets and many had no coats. Inadequate
numbers of slit trenches were provided for excrement, and so the men
lived and slept in the mud and increasing filth during a cold, wet
spring. Their misery from exposure alone was evident.

It was even more shocking to see them eating grass, sometimes
throwing
it into a tin can containing a thin soup. They told me they did this
hoping to ease their hunger pains. Soon their emaciation was evident.
Dysentery raged and, too weak and crowded to reach the slit trenches,
they were increasingly sleeping in excrement. I saw no sign of
provision for water, so the thin soup was their food and water for
the
day. Some days there was bread, less than a slice each. Other days
there was nothing.

The sight of so many men desperate for food and water, sickening and
dying before our eyes, is indescribable. Even now, I can only think
of
it momentarily.

We had ample food and supplies that could have been shared more
humanely, and we could have offered some medical assistance, but did
nothing. Only the dead were quickly and efficiently taken care of:
hauled away to mass graves.

My outrage reached the point that I protested to my officers, but I
was met with hostility or bland indifference. When pressed, they
explained they were under strict orders from "higher up". No officer
would dare to systematically do this to over 50,000 prisoners if he
felt he was violating general policy and subject to court martial.
The
term "war criminal" was just beginning to come into fashion.

Realizing my protests were useless, I asked a friend working in the
kitchen if he could slip me some extra food for the prisoners. He too
repeated that they were under strict orders to severely ration the
prisoners' food, and that these orders came from "higher up". But he
said they had more food than they knew what to do with and would
sneak
me some.

When I threw this food over the barbed wires to the prisoners I was
caught and threatened with imprisonment. I repeated the "offense",
and
one officer threatened to shoot me. I naturally assumed this was a
bluff, but I began to have some doubts after I encountered a captain
on a hill above the Rhine shooting down at a group of German civilian
women with his .45 caliber pistol. When I asked, "Why?" he mumbled,
"Target practice," and fired until his pistol was empty. I saw the
women running for cover, but, at that distance, couldn't tell if any
had been hit.

This is when I more fully realized I was dealing with some cold-
blooded killers filled with moralistic hatred. They considered the
Germans sub-human and worthy of extermination; another expression of
the downward spiral of racism. Articles in the G.I. newspaper, Stars
&
Stripes, played up the Nazi concentration camps, complete with
photographs of emaciated bodies; this amplified our self-righteous
cruelty and made it easier to imitate behavior we were supposed to
oppose. Also, I think, soldiers not exposed to combat were trying to
prove how tough they were by taking it out on the prisoners and
civilians. At least, many combat soldiers told me later they would
not
have tolerated this, for they combined hatred with respect for a
courageous enemy.

The prisoners I spoke to were mostly simple farmers and workingmen,
as
ignorant, albeit nationalistic, as many of our own troops. I heard
many versions of "my country, right or wrong, my country," which we
still hear in our own country today.

As time went on, many of them lapsed into a Zombie-like state of
listlessness. Others, maddened by thirst, tried to escape in a
desperate or suicidal fashion, running through open fields in broad
daylight towards the Rhine to quench their thirst. They were mowed
down.

Some prisoners were extremely eager for cigarettes, saying they took
the edge off their hunger. Accordingly, some enterprising G.I.
"Yankee
traders" were acquiring hordes of wrist watches and rings in exchange
for handfuls of cigarettes or less. When I began throwing cartons of
cigar-ettes to the prisoners to ruin this trade, I found myself
threatened by rank-and-file G.I.s also. At least this taught me an
indelible lesson: how wrong majorities and authorities can be.

A bright spot in this gloomy picture came, oddly enough, one night
when I was put on the "graveyard shift", from two to four A.M.
Actually, there was a graveyard on the uphill side of this enclosure,
not many yards away. My superiors had forgotten to give me a
flashlight and I hadn't bothered to ask, being disgusted with the
whole situation by that time. It was a fairly bright night and I soon
became aware of a prisoner crawling under the wires to the graveyard.
We were supposed to shoot escapees on sight, so I started to get up
to
warn him to get back. Suddenly I noticed another prisoner crawling
from the graveyard back to the enclosure. They were risking their
lives to get to the graveyard for something; I had to investigate.

When I entered the gloom of this shrubby, tree-shaded cemetery, I
never felt more vulnerable, but somehow curiosity kept me going.
Despite my caution, I tripped over the legs of someone in a prone
position. Whipping my rifle around while stumbling and trying to
regain composure of mind and body, I soon was relieved I hadn't
reflexively fired. The figure sat up, moving erratically. Gradually I
could see the beautiful but terror-stricken face of a woman with a
picnic basket nearby. German civilians were not allowed to feed, nor
even come near, the prisoners, so I quickly assured her I approved of
what she was doing, not to be afraid, and that I would leave the
graveyard to get out of the way, telling no one.

I left the graveyard as quickly as possible and sat down, leaning
against a tree at the edge CF the cemetary to be inconspicuous and
not
frighten the prisoners. I imagined then, and often since, what it
would be like to be a prisoner under those conditions and meet a
beautiful woman with a picnic basket. I never saw her again, but I
have never forgotten her face.

While I watched, more prisoners crawled to and from the enclosure. I
saw they were dragging food back to their comrades and could only
admire their courage and devotion. As I walked back to my quarters at
the end of my shift, a nightingale and I were singing -- both felt a
touch of spring.

(I originally did not intend to reveal the following incident, for it
moves into a realm termed "mystical". However, for me, it was an
extremely significant experience, changing my life, providing a light
no darkness can extinguish. It must be told, hoping it will foster
understanding.)

On May 8, V.E. day, I decided to celebrate with some prisoners I was
guarding who were baking bread, meager amounts of which the other
prisoners occasionally received. This group had all the bread they
could eat, and shared the jovial mood generated by the end of the
war.
We all thought we would be going home soon, a pathetic hope on their
part. We were in what was to become the French zone, and I later
witnessed the brutality of the French soldiers when we transferred
our
prisoners to them for their slave labor camps (see below).

However, on this day we were happy.

After chatting with them about the potentials of peace for the rest
of
our lives, I decided to risk a gesture of trust that objectively
would
seem foolish. I emptied my rifle and stood it in the corner. They
tested me further by asking to play with it, and I agreed.
Intuitively
I felt I could rely on their sense of honor not to attack me, for
they
knew they too were being tested. This thoroughly 'broke the ice', and
soon we were singing songs we taught each other or I had learned in
high school German ("Du, du, liegst mir im Herzen"). Out of
gratitude,
they secretly baked a small sweet bread and insisted I take it,
explaining it was the only possible gift they had left to offer.
Expressing my gratitude with a lump in my throat, I put it in my
tight
"Eisenhower jacket" so I could sneak it back to my barracks. I later
found an opportunity to eat it outside.

Never had bread tasted more delicious, nor conveyed to me a deeper
sense of communion while eating it. A wonderful feeling pervaded me,
gently opening me to an intimation of the Oneness of all Being.
Through those prisoners I sensed the ~cosmic presence of what has
been
called the Christ, Buddha-nature, or, perhaps most aptly, the
Ineffable: cosmically present, but hidden and apparently separate,
until revealed in the wholeness of the giving of the self. Even
within
the horror humans had created, I was taught a path to redemption may
open by taking a first, tentative step in the direction of love,
understanding and forgiveness. This above all the prisoners taught
me:
not only are we all potentially humane humans, there is divinity
within us waiting for us to dissolve the defensive shield of ego. I
was pleased to discover later the words of Matthew 25:34-46,
expressing the potential within prisoners and all who are at our
mercy.

Shortly after this experience I was plunged into even greater horror.
Some of our weak and sickly prisoners were being marched off by
French
soldiers to their camp. The truck we were on first passed another
truck picking up bodies along the side of the road, and then came up
behind a slowly moving column of men. Temporarily we slowed down and
remained behind, perhaps because the driver was as shocked as I was.
The French soldiers were apparently incensed at the poor condition of
our prisoners, not only for labor but for marching to another camp.
Whenever a prisoner staggered or dropped back, the French clubbed him
to death and then dragged him to the side of the road. For many, this
quick death might have been preferable to their prolonged suffering.
Even gas would have been more merciful than our murder by neglect in
our slow 'killing fields'...

Martin Brech
(Adjunct Professor,
Philosophy & Religion,
Mercy College;
Ex-G.I., Finally Free)

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Barb May
2011-05-23 17:10:43 UTC
Permalink
Topaz wrote:
> By Martin Brech
>
> FORTY-FIVE years ago, I witnessed an atrocity: the deliberate
> starvation of German POWs by our own army. History, written by the
> victors, suppressed all news of this atrocity until James Bacque, a
> Canadian author, published his brilliant expose, OTHER LOSSES. This
> book is a best seller in Canada, a sensation in Europe, yet is
> virtually unavailable (censored?) in the U.S.

This is the first of many outrageous lies told by this author. The book
is available on Amazon.

OTHER LOSSES is a pack of lies that is most often quoted by Holocaust
denying, neo-NAZI,
anti-Semitic, race-baiting kooks -- like "Topaz."


--
Barb
Topaz
2011-05-24 00:05:47 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 23 May 2011 09:10:43 -0800, "Barb May"
<***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:

>Topaz wrote:
>> By Martin Brech
>>
>> FORTY-FIVE years ago, I witnessed an atrocity: the deliberate
>> starvation of German POWs by our own army. History, written by the
>> victors, suppressed all news of this atrocity until James Bacque, a
>> Canadian author, published his brilliant expose, OTHER LOSSES. This
>> book is a best seller in Canada, a sensation in Europe, yet is
>> virtually unavailable (censored?) in the U.S.
>
>This is the first of many outrageous lies told by this author. The book
>is available on Amazon.
>
>OTHER LOSSES is a pack of lies that is most often quoted by Holocaust
>denying, neo-NAZI,
>anti-Semitic, race-baiting kooks -- like "Topaz."

Actually, what you wrote is a lot of Jewish crap.


Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews America
didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

No one is moaning because America once fought the British. But
suddenly Jews can not be the enemy under any circumstances. Why is
that? Because the Jews control the media. Think outside the box.

Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.

The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.

This is what President Nixon said:

http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html

"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
consideration."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Barb May
2011-05-24 02:19:38 UTC
Permalink
Topaz wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2011 09:10:43 -0800, "Barb May"
> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
>
>> Topaz wrote:
>>> By Martin Brech
>>>
>>> FORTY-FIVE years ago, I witnessed an atrocity: the deliberate
>>> starvation of German POWs by our own army. History, written by the
>>> victors, suppressed all news of this atrocity until James Bacque, a
>>> Canadian author, published his brilliant expose, OTHER LOSSES. This
>>> book is a best seller in Canada, a sensation in Europe, yet is
>>> virtually unavailable (censored?) in the U.S.
>>
>> This is the first of many outrageous lies told by this author. The
>> book is available on Amazon.
>>
>> OTHER LOSSES is a pack of lies that is most often quoted by Holocaust
>> denying, neo-NAZI,
>> anti-Semitic, race-baiting kooks -- like "Topaz."
>
> Actually, what you wrote is a lot of Jewish crap.

Oh wow. I didn't see that coming.
lol

> This is what President Nixon said:
>
> http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html

Page not found

>
> "There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
> about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
> the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
> large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
> big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
> consideration."

No he didn't.

--
Barb
Johannes von Ebersdorf
2011-05-24 01:56:22 UTC
Permalink
Working is for the Joooooooz, besides nobody hires
mentally ill drug addicts like me.

I jerk off to pictures of Hitler and rape little boys.

I love to take it in the ass from well hung Jews because I'm a little
Nazi Faggot.

These are the things that I enjoy the most when my Nigger fucks me
in
the ass:

1: Kissing men. Kissing a man is still somehow more culturally erotic
than kissing a woman, unless of course you are another woman. I mean
look at straight audiences in movie-theatres when men kiss on screen.
So
when you kiss a man, and you are a man, you are pre-primed by culture
to
be having a more exciting time. And it is nice to tenderly and softly
kiss a man. Not for me the hard kiss of would-be studs in leather-
chaps.

2: Men's nipples. I love them. You sort of venture your way to find
them, pretending to get lost on the way, just to add excitement and
then
your fingertips find those nice neat flat nubs and that is good, but
even better is a bit of oral action when the tongue comes out to
trace
circles. I love the way men's nipples are often related to orgasm. A
slight pinch or a rub at that crucial moment and ka-blooey!

3: Men's erections beneath their clothes, in underwear, under towels,
in
swimming briefs... well, just about anywhere. Then your job is to
slowly, mouth-wateringly unwrap 'em. There is something so
inexpressibly
tender about male erections which is why I dislike American culture
where the penis is a jackhammer. No, erections are sweet. And they
are
polite, because they're there because of you.

4: Men's butts. I love smooth butts, tight and small. It is the
breast-thing transgfereed down and around the back or are breasts the
butt think moved up and to the front. Either way a handfull is a
handfull is a handfull. And becuse the male butt is a bisected piece
this gives even greater pleasure. Remember peaches and the curves
and
crease. And hmm, what have we here between them..

5: Men's anus'. Such a secret little entry-way to the hidden palace
of
the king.It is nice going slowly towards them, taking your time,
tickling the hair of the perineum on the way, pausing there and
letting
a finger tickle and lightly touch the under-ball hair and then
burrow
further in and reach your goal and a finger's slight entry between
while
your partner bucks a little and murmurs because it does feel so
good.

6: Foreplay. I like that slow process. I also am inclined to like
starting off without erection. Like you take your partner and they
take
you right from the beginning. There is something wonderful about
witnessing that slow erection from soft to hard and shy to proud. And
you go places. You pause on the Slopes of Kiss for hours. You loiter
on
the Oral Cliffs. You saunter along Stomach Flat, get lost in Darks
Of
Hair... It is yummy.

7: Mutual Masturbation. I love watching other men touch themselves
so
well while you are doing ditto and both helping the other out with a
hand here, a finger there, a lick elsewhere. I love watching them
come
with the look on their faces that they never have any other time.

8: Oral sex. Well I'm into oral sex as part of the action, but never
the
whole game. I do love my tongue as it tongues delicately the dick.
But
me, well, I'm not really a 'do you swallow or spit' type boy because
I
seldom get there but when I do, I swallow and reach for that glass of
water instantly. Oral sex as the whole game is inclined to be too
much
work and there are more interesting things to do.

9: Sodomy. Sodomy is fun, whether catching or pitching, giving or
receiving, screwing or being screwed. Yoou can play games with power
that are fun for most males because a male isn't meant to be screwed
and
you are being screwed or screwing. See what I mean when I say that
gayness was almost more fun when it was illegal. It overlaid the
whole
process with connotations. So sodomy is often where you get the games
with culture that make the sex more interesting. Then of course it
feel
fine... There is nothing like being screwed and the person screwing
you
MAKES you come and you don't even have to think about it. It is fun
screwing someone and feeling them come from the other side. It is fun
finding different ways of doing it because there and really there
only
are you locked together in one mass and loving it.

10: Towels. I love those white cotton towels that you use to mop up
the
come and wipe yourself down before snuggling up to go to sleep
immediately because you are males and that is what males do.

Heil Hitler
Mason Barge
2011-05-24 16:40:02 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 23 May 2011 09:10:43 -0800, "Barb May"
<***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:

>Topaz wrote:
>> By Martin Brech
>>
>> FORTY-FIVE years ago, I witnessed an atrocity: the deliberate
>> starvation of German POWs by our own army. History, written by the
>> victors, suppressed all news of this atrocity until James Bacque, a
>> Canadian author, published his brilliant expose, OTHER LOSSES. This
>> book is a best seller in Canada, a sensation in Europe, yet is
>> virtually unavailable (censored?) in the U.S.
>
>This is the first of many outrageous lies told by this author. The book
>is available on Amazon.

Since German prisoners taken by the US were generally shipped here for the
duration (and given good jobs, good quarters, adequate food and generally,
probably the best treatment of POWs in the 20th century), there is no
ambiguity caused by the fog of a foreign war. I.e., humane treatment of
German POWs is verifiable (at least to anyone who doesn't think the moon
landing was filmed on an Arizona soundstage).
Barb May
2011-05-24 18:29:33 UTC
Permalink
Mason Barge wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2011 09:10:43 -0800, "Barb May"
> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
>
>> Topaz wrote:
>>> By Martin Brech
>>>
>>> FORTY-FIVE years ago, I witnessed an atrocity: the deliberate
>>> starvation of German POWs by our own army. History, written by the
>>> victors, suppressed all news of this atrocity until James Bacque, a
>>> Canadian author, published his brilliant expose, OTHER LOSSES. This
>>> book is a best seller in Canada, a sensation in Europe, yet is
>>> virtually unavailable (censored?) in the U.S.
>>
>> This is the first of many outrageous lies told by this author. The
>> book is available on Amazon.
>
> Since German prisoners taken by the US were generally shipped here
> for the duration (and given good jobs, good quarters, adequate food
> and generally, probably the best treatment of POWs in the 20th
> century),

http://ww2.fsu.edu/African-American
"Blacks in the 1940s, especially in the South, faced Jim Crow laws that
treated German POWs better than American citizens of color."


> there is no ambiguity caused by the fog of a foreign war.
> I.e., humane treatment of German POWs is verifiable (at least to
> anyone who doesn't think the moon landing was filmed on an Arizona
> soundstage).

Which is not to say that there wasn't some isolated cases of
mistreatment of German POWs by Americans, but it certainly wasn't
widespread or officially condoned.

--
Barb
Topaz
2011-05-24 20:07:55 UTC
Permalink
The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986

"That young girl riding on her bicycle - she must know that on the
day the Russians come she will probably be raped by a dozen soldiers.
When do they come? In days? In weeks? That, we have not told the
Germans. She has a good face - nicely dressed in old but clean and
brightly colored garments - like the daughter of a middle class
American family. I realize that we Americans are holding her at
Dessau. She cannot flee to safety. We will not let her pass our
sentries on the roads. We are turning her and thousands of
others like her over to the Soviet soldiers for their sport. I feel
ashamed."

p.961
"German children look in through the window. We have more food than
we need, but regulations prevent giving it to them. It is difficult to
look at them. I feel ashamed of myself, of my people, as I eat and
watch those children. They are not to blame for the war. They are
hungry children. What right have we to stuff ourselves while they look
on - well-fed men eating, leaving unwanted food on plates, while
hungry children look on."

Berlin Correspondent, The Times, September 10th, 1945

"...Another small boy turned out of Danzig had a scrawled postcard
attached to him stating that his soldier father was long since missing
and that his mother and two sisters had died of hunger."

At this time, Denmark, formerly occupied by the Germans as a means
of denying the allies a North Sea bridgehead was bursting at the seams
with surplus food and was pleading with the allies to put it to good
use. It was refused.


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Barb May
2011-05-24 21:25:06 UTC
Permalink
Topaz wrote:
> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986

Infamous anti-semitic "defeatist and appeaser" who openly supported
Hitler prior to and during WW2.
--
Barb
Mason Barge
2011-05-25 18:49:00 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:25:06 -0800, "Barb May"
<***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:

>Topaz wrote:
>> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986
>
>Infamous anti-semitic "defeatist and appeaser" who openly supported
>Hitler prior to and during WW2.

What she said. Zero credibility or even interest.

Lindbergh was an asshole who got lucky on one (admittedly brave) flight.
PaxPerPoten
2011-05-26 02:16:34 UTC
Permalink
On 5/25/2011 1:49 PM, Mason Barge wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:25:06 -0800, "Barb May"
> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
>
>> Topaz wrote:
>>> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986
>>
>> Infamous anti-semitic "defeatist and appeaser" who openly supported
>> Hitler prior to and during WW2.
>
> What she said. Zero credibility or even interest.
>
> Lindbergh was an asshole who got lucky on one (admittedly brave) flight.

Lindbergh made some wise decisions as to whom started the war and it
sure as Hell wasn't Germany. He laid the blame directly at the feet of
the International Congress of Jews. He was absolutely correct. The
fucking Bolsheviks had already murdered upwards of a Hundred million
none Jews. Even America sent troops to Russia in a failed attempt to
save the Christian Czar and his family. America would not accept the
Jews before or during the war. If this practice had continued after
WWII, we would not be buried up to our necks in the ME mess. Look at the
destroyed and corrupt American Political system ..Thanks to the Jewish
AIPAC. By the way AIPAC funds one half of all moneys to the Democratic
party. That is why the Jewish Leadership can insult an American
President that is a Democrat. I personally would have Netanyahu beaten
to a pulp and sent back to Israel in a sack...With a warning to keep a
civil tongue in the Israeli mouth. And you people criticize the T-Baggers!


--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Bible Studies with Satan
2011-05-26 16:23:42 UTC
Permalink
PaxPerPoten wrote:

> On 5/25/2011 1:49 PM, Mason Barge wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:25:06 -0800, "Barb May"
>> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
>>
>>> Topaz wrote:
>>>> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986
>>>
>>> Infamous anti-semitic "defeatist and appeaser" who openly supported
>>> Hitler prior to and during WW2.
>>
>> What she said. Zero credibility or even interest.
>>
>> Lindbergh was an asshole who got lucky on one (admittedly brave) flight.
>
> Lindbergh made some wise decisions as to whom started the war and it
> sure as Hell wasn't Germany. He laid the blame directly at the feet of
> the International Congress of Jews. He was absolutely correct.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tlh2PGk5ooU

> The
> fucking Bolsheviks had already murdered upwards of a Hundred million
> none Jews. Even America sent troops to Russia in a failed attempt to
> save the Christian Czar and his family. America would not accept the
> Jews before or during the war. If this practice had continued after
> WWII, we would not be buried up to our necks in the ME mess. Look at the
> destroyed and corrupt American Political system ..Thanks to the Jewish
> AIPAC. By the way AIPAC funds one half of all moneys to the Democratic
> party. That is why the Jewish Leadership can insult an American
> President that is a Democrat. I personally would have Netanyahu beaten
> to a pulp and sent back to Israel in a sack...With a warning to keep a
> civil tongue in the Israeli mouth. And you people criticize the T-Baggers!
>
>

--
Ezekiel 23:20
Topaz
2011-05-26 20:54:57 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 26 May 2011 09:23:42 -0700, Bible Studies with Satan
<***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ezekiel 23:20


The Old Testament does say that God likes one race of people more than
others. It calls this race the Israelites. Nature wants the most
advanced and evolved race to take over. This is obviously the White
race. Compare Europe to Africa.

This is the definition of the word "adam" in Strong's Concordance:

"to show blood (in the face), i.e. flush or turn rosy:- be
(dyed, made) red (ruddy)."

This can only be describing a White man. Look at people today
and see which ones have rosy red cheeks. They are light skinned White
people.

The Bible says David was ruddy. This is the definition of the
Hebrew word "ruddy":

"reddish (of the hair or of the complexion):-red, ruddy."

David had rosy cheeks (or red hair) and did not look like a
typical Jew.

The original Israelites were White people.

Jews are like the American Indians of today. These people say they
are Indians but the original Indians were clearly described as having
red skin. Today Indians may look brown or white, but not red. Neither
are Jews like the original Israelites.

The religious leaders of the Jews were the Pharisees. Jesus
condemned them in the harshest words.

Matthew 23:33 "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye
escape the damnation of hell?"

The New Jewish Encyclopedia, edited by David Bridger, PH.D in
association with Samual Wolk, Rabbi, J.S.D, copyright 1962, Published
by Behrman House, inc.,1261 Broadway, New York 1, N.Y., Library of
Congress Catalog Card Number: 62-17079, says on page 376:

"The Pharisees are therefore regarded as those authorities who helped
develop and preserve traditional Judaism as it is known today."

The old drawing of Jesus were probably correct. He probably had blond
hair and blue eyes.

John 7:1 "After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would
not walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill him."

John 20:19 "the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled
for fear of the Jews"

2 Co 11:24 "Of the Jews five times recieved I forty stripes save
one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned"

Mathew 27: 20+25 "But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the
multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus...then
answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our
children."

Acts 25:24 "ye see this man, about whom all the multitude of the Jews
have dealt with me, both at Jerusalem and also here, crying that he
ought not to live any longer."

John 8:42,44,48 "Jesus said unto them...Ye are of your father the
devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from
the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth
in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a
liar, and the father of it...Then answered the Jews..."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Mason Barge
2011-05-26 16:34:30 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 25 May 2011 21:16:34 -0500, PaxPerPoten <***@USA.org> wrote:

>On 5/25/2011 1:49 PM, Mason Barge wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:25:06 -0800, "Barb May"
>> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
>>
>>> Topaz wrote:
>>>> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986
>>>
>>> Infamous anti-semitic "defeatist and appeaser" who openly supported
>>> Hitler prior to and during WW2.
>>
>> What she said. Zero credibility or even interest.
>>
>> Lindbergh was an asshole who got lucky on one (admittedly brave) flight.
>
>Lindbergh made some wise decisions as to whom started the war and it
>sure as Hell wasn't Germany. He laid the blame directly at the feet of
>the International Congress of Jews. He was absolutely correct. The
>fucking Bolsheviks had already murdered upwards of a Hundred million
>none Jews. Even America sent troops to Russia in a failed attempt to
>save the Christian Czar and his family. America would not accept the
>Jews before or during the war. If this practice had continued after
>WWII, we would not be buried up to our necks in the ME mess. Look at the
>destroyed and corrupt American Political system ..Thanks to the Jewish
>AIPAC. By the way AIPAC funds one half of all moneys to the Democratic
>party. That is why the Jewish Leadership can insult an American
>President that is a Democrat. I personally would have Netanyahu beaten
>to a pulp and sent back to Israel in a sack...With a warning to keep a
>civil tongue in the Israeli mouth. And you people criticize the T-Baggers!

Best argument I've heard in a long time for repeal of the First Amendment.
PaxPerPoten
2011-05-26 20:06:42 UTC
Permalink
On 5/26/2011 11:34 AM, Mason Barge wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011 21:16:34 -0500, PaxPerPoten<***@USA.org> wrote:
>
>> On 5/25/2011 1:49 PM, Mason Barge wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:25:06 -0800, "Barb May"
>>> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Topaz wrote:
>>>>> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986
>>>>
>>>> Infamous anti-semitic "defeatist and appeaser" who openly supported
>>>> Hitler prior to and during WW2.
>>>
>>> What she said. Zero credibility or even interest.
>>>
>>> Lindbergh was an asshole who got lucky on one (admittedly brave) flight.
>>
>> Lindbergh made some wise decisions as to whom started the war and it
>> sure as Hell wasn't Germany. He laid the blame directly at the feet of
>> the International Congress of Jews. He was absolutely correct. The
>> fucking Bolsheviks had already murdered upwards of a Hundred million
>> none Jews. Even America sent troops to Russia in a failed attempt to
>> save the Christian Czar and his family. America would not accept the
>> Jews before or during the war. If this practice had continued after
>> WWII, we would not be buried up to our necks in the ME mess. Look at the
>> destroyed and corrupt American Political system ..Thanks to the Jewish
>> AIPAC. By the way AIPAC funds one half of all moneys to the Democratic
>> party. That is why the Jewish Leadership can insult an American
>> President that is a Democrat. I personally would have Netanyahu beaten
>> to a pulp and sent back to Israel in a sack...With a warning to keep a
>> civil tongue in the Israeli mouth. And you people criticize the T-Baggers!
>
> Best argument I've heard in a long time for repeal of the First Amendment.

Just more proof why your kind should never be let off the leash. Did
your Momma ever come out from under the porch after you were born?


--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Topaz
2011-05-26 20:52:32 UTC
Permalink
Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime. Do they say
being "anti-Arab" is a terrible crime? What about "anti-Christian", or
"anti-German"? Of course the Jews think
they are special. Any other group could be our enemy, but not the
Jews, they say. The Jews tell us the Arabs are our enemies. The
Jewish controlled media tells us that the Jews are America's only
friend in the Middle East. The truth is that before these Jews America
didn't have any enemies in the Middle East.

No one is moaning because America once fought the British. But
suddenly Jews can not be the enemy under any circumstances. Why is
that? Because the Jews control the media. Think outside the box.

Now that America is ruled by the Jews it is no insult to be called
"anti-Semite". The insult is that they think we care about their self
serving verbiage.

The Jewish controlled media said the French were "cheese eating
surrender monkeys". Why can't the French howl "anti-French" like the
Jews howl "anti-Semite"? Because the French don't control the media,
Jews do.

This is what President Nixon said:

http://www.hnn.us/comments/15664.html

"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints
about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in
the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the
large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the
big companies. And there is a force that we have to take into
consideration."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Barb May
2011-05-26 23:33:04 UTC
Permalink
Topaz wrote:
> Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime.

Really? Which Jews say that?
--
Barb
Topaz
2011-05-27 00:46:01 UTC
Permalink
In researching Jewish history, the investigator discovers a wide
variance of written material. Work by authors expressly critical of
Jews (and they include a surprising number of Jewish commentators,
mostly "apostates" of one kind or another) is invariably labeled by
today's political conventions to be "anti-Semitic" in nature. There is
a large body of such material extending throughout history, written by
critics wherever Jews were to be found. Observations about Jewish
life by non-Jews is startlingly consistent over two thousand years.
Consistently credible Gentile themes in attacks against Jews include
Jewish elitism, their insularity and clannishness, their disdain for
non-Jews, their exploitive and deceptive behavior towards those not
their own, the suspicion of Jewish national loyalties and allegiance
to the lands they lived in, excessive Jewish proclivity for money and
economic domination, and an economic "parasitism" (the concentration
of Jews in lucrative non-productive fields of finance-usury, money
lending, etc.-at the expense of non-Jewish communities).

"Hatred for the Jews," Abram Leon writes, "does not date solely from
the birth of Christianity. Seneca treated the Jews as a criminal race.
Juvenal believed that the Jews only existed to cause evil for other
peoples. Quintilian said that Jews were a curse for other people"
(Leon, 71).
In 59 BC the Roman statesman Cicero criticized Jewish "clannishness"
and "influence in the assemblies." In the second century AD Celsus,
one of Rome's great medical writers, wrote that Jews "pride themselves
in possessing superior wisdom and disdain for the company of other
men." Philostratus, an ancient Greek author, believed that Jews "have
long since risen against humanity itself. They are men who have
devised a misanthropic life, who share neither food nor drink with
others." (Cf. Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, I, iii, 29-32.) The
great Roman historian Tacitus (A.D. 56-120) declared that "the Jews
are extremely loyal toward one another, and are always ready to show
compassion [for their fellow Jews], but toward other people they feel
only hate and enmity" (Morais, 46).

Centuries later Voltaire's criticism of Jews, in his Essai sur le
Moeurs, repeated many of the same charges: "The Jewish nation dares to
display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations, and revolts
against all masters; always superstitious, always greedy for the
well-being enjoyed by others, always barbarous-cringing in misfortune
and insolent in prosperity."
"However uncomfortable it is to recognize," says Albert Lindemann,
"not all those whom historians have classified as anti-Semites were
narrow bigots, irrational, or otherwise incapable of acts of altruism
and moral courage. They represented a bewildering range of opinion and
personality types" (Lindemann, 13). And why is this "uncomfortable
[for Jews] to recognize?" Because, by even a child's exercise of logic
and common sense, the common denominator of all such disparate people
can only be the enduring truths about Jews as each observer
experienced them in varying historical and cultural circumstances.
The French Jewish intellectual (and eventual Zionist), Bernard Lazare,
among many others in history, noted this obvious fact in 1894, long
before the Nazi persecutions of Jews and resultant institutionalized
Jewish efforts to deny, or obfuscate, crucial-and central- aspects of
their history:
Wherever the Jews settled one observes the development of
anti-Semitism, or rather anti-Judaism ... If this hostility, this
repugnance had been shown towards the Jews at one time or in one
country only, it would be easy to account for the local cause of this
sentiment. But this race has been the object of hatred with all
nations amidst whom it settled.
Inasmuch as the enemies of Jews belonged to diverse races, as
they dwelled far apart from one another, were ruled by
different laws and governed by opposite principles; as they had
not the same customs and differed in spirit from one another,
so that they could not possibly judge alike of any subject, it
must needs be that the general causes of anti-Semitism have always
resided in [the people of] Israel itself, and not in those who
antagonized it (Lazare, 8).
Excerpts from from When Victims Rule, online at Jewish Tribal Review.
http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/wvr.htm

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
trotsky
2011-05-27 10:53:34 UTC
Permalink
On 5/26/11 6:33 PM, Barb May wrote:
> Topaz wrote:
>> Jews say that being "anti-Semitic" is a terrible crime.
>
> Really? Which Jews say that?


The very Semitic ones.
Mason Barge
2011-05-25 18:51:06 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 24 May 2011 10:29:33 -0800, "Barb May"
<***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:

>Mason Barge wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 May 2011 09:10:43 -0800, "Barb May"
>> <***@nonofyourbusinessx.tv> wrote:
[...]
>> Since German prisoners taken by the US were generally shipped here
>> for the duration (and given good jobs, good quarters, adequate food
>> and generally, probably the best treatment of POWs in the 20th
>> century),
>
>http://ww2.fsu.edu/African-American
>"Blacks in the 1940s, especially in the South, faced Jim Crow laws that
>treated German POWs better than American citizens of color."

Not hard to believe, although the source is suspect.
>> there is no ambiguity caused by the fog of a foreign war.
>> I.e., humane treatment of German POWs is verifiable (at least to
>> anyone who doesn't think the moon landing was filmed on an Arizona
>> soundstage).
>
>Which is not to say that there wasn't some isolated cases of
>mistreatment of German POWs by Americans, but it certainly wasn't
>widespread or officially condoned.

Oh, there were documented incidents of American units shooting Germans who
surrendered. It happens in war.
Topaz
2011-05-24 20:06:51 UTC
Permalink
An Unknown Holocaust: Mass Killing, `Ethnic Cleansing' and Brutal
Mistreatment of Germans by the Victorious Allies
Mark Weber -- Worldwatch (Audio MP3 file)
http://reasonradionetwork.com/_archive/MW_20090505.mp3

Weber reviews the little-known story of misery and death imposed by
the victors on defeated Germany in the aftermath of World War II. The
Allied powers imposed an "unknown holocaust" of destruction, looting,
starvation, rape, "ethnic cleansing," and mass killing. More than 14
million Germans were expelled or forced to flee from eastern and
central Europe. Some three million Germans died needlessly -- about
two million civilians, mostly women, children and elderly, and one
million prisoners of war. Weber also highlights the Allied double
standard in putting German leaders to death for policies that the
Allies themselves were carrying out, sometimes on a far greater scale.


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Michael Ejercito
2011-05-25 00:37:11 UTC
Permalink
On May 24, 1:06 pm, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> An Unknown Holocaust: Mass Killing, `Ethnic Cleansing' and Brutal
> Mistreatment of Germans by the Victorious Allies
> Mark Weber -- Worldwatch (Audio MP3 file)http://reasonradionetwork.com/_archive/MW_20090505.mp3
>
> Weber reviews the little-known story of misery and death imposed by
> the victors on defeated Germany in the aftermath of World War II. The
> Allied powers imposed an "unknown holocaust" of destruction, looting,
> starvation, rape, "ethnic cleansing," and mass killing. More than 14
> million Germans were expelled or forced to flee from eastern and
> central Europe. Some three million Germans died needlessly -- about
> two million civilians, mostly women, children and elderly, and one
> million prisoners of war. Weber also highlights the Allied double
> standard in putting German leaders to death for policies that the
> Allies themselves were carrying out, sometimes on a far greater scale.
>
> http://www.ihr.org/   http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
>
> http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Weber is a known Holocaust denier.


Michael
Topaz
2011-05-25 10:33:39 UTC
Permalink
By Patrick Grimm

We hear daily of the alleged dangers of "Holocaust denial." We read in
newspapers the frightful scare-mongering, comparing those who deny
"global warming" to "Holocaust deniers." But I purport that there is
one form of denial truly more deadly to the survival of all nations
than any other. It is "Jew-denial."

Now you might say, no one denies that Jews exist, that they live among
us and have done quite well economically, sometimes honestly and other
times dishonestly. This is not what I refer to. "Jew-denial" or a
"Jew-denier" is a person, either uninformed or collusive with the
overclass, who denies the power of Jews in America and the world,
denies that their organized power has been corrosive (and many honest
Jews will admit that it is) and denies that Jews are a racial group
(their own words) who believe in their right to rule over the Goyim
(which means cattle). To deny all these things is only to ignore the
words of Jewish leaders and the words of the Jews' own holy books, the
Torah and the Talmud. It is also to jettison mountains of evidence and
decades of Jewish political activism.

But the Jew-deniers are everywhere, a ubiquitous dullard or deceptive
or deceived (take your pick) band of human beings. The Jew-deniers are
in our churches, in our governments, in our schools, in our military,
in our White House and in some of our own houses. Now I don't believe
these people should be jailed, imprisoned or fined for swallowing
false news or abetting the genocide the Jews are working to bring upon
us all, whites and Palestinians alike (the white is the Palestinian of
the European sphere), but they should be approached with caution,
mainly because a lifetime of brainwashing and hornswoggling can elicit
an animalistic reaction when one of these Jew-deniers is smacked in
the face with the truth.

The Jew-deniers (at least the lay ones) should be pitied rather than
stigmatized, though I do exactly that with this article and I deeply
apologize for that. But in all seriousness, they need help. They are
not mentally ill as the Jews call any person who disagrees with their
steamrolling of humanity. The Jew-deniers are misinformed and in need
of rescuing from a life of reckless disinfo which the media Jews will
be glad to force-feed them on a daily basis forever and ever if they
are willing to read the Jew newspapers and watch inane Jew newscasts
with reporters who are front men and front women for Big Jewry. These
types of medium masteries only perpetuate Jew-denial and breed more
little Jew-deniers, persons for whom the thought that Jewry could
desire anything but beneficence and ennoblement toward the Gentile
herds is a "canard" or a "libel", either bloody or bloodless, or an
"anti-Semitic" screed.

Present facts, statistics, troubling Israeli massacres, Talmudic
quotes, lists of ultra-liberal Jewish wheelers and dealers,
anti-Christian political action committees, discombobulating
historical accounts that show Jews as they are rather than as how they
dress themselves up for the camera, and a Jew-denier and those who are
card-carrying members of the Jew-denial movement that numbers in the
millions upon millions will spit out one or more replies taken from a
prepared list of oodles of Pavlovian conditioned retorts. For the sake
of brevity, here are just a select few:

1.You're an anti-Semite!

This one is easy to combat because most Jews are not Semites and many
non-Jews are. Most Jews are Khazars, Ashkenazi Khazars, so this
characterization (anti-Semite) is a real living, breathing canard.
Inform the Jew-denier of this reality and recommend Arthur Koestler's
book The Thirteenth Tribe for his/her perusal. Some Jew-deniers are
smart, while others don't read anything more intellectual than Harry
Potter novels. If this is the case, a sympathetic and platonic hug may
be in order.

2 Jews are "God's Chosen People"

If the Jew-denier is someone who believes in God, ask the Jew-denier
if God is indeed a racist of the crudest sort (though this is not to
say that racism defensively and properly understood is always a
negative). If the reply is a reflexive egalitarian 'no', and it will
be if this person goes to any Zionized, Judaized church in this
country, then ask the person if he/she honestly believes that God
would have sanctioned the killing of thousands upon thousands of
innocent human beings only for the purpose of having the Jews procure
their property, vineyards, wives, concubines, etc. Either God is a
genocidal maniac or the stories of the Old Testament are
Judahite-penned justifications of mass murder. It's one or the other.
This is not going to wash as an argument if you are talking to a
biblical literalist or one of those folks who believes that all
Scripture is "God-breathed" and "inerrant." If the Jew-denier
regularly sends financial love gifts to television evangelists, then
quietly walk away after shaking the dust from your Reeboks.

3. Jews are just members of one of the world's monotheistic religions

Jews identify themselves as a "race", a "master race" superior to all
other races and destined to enslave the world. Jews consider
themselves a race, first and foremost. One helpful quote is in order:
"The former Israeli Prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking to
Jewish group in southern California said: 'If Israel had not come into
existence after World War II then I am certain the Jewish race
wouldn't have survived. I stand before you and say you must strengthen
your commitment to Israel.'" [1]
Judaism is a racial religion based on blood purity and conquest of the
Gentile as ordered by their holy books. This is not conspiracy theory.
This is basic Old Testament hermeneutics. I won't list all the verses
here where God tells the "Chosen People" that they are destined to
rule the world, but you can find them in your family Bible in books
like Deuteronomy and Numbers and present them to any Jew-deniers you
happen to run into.

CONCLUSION
Friends and countrymen, Jew-denial is an epidemic sweeping the world,
especially the American portion of it. Our churches are cranking out
little Judaized clones right off the conveyor Bible belt, ready to
parrot the words of Cyrus Scofield and John Hagee. Our governments are
rife with Judeophilic politicians scared to speak out about the Jewish
hijacking of our foreign policy. They attack those like Jim Moran,
even projecting Protocols of Zion conspiracies onto his temperate and
reasonable critiques of AIPAC and the Israel-First-Last-And-Always
Lobby. The Jew-denial movement is running wild in the United States!
It is ignoring the real issues, which are Jewish dual loyalty or
Israel-only loyalty, the Jewish machinations manipulating our currency
and economy and the debauching of our culture and the shattering of
our borders by galvanized Jews drunk and delirious with political
power and ruinous regency.

Should we prosecute the Jew-deniers, persecute the Jew-denial movement
on the internet, lock up its sycophants, lackeys and philo-Semitic
toadies and batter these simpletons in the streets with steel pipes
and tire irons? No, there's no use emulating the Jews.

We can only curb or put the kibosh on the Jew-denial movement by
spreading data far and wide on the web and to anyone who will listen
to the straight skinny on Jew supremacism and traitorous Jew antics.
The Jew-denial campaign has done quite a bang-up job deceiving and
misdirecting the energies of ordinary individuals (acolytes of
Jew-deniery) away from their true enemy and their greatest threat,
Jewish extremism and onto bogeymen like supposed white supremacists
and radical Islamists. Because of the popular front and font of lies
and anti-white disempowerment, most people are unaware or too
apathetic to even notice the Big Jewry Hidden Hand pouring our
liberties and our freedoms straight down the Talmudic drain.
To paraphrase the son of a rabbi and the creator of Communism, Karl
Marx "Jew-recognizers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose
but your high interest rates!"

[1] (Daily Pilot, Newport Beach/ Costa Mesa, Feb. 28, 2000, front
page)

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Mason Barge
2011-05-25 18:55:17 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 24 May 2011 15:06:51 -0500, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>An Unknown Holocaust: Mass Killing, `Ethnic Cleansing' and Brutal
>Mistreatment of Germans by the Victorious Allies
>Mark Weber -- Worldwatch (Audio MP3 file)
>http://reasonradionetwork.com/_archive/MW_20090505.mp3
>
>Weber reviews the little-known story of misery and death imposed by
>the victors on defeated Germany in the aftermath of World War II. The
>Allied powers imposed an "unknown holocaust" of destruction, looting,
>starvation, rape, "ethnic cleansing," and mass killing. More than 14
>million Germans were expelled or forced to flee from eastern and
>central Europe. Some three million Germans died needlessly -- about
>two million civilians, mostly women, children and elderly, and one
>million prisoners of war.

Without doubt. Problem is, talking about "the Allies" lumps the US in
with the Soviets. Total crap.

>Weber also highlights the Allied double
>standard in putting German leaders to death for policies that the
>Allies themselves were carrying out, sometimes on a far greater scale.

Well, if you believe (like Weber) that the Nazis didn't murder gazillions
of Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill, etc., and blame the US for the USSR's
treatment of noncombatants, that's close to correct :)
Topaz
2011-05-26 20:58:00 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 25 May 2011 14:55:17 -0400, Mason Barge <***@gmail.com>
wrote:


>
>Without doubt. Problem is, talking about "the Allies" lumps the US in
>with the Soviets. Total crap.

The US and the Soviets were both ruled by the Jews.


An article by Dr. Joseph Goebbels, January 21, 1945
The Creators of the World's Misfortunes
by Joseph Goebbels

One could not understand this war if one did not always keep in mind
the fact that International Jewry stands behind all the unnatural
forces that our united enemies use to attempt to deceive the world and
keep humanity in the dark. It is so to speak the mortar that holds the
enemy coalition firmly together, despite its differences of class,
ideology and interests. Capitalism and Bolshevism have the same Jewish
roots, two branches of the same tree that in the end bear the same
fruit. International Jewry uses both in its own way to suppress the
nations and keep them in its service. How deep its influence on public
opinion is in all the enemy countries and many neutral nations is
plain to see that it may never be named in newspapers, speeches and
radio broadcasts. There is a law in the Soviet Union that punishes
anti-Semitism - or in plain English, public education about the Jewish
Question - by death. The expert in these matters is in no way
surprised that a leading spokesman for the Kremlin said over the New
Year that the Soviet Union would not rest until this law was valid
throughout the world. In other words, the enemy clearly says that its
goal in this war is to put the total domination of Jewry over the
nations of the earth under legal protection, and to threaten even a
discussion of this shameful attempt with the death penalty.

It is little different in the plutocratic nations. There the struggle
against the impudent usurpation of the Jewish race is not punished by
the executioner, rather by death through economic and social boycott
and by intellectual terror. This has the same effect in the end.
Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt were made by the Jewry. They enjoy its
full support and reward it with their full protection. They present
themselves in their speeches as upright men of civil courage, yet one
never hears even a word against the Jews, even though there is growing
hatred among their people as a result of this war, a hatred that is
fully justified. Jewry is a tabu theme in the enemy countries. It
stands outside every legal boundary and thus becomes the tyrant of its
host peoples. While enemy soldiers fight, bleed and die at the front,
the Jews make money from their sacrifice on the stock exchanges and
black markets. If a brave man dares to step forward and accuse the
Jews of their crimes, he will be mocked and spat on by their press,
chased from his job or otherwise impoverished, and be brought into
public contempt. Even that is apparently not enough for the Jews. They
want to bring Soviet conditions to the whole world: to give Jewry
absolute power and freedom from prosecution. He who objects or even
debates the matter gets a bullet in the back of his head or an axe
through his neck. There is no worse tyranny than this. This is the
epitome of the public and secret disgrace that Jewry inflicts on the
nations that deserve freedom.

That is all long behind us. Yet it still threatens us in the distance.
We have, it is true, entirely broken the power of the Jews in the
Reich, but they have not given up. They did not rest until they had
mobilized the whole world against us. Since they could no longer
conquer Germany from within, they want to try it from without. Every
Russian, English and American soldier is a mercenary of this world
conspiracy of a parasitic race. Given the current state of the war,
who could still believe that they are fighting and dying at the front
for the national interests of their countries! The nations want a
decent peace, but the Jews are against it. They know that the end of
the war would mean the dawning knowledge of humanity of the unhealthy
role that International Jewry played in preparing for and carrying out
this war. They fear being unmasked, which has in fact become
unavoidable and must inevitably come, just as the day follows the
night. That explains their raging bursts of hatred against us, which
are only the result of their fear and their feelings of inferiority.
They are too eager, and that makes them suspicious. International
Jewry will not succeed in turning this war to its advantage. Things
are already too far along. The hour will come in which all the peoples
of the earth will awake, and the Jews will be the victims. Here too
things can only go so far.

It is an old, often-used method of International Jewry to discredit
education and knowledge about its corrupting nature and drives,
thereby depending on the weaknesses of those people who easily confuse
cause with effect. The Jews are also masters at manipulating public
opinion, which they dominate through their network of news agencies
and press concerns that reaches throughout the world. The pitiful
illusion of a free press is one of the methods they use to stupefy the
publics of enemy lands. If the enemy press is as free as it pretends
to be, let it take an open position, for or against, on the Jewish
Question. It will not do that because it cannot and may not do so. The
Jews love to mock and criticize everything except themselves, although
everyone knows that they are most in need of public criticism. This is
where the so-called freedom of the press in enemy countries ends.
Newspapers, parliaments, statesmen and church leaders must be silent
here. Crimes and vices, filth and corruption are covered by the
blanket of love. The Jews have total control of public opinion in
enemy countries, and he who has that is also master of all of public
life. Only the nations that have to accept such a condition are to be
pitied. The Jews mislead them into believing that the German nation is
backward. Our alleged backwardness is actually proof of our progress.
We have recognized the Jews as a national and international danger,
and from this knowledge have drawn compelling conclusions. This German
knowledge will become the knowledge of he world at the end of this
war. We think it our primary duty to do everything in our power to
make that happen.

Humanity would sink into eternal darkness, it would fall into a dull
and primitive state, were the Jews to win this war. They are the
incarnation of that destructive force that in these terrible years has
guided the enemy war leadership in a fight against all that we see as
noble, beautiful and worth keeping. For that reason alone the Jews
hate it. They despite our culture and learning, which they perceive as
towering over their nomadic worldview. They fear our economic and
social standards, which leave no room for their parasitic drives, They
are the enemy of our domestic order, which has excluded their
anarchistic tendencies. Germany is the first nation in the world that
is entirely free of the Jews. That is the prime cause of its political
and economic balance. Since their expulsion from the German national
body has made it impossible for them to shake this balance from
within, they lead the nations they have deceived in battle against us
from without. It is fine with them, in fact it is part of their plan,
that Europe in the process will lose a large part of its cultural
values. The Jews had no part in their creation. They do not understand
them. A deep racial instinct tells them that since these heights of
human creative activity are forever out of their reach, they must
attack them today with hatred. The day is not distant when the nations
of Europe, yes, even those of the whole world, will shout: The Jews
are guilty for all our misfortunes! They must be called to account,
and soon and thoroughly!
International Jewry is ready with its alibi. Just as during the great
reckoning in Germany, they will attempt to look innocent and say that
one needs a scapegoat, and they are it. But that will no longer help
them, just as it did not help them during the National Socialist
revolution, The proof of their historical guilt, in details large and
small, is so plain that they can no longer be denied even with the
most clever lies and hypocrisy.

Who is it that drives the Russians, the English and the Americans into
battle and sacrifices huge numbers of human lives in a hopeless
struggle against the German people? The Jews! Their newspapers and
radio broadcasts spread the songs of war while the nations they have
deceived are led to the slaughter. Who is it that invents new plans of
hatred and destruction against us every day, making this war into a
dreadful case of self-mutilation and self-destruction of European life
and its economy, education and culture? The Jews! Who devised the
unnatural marriage between England and the USA on one side and
Bolshevism on the other, building it up and jealously ensuring its
continuance? Who covers the most perverse political situations with
cynical hypocrisy from a trembling fear that a new way could lead the
nations to realize the true causes of this terrible human catastrophe?
The Jews, only the Jews! They are named Morgenthau and Lehmann and
stand behind Roosevelt as a so-called brain trust. They are named
Mechett and Sasoon and serve as Churchill's money bags and order
givers. They are named Kaganovitsch and Ehrenburg and are Stalin's
pacesetters and intellectual spokesmen. Wherever you look, you see
Jews. They march as political commisars behind the Red army and
organize murder and terror in the areas conquered by the Soviets. They
sit behind the lines in Paris and Brussels, Rome and Athens, and
fashion their reins from the skin of the unhappy nations that have
fallen under their power.

That is the truth. It can no longer be denied, particularly since in
their drunken joy of power and victory the Jews have forgotten their
ordinarily so carefully maintained reserve and now stand in the
spotlight of public opinion. They no longer bother, apparently
believing that it is no longer necessary, that their hour has come.
And this is their mistake, which they always make when think
themselves near their great goal of anonymous world domination.
Thoughout the history of the nations, whenever this tragic situation
developed, a good providence saw to it that the Jews themselves became
the grave diggers of their own hopes. They did not destroy the healthy
peoples, rather the sting of their parasitic effects brought the
realization of the looming danger to the forefront and led to the
greatest sacrifices to overcome it. At a certain point, they become
that power that always wants evil but creates good. It will be that
way this time too.

The fact that the German nation was the first on earth to recognize
this danger and expel it from its organism is proof of its healthy
instincts. It therefore became the leader of a world struggle whose
results will determine of fate and the future of International Jewry.
We view with complete calm the wild Old Testament tirades of hatred
and revenge of Jews throughout the world against us. They are only
proof that we are on the right path. They cannot unsettle us. We gaze
on them with sovereign contempt and remember that these outbursts of
hate and revenge were everyday events for us in Germany until that
fateful day for International Jewry, 30 January 1933, when the world
revolution against the Jews that threateend not only Germany, but all
the other nations, began.
It will not cease before it has reached its goal. The truth can not be
stopped by lies or force. It will get through. The Jews will meet
their Cannae at the end of this war. Not Europe, rather they will
lose. They may laugh at this prophecy today, but they have laughed so
often in the past, and almost as often they stopped laughing sooner or
later. Not only do we know precisely what we want, we also know
precisely what we do not want. The deceived nations of he Earth may
still lack the knowledge they need, but we will bring it to them. How
will the Jews stop that in the long run? They believe their power
rests on sure foundations, but it stands on feet of clay. One hard
blow and it will collapse, burying the creators of the misfortunes of
the world in its ruins.


>Well, if you believe (like Weber) that the Nazis didn't murder gazillions
>of Jews, Gypsies, mentally ill, etc., and blame the US for the USSR's
>treatment of noncombatants, that's close to correct :)


There was a book in ordinary bookstores called "An Empire of
Their Own". It was a pro-Jewish book but it showed that the Jews ran
Hollywood.

Here are some quotes from a magazine for Jews called "Moment".
It is subtitled "The Jewish magazine for the 90's" These quotes are
from the Aug 1996 edition after the Headline "Jews Run Hollywood - So
What?":

"It makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish
power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most
influential production executives at each of the major movie studios
will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names."

"the famous Disney organization, which was founded by Walt
Disney, a gentile Midwesterner who allegedly harbored anti-Semetic
attitudes, now features Jewish personnel in nearly all its most
powerful positions."

"When Matsushita took over MCA-Universal, they did nothing to
undermine the unquestioned authority of Universal's legendary - and
all Jewish - management triad of Lew Wasserman, Sid Scheinberg, and
Tom Pollack."

Jewish control of the media:
MORTIMER ZUCKERMAN, owner of NY Daily News, US News & World Report and
chair of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish American
Organizations, one of the largest pro-Israel lobbying groups.
LESLIE MOONVES, president of CBS television, great-nephew of David
Ben-Gurion, and co-chair with Norman Ornstein of the Advisory
Committee on Public Interest Obligation of Digital TV Producers,
appointed by Clinton.
JONATHAN MILLER, chair and CEO of AOL division of AOL-Time-Warner
NEIL SHAPIRO, president of NBC News
JEFF GASPIN, Executive Vice-President, Programming, NBC
DAVID WESTIN, president of ABC News
SUMNER REDSTONE, CEO of Viacom, "world's biggest media giant"
(Economist, 11/23/2) owns Viacom cable, CBS and MTVs all over the
world, Blockbuster video rentals and Black Entertainment TV.
MICHAEL EISNER, major owner of Walt Disney, Capitol Cities, ABC.
RUPERT MURDOCH, Owner Fox TV, New York Post, London Times, News of the
World (Jewish mother)
MEL KARMAZIN, president of CBS
DON HEWITT, Exec. Director, 60 Minutes, CBS
JEFF FAGER, Exec. Director, 60 Minutes II. CBS
DAVID POLTRACK, Executive Vice-President, Research and Planning, CBS
SANDY KRUSHOW, Chair, Fox Entertainment
LLOYD BRAUN, Chair, ABC Entertainment
BARRY MEYER, chair, Warner Bros.
SHERRY LANSING. President of Paramount Communications and Chairman of
Paramount Pictures' Motion Picture Group.
HARVEY WEINSTEIN, CEO. Miramax Films.
BRAD SIEGEL., President, Turner Entertainment.
PETER CHERNIN, second in-command at Rupert Murdoch's News. Corp.,
owner of Fox TV
MARTY PERETZ, owner and publisher of the New Republic, which openly
identifies itself as pro-Israel. Al Gore credits Marty with being his
"mentor."
ARTHUR O. SULZBERGER, JR., publisher of the NY Times, the Boston Globe
and other publications.
WILLIAM SAFIRE, syndicated columnist for the NYT.
TOM FRIEDMAN, syndicated columnist for the NYT.
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post.
Honored by Honest Reporting.com, website monitoring "anti-Israel
media."
RICHARD COHEN, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post
JEFF JACOBY, syndicated columnist for the Boston Globe
NORMAN ORNSTEIN, American Enterprise Inst., regular columnist for USA
Today, news analyst for CBS, and co-chair with Leslie Moonves of the
Advisory Committee on Public Interest Obligation of Digital TV
Producers, appointed by Clinton.
ARIE FLEISCHER, Dubya's press secretary.
STEPHEN EMERSON, every media outlet's first choice as an expert on
domestic terrorism.
DAVID SCHNEIDERMAN, owner of the Village Voice and the New Times
network of "alternative weeklies."
DENNIS LEIBOWITZ, head of Act II Partners, a media hedge fund
KENNETH POLLACK, for CIA analysts, director of Saban Center for Middle
East Policy, writes op-eds in NY Times, New Yorker
BARRY DILLER, chair of USA Interactive, former owner of Universal
Entertainment
KENNETH ROTH, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch
RICHARD LEIBNER, runs the N.S. Bienstock talent agency, which
represents 600 news personalities such as Dan Rather, Dianne Sawyer
and Bill O'Reilly.
TERRY SEMEL, CEO, Yahoo, former chair, Warner Bros.
MARK GOLIN, VP and Creative Director, AOL
WARREN LIEBERFORD, Pres., Warner Bros. Home Video Div. of AOL-
TimeWarner
JEFFREY ZUCKER, President of NBC Entertainment
JACK MYERS, NBC, chief.NYT 5.14.2
SANDY GRUSHOW, chair of Fox Entertainment
GAIL BERMAN, president of Fox Entertainment
STEPHEN SPIELBERG, co-owner of Dreamworks
JEFFREY KATZENBERG, co-owner of Dreamworks
DAVID GEFFEN, co-owner of Dreamworks
LLYOD BRAUN, chair of ABC Entertainment
JORDAN LEVIN, president of Warner Bros. Entertainment
MAX MUTCHNICK, co-executive producer of NBC's "Good Morning Miami"
DAVID KOHAN, co-executive producer of NBC's "Good Morning Miami"
HOWARD STRINGER, chief of Sony Corp. of America
AMY PASCAL, chair of Columbia Pictures
JOEL KLEIN, chair and CEO of Bertelsmann's American operations
ROBERT SILLERMAN, founder of Clear Channel Communications
BRIAN GRADEN, president of MTV entertainment
IVAN SEIDENBERG, CEO of Verizon Communications
WOLF BLITZER, host of CNN's Late Edition
LARRY KING, host of Larry King Live
TED KOPPEL, host of ABC's Nightline
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN Reporter
PAULA ZAHN, CNN Host
MIKE WALLACE, Host of CBS, 60 Minutes
BARBARA WALTERS, Host, ABC's 20-20
MICHAEL LEDEEN, editor of National Review
BRUCE NUSSBAUM, editorial page editor, Business Week
DONALD GRAHAM, Chair and CEO of Newsweek and Washington Post, son of
CATHERINE GRAHAM MEYER, former owner of the Washington Post
HOWARD FINEMAN, Chief Political Columnist, Newsweek
WILLIAM KRISTOL, Editor, Weekly Standard, Exec. Director
Project for a New American Century (PNAC)
RON ROSENTHAL, Managing Editor, San Francisco Chronicle
PHIL BRONSTEIN, Executive Editor, San Francisco Chronicle,
RON OWENS, Talk Show Host, KGO (ABC-Capitol Cities, San Francisco)
JOHN ROTHMAN, Talk Show Host, KGO (ABC-Capitol Cities, San Francisco)
MICHAEL SAVAGE, Talk Show Host, KFSO (ABC-Capitol Cities, San
Francisco) Syndicated in 100 markets
MICHAEL MEDVED, Talk Show Host, on 124 AM stations
DENNIS PRAGER, Talk Show Host, nationally syndicated from LA. Has
Israeli flag on his home page.
BEN WATTENBERG, Moderator, PBS Think Tank.
ANDREW LACK, president of NBC
DANIEL MENAKER, Executive Director, Harper Collins
DAVID REMNICK, Editor, The New Yorker
NICHOLAS LEHMANN, writer, the New York
HENRICK HERTZBERG, Talk of the Town editor, The New Yorker
SAMUEL NEWHOUSE JR, and DONALD NEWHOUSE own Newhouse Publications,
includes 26 newspapers in 22 cities; the Conde Nast magazine group,
includes The New Yorker; Parade, the Sunday newspaper supplement;
American City Business Journals, business newspapers published in more
than 30 major cities in America; and interests in cable television
programming and cable systems serving 1 million homes.
DONALD NEWHOUSE, chairman of the board of directors, Associated Press.
PETER R KANN, CEO, Wall Street Journal, Barron's
RALPH J. & BRIAN ROBERTS, Owners, Comcast-ATT Cable TV.
LAWRENCE KIRSHBAUM, CEO, AOL-Time Warner Book Group



http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Michael Ejercito
2011-05-25 00:37:58 UTC
Permalink
On May 20, 1:17 pm, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> German leaders believed in death before dishonor. They knew the allies
> were subhuman monsters:
Like the subhuman monsters who did the Holocaust?

>
> The Diaries of Charles A. Lindbergh, p.986
>
>   "That young girl riding on her bicycle - she must know that on the
> day the Russians come she will probably be raped by a dozen soldiers.
> When do they come? In days? In weeks? That, we have not told the
> Germans. She has a good face - nicely dressed in old but clean and
> brightly colored garments - like the daughter of a middle class
> American family. I realize that we Americans are holding her at
> Dessau. She cannot flee to safety. We will not let her pass our
> sentries on the roads. We are turning her and thousands of
> others like her over to the Soviet soldiers for their sport. I feel
> ashamed."
>
> p.961
>    "German children look in through the window. We have more food than
> we need, but regulations prevent giving it to them. It is difficult to
> look at them. I feel ashamed of myself, of my people, as I eat and
> watch those children. They are not to blame for the war. They are
> hungry children. What right have we to stuff ourselves while they look
> on - well-fed men eating, leaving unwanted food on plates, while
> hungry children look on."
>
>  Berlin Correspondent, The Times, September 10th, 1945
>
> "...Another small boy turned out of Danzig had a scrawled postcard
> attached to him stating that his soldier father was long since missing
> and that his mother and two sisters had died of hunger."
>
>   At this time, Denmark, formerly occupied by the Germans as a means
> of denying the allies a North Sea bridgehead was bursting at the seams
> with surplus food and was pleading with the allies to put it to good
> use. It was refused.
>
> http://www.ihr.org/   http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
>
> http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
This link explains you.

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/ftp.py?people//m/morton.chris/what-is-a-nazi


Michael
Tesla
2011-05-25 00:59:52 UTC
Permalink
On 5/24/2011 8:37 PM, Michael Ejercito wrote:
> On May 20, 1:17 pm, Topaz<***@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> German leaders believed in death before dishonor. They knew the allies
>> were subhuman monsters:
> Like the subhuman monsters who did the Holocaust?
>

Which "Holocaust"?

Jewish USSR Murders - 65,000,000 to 100,000,000 Mass Murdered Christians
Including Their Priests between 1920-1940?

Jewish Blockade of Germany - 1,000,000 Dead German Babies Starved In
Blockade 1933-40?

Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians?

American Genocidal Jewish Plans?

Jewish Hatred of All Gentiles?

100,000 Ringworm Children Poisoned/Radiated in Israel by Zionists?

Jewish Marriage Laws & Racial Purity Laws -- Israeli Law?

Jewish Apartheid Wall Between Israel & Palestine?

Israelis Sentenced for Christian Hate Crime?

Jewish Palestinian Genocide?

Israel's Apartheid System?

Jewish Slaughter of Christians -- 641 A.D. in Jerusalem?

Iraqi Blockade?

Anti-Christian Movement?

Black Slavery as a Highly Profitable Jewish Business?


Link to all the above: Jewish Genocides Today and Yesterday -

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-genocide-folder.htm


And that is just one source out of many, many more.

This is where so-called "antisemitism" comes from . . . and in THAT
regard, it is a perfectly understandable, and acceptable, attitude.

Time to stop whining. You can't keep playing the "victims" when you are
actually the biggest perpetrators.


-

"They are real liars and bloodhounds who have not only continually
perverted and falsified all of Scripture with their mendacious glosses
from the beginning until the present day. Their heart's most ardent
sighing and yearning and hoping is set on the day on which they can deal
with us Gentiles as they did with the Gentiles in Persia at the time of
Esther. Oh, how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so
beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning
and hope. The sun has never shone on a more bloodthirsty and vengeful
people than they are who imagine that they are God's people who have
been commissioned and commanded to murder and to slay the Gentiles. In
fact, the most important thing that they expect of their Messiah is that
he will murder and kill the entire world with their sword. They treated
us Christians in this manner at the very beginning through out all the
world. They would still like to do this if they had the power, and often
enough have made the attempt, for which they have got their snouts boxed
lustily."

"Why, their Talmud and their rabbis record that it is no sin for a Jew
to kill a Gentile, but it is only a sin for him to kill a brother
Israelite. Nor is it a sin for a Jew to break his oath to a Gentile.
Likewise, they say that it is rendering God a service to steal or rob
from a Goy, as they in fact do through their usury. For since they
believe that they are the noble blood and the circumcised saints and we
the accursed Goyim, they cannot treat us too harshly or commit sin
against us, for they are the lords of the world and we are their
servants, yes, their cattle."

"Do you ask what prompts them to write this, or what is the cause of it?
You stupid, accursed Goy, why should you ask that? Does it not satisfy
you to know that this is said by the noble, circumcised saints? Are you
so slow to learn that such a holy people is exempt from all the decrees
of God and cannot sin? They may lie, blaspheme, defame, and murder whom
they will, even God himself and all his prophets. All of this must be
accounted as nothing but a fine service rendered to God. Did I not tell
you earlier that a Jew is such a noble, precious jewel that God and all
the angels dance when he farts? And if he were to go on to do something
coarser than that, they would nevertheless expect it to be regarded as a
golden Talmud. Whatever issues from such a holy man, from above or from
below, must surely be considered by the accursed Goyim to be pure holiness."

Martin Luther (1483-1546)
"On the Jews and Their Lies" (1543)
Topaz
2011-05-25 10:34:18 UTC
Permalink
by James Buchanan

Let's say the Germans merely removed the Jews from positions of
political power and banned them from the legal profession. Germany
went from devastating economic poverty in 1932 to full employment just
a couple years later. If an incredible economic improvement can be
achieved, merely by removing the Jews from power (and replacing them
with patriotic nationalists), then every Gentile nation in the world
should give this a try.

Obviously the Jews don't want anyone else getting the idea of removing
them to create prosperity. The Jews control the mass media in most
Western countries. Most people don't know about the Balfour
Declaration. During World War One, Zionist Jews offered to use their
control of the press to bring America into World War One if Britain
would promise them Palestine. This offer was dubbed the Balfour
Declaration. If the Jews had enough media control and influence to
push America into World War One in 1917, what else have they done with
their power?

It was a huge embarrassment for the Jews to see Germany so prosperous
in the mid-1930s after removing them from power. They considered this
a dangerous precedent. To deal with this "problem" the Jewish World
Congress declared war on Germany in 1933. This declaration of war at
least encouraged a world-wide boycott against Germany and at worst
encouraged other nations of the world to become hostile toward
Germany. (The Jews curiously sanctioned the Germans before the Germans
passed any laws restricting the Jews.) More importantly the Jews
pushed vicious anti-German slander in all the Jewish-owned newspapers
in the West in the years leading up to World War Two. The Communist
mass murder of 30 million people in Russia and the Ukraine received
almost no publicity in the Jewish media. Most people in the West only
heard a serious mention of these Communist mass murders beginning in
the 1980s. Instead, the Jewish media focused all their hatred and
agitation against Germany and its allies.

After six years of relentless agitation, the Jews pushed England and
France into war with Germany. Only two years later, FDR and his cabal
of Jews provoked a war with Japan (and Germany).

Naturally, the Jews did not want future historians to say: "World War
Two was provoked by the Jewish media in retaliation for Germany
removing the Jews from power." The Jews needed a new reason for World
War Two. A reason that painted their enemies as unquestionably evil.
So they invented the Holocaust.

The Holocaust stood mostly unchallenged for decades after the war
because people feared being branded "Nazi-sympathizers" for
questioning its details. The truth always comes out in the long run.
Professor Arthur Butz published his famous work "The Hoax of the 20th
Century" in 1977 detailing a very solid argument against this war
propaganda. Dr. Butz pointed out that the world population of Jews
remained at about 16 million before and after the war. He also noted
that half a million Jews remained in Paris after four years of German
occupation. Both these facts strongly suggest the Holocaust is a
fraud, but the political power of the Jews has suppressed and punished
any public questioning of the Holocaust to this day. David Irving
joined the ranks of Revisionist historians several years ago and went
from a famous successful author to a pariah thanks to persecution by
the Jews.

The Institute for Historical Review has done great work exposing the
Holocaust as a great historical fraud. Anyone interested in looking
for historical truth should visit their website. It's a shock for many
people to see how much propaganda we've been force fed.

http://www.ihr.org

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Michael Ejercito
2011-05-25 16:05:51 UTC
Permalink
On May 25, 3:34 am, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> by James Buchanan
>
> Let's say the Germans merely removed the Jews from positions of
> political power and banned them from the legal profession. Germany
> went from devastating economic poverty in 1932 to full employment just
> a couple years later.  If an incredible economic improvement can be
> achieved, merely by removing the Jews from power (and replacing them
> with patriotic nationalists), then every Gentile nation in the world
> should give this a try.
>
> Obviously the Jews don't want anyone else getting the idea of removing
> them to create prosperity. The Jews control the mass media in most
> Western countries. Most people don't know about the Balfour
> Declaration. During World War One, Zionist Jews offered to use their
> control of the press to bring America into World War One if Britain
> would promise them Palestine. This offer was dubbed the Balfour
> Declaration. If the Jews had enough media control and influence to
> push America into World War One in 1917, what else have they done with
> their power?
>
> It was a huge embarrassment for the Jews to see Germany so prosperous
> in the mid-1930s after removing them from power. They considered this
> a dangerous precedent. To deal with this "problem" the Jewish World
> Congress declared war on Germany in 1933. This declaration of war at
> least encouraged a world-wide boycott against Germany and at worst
> encouraged other nations of the world to become hostile toward
> Germany. (The Jews curiously sanctioned the Germans before the Germans
> passed any laws restricting the Jews.) More importantly the Jews
> pushed vicious anti-German slander in all the Jewish-owned newspapers
> in the West in the years leading up to World War Two. The Communist
> mass murder of 30 million people in Russia and the Ukraine received
> almost no publicity in the Jewish media. Most people in the West only
> heard a serious mention of these Communist mass murders beginning in
> the 1980s. Instead, the Jewish media focused all their hatred and
> agitation against Germany and its allies.
>
> After six years of relentless agitation, the Jews pushed England and
> France into war with Germany. Only two years later, FDR and his cabal
> of Jews provoked a war with Japan (and Germany).
>
> Naturally, the Jews did not want future historians to say: "World War
> Two was provoked by the Jewish media in retaliation for Germany
> removing the Jews from power." The Jews needed a new reason for World
> War Two. A reason that painted their enemies as unquestionably evil.
> So they invented the Holocaust.
>
> The Holocaust stood mostly unchallenged for decades after the war
> because people feared being branded "Nazi-sympathizers" for
> questioning its details. The truth always comes out in the long run.
> Professor Arthur Butz published his famous work "The Hoax of the 20th
> Century" in 1977 detailing a very solid argument against this war
> propaganda. Dr. Butz pointed out that the world population of Jews
> remained at about 16 million before and after the war. He also noted
> that half a million Jews remained in Paris after four years of German
> occupation. Both these facts strongly suggest the Holocaust is a
> fraud, but the political power of the Jews has suppressed and punished
> any public questioning of the Holocaust to this day. David Irving
> joined the ranks of Revisionist historians several years ago and went
> from a famous successful author to a pariah thanks to persecution by
> the Jews.
>
> The Institute for Historical Review has done great work exposing the
> Holocaust as a great historical fraud. Anyone interested in looking
> for historical truth should visit their website. It's a shock for many
> people to see how much propaganda we've been force fed.
>
> http://www.ihr.org
>
> http://www.ihr.org/   http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
>
> http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
The following article explains your pathology.

History's oldest hatred

by Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe
March 11, 2009

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/4743/historys-oldest-hatred

ANTI-SEMITISM is an ancient derangement, the oldest of hatreds, so it
is strange that it lacks a more meaningful name. The misnomer "anti-
Semitism" -- a term coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm
Marr, who wanted a scientific-sounding euphemism for Judenhass, or Jew-
hatred -- is particularly inane, since hostility to Jews has never had
anything to do with Semites or being Semitic. (That is why those who
protest that Arabs cannot be anti-Semitic since "Arabs are Semites
too" speak either from ignorance or disingenuousness.)

Perhaps there is no good name for a virus as mutable and unyielding as
anti-Semitism. "The Jews have been objects of hatred in pagan,
religious, and secular societies," write Joseph Telushkin and Dennis
Prager in Why the Jews?, their classic study of anti-Semitism.
"Fascists have accused them of being Communists, and Communists have
branded them capitalists. Jews who live in non-Jewish societies have
been accused of having dual loyalties, while Jews who live in the
Jewish state have been condemned as 'racists.' Poor Jews are bullied,
and rich Jews are resented. Jews have been branded as both rootless
cosmopolitans and ethnic chauvinists. Jews who assimilate have been
called a 'fifth column,' while those who stay together spark hatred
for remaining separate."

So hardy is anti-Semitism, it can flourish without Jews. Shakespeare's
poisonous depiction of the Jewish moneylender Shylock was written for
audiences that had never seen a Jew, all Jews having been expelled
from England more than 300 years earlier. Anti-Semitic bigotry infests
Saudi Arabia, where Jews have not dwelt in at least five centuries;
its malignance is suggested by the government daily Al-Riyadh, which
published an essay claiming that Jews have a taste for "pastries mixed
with human blood."

Esther Confounding Haman (Engraving by Gustave Doré, 1875)
There was Jew-hatred before there was Christianity or Islam, before
Nazism or Communism, before Zionism or the Middle East conflict. This
week Jews celebrate the festival of Purim, gathering in synagogues to
read the biblical book of Esther. Set in ancient Persia, it tells of
Haman, a powerful royal adviser who is insulted when the Jewish sage
Mordechai refuses to bow down to him. Haman resolves to wipe out the
empire's Jews and makes the case for genocide in an appeal to the
king:

"There is a certain people scattered and dispersed among ... all the
provinces of your kingdom, and their laws are different from those of
other peoples, and the king's laws they do not keep, so it is of no
benefit for the king to tolerate them. If it please the king, let it
be written that they be destroyed." After winning royal assent, Haman
makes plans "to annihilate, to kill and destroy all the Jews, the
young and the elderly, children and women, in one day . . . and to
take their property for plunder."

What drives such bloodlust? Haman's indictment accuses the Jews of
lacking national loyalty, of insinuating themselves throughout the
empire, of flouting the king's law. But the Jews of Persia had done
nothing to justify Haman's murderous anti-Semitism -- just as Jews in
later ages did nothing that justified their persecution under the
Church or Islam, or their expulsion from so many lands in Europe and
the Middle East, or their repression at the hands of Russian czars and
Soviet commissars, or their slaughter by Nazi Germany. When the
president of Iran today calls for the extirpation of the Jewish state,
when a leader of Hamas vows to kill Jewish children around the world,
when firebombs are hurled at synagogues in London and Paris and
Chicago, it is not because Jews deserve to be victimized.

Some Jews are no saints, but the paranoid frenzy that is anti-Semitism
is not explained by what Jews do, but by what they are. The Jewish
people are the object of anti-Semitism, not its cause. That is why the
haters' rationales can be so wildly inconsistent and their agendas so
contradictory. What, after all, do those who vilify Jews as greedy
bankers have in common with those who revile them as seditious
Bolsheviks? Nothing, save an irrational obsession with Jews.

At one point in the book of Esther, Haman lets the mask slip. He
boasts to his friends and family of "the glory of his riches, and the
great number of his sons, and everything in which the king had
promoted him and elevated him." Still, he seethes with rage and
frustration: "Yet all this is worthless to me so long as I see
Mordechai the Jew sitting at the king's gate." That is the
unforgivable offense: "Mordechai the Jew" refuses to blend in, to
abandon his values, to be just like everyone else. He goes on sitting
there -- undigested, unassimilated, and for that reason unbearable.

Of course Haman had his ostensible reasons for targeting Jews. So did
Hitler and Arafat; so does Ahmadinejad. Sometimes the anti-Semite
focuses on the Jew's religion, sometimes on his laws and lifestyle,
sometimes on his national identity or his professional achievements.
Ultimately, however, it is the Jew's Jewishness, and the call to
higher standards that it represents, that the anti-Semite cannot
abide.

With all their flaws and failings, the Jewish people endure, their
role in history not yet finished. So the world's oldest hatred endures
too, as obsessive and indestructible -- and deadly -- as ever.

(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe.)
Topaz
2011-05-26 20:58:28 UTC
Permalink
In researching Jewish history, the investigator discovers a wide
variance of written material. Work by authors expressly critical of
Jews (and they include a surprising number of Jewish commentators,
mostly "apostates" of one kind or another) is invariably labeled by
today's political conventions to be "anti-Semitic" in nature. There is
a large body of such material extending throughout history, written by
critics wherever Jews were to be found. Observations about Jewish
life by non-Jews is startlingly consistent over two thousand years.
Consistently credible Gentile themes in attacks against Jews include
Jewish elitism, their insularity and clannishness, their disdain for
non-Jews, their exploitive and deceptive behavior towards those not
their own, the suspicion of Jewish national loyalties and allegiance
to the lands they lived in, excessive Jewish proclivity for money and
economic domination, and an economic "parasitism" (the concentration
of Jews in lucrative non-productive fields of finance-usury, money
lending, etc.-at the expense of non-Jewish communities).

"Hatred for the Jews," Abram Leon writes, "does not date solely from
the birth of Christianity. Seneca treated the Jews as a criminal race.
Juvenal believed that the Jews only existed to cause evil for other
peoples. Quintilian said that Jews were a curse for other people"
(Leon, 71).
In 59 BC the Roman statesman Cicero criticized Jewish "clannishness"
and "influence in the assemblies." In the second century AD Celsus,
one of Rome's great medical writers, wrote that Jews "pride themselves
in possessing superior wisdom and disdain for the company of other
men." Philostratus, an ancient Greek author, believed that Jews "have
long since risen against humanity itself. They are men who have
devised a misanthropic life, who share neither food nor drink with
others." (Cf. Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, I, iii, 29-32.) The
great Roman historian Tacitus (A.D. 56-120) declared that "the Jews
are extremely loyal toward one another, and are always ready to show
compassion [for their fellow Jews], but toward other people they feel
only hate and enmity" (Morais, 46).

Centuries later Voltaire's criticism of Jews, in his Essai sur le
Moeurs, repeated many of the same charges: "The Jewish nation dares to
display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations, and revolts
against all masters; always superstitious, always greedy for the
well-being enjoyed by others, always barbarous-cringing in misfortune
and insolent in prosperity."
"However uncomfortable it is to recognize," says Albert Lindemann,
"not all those whom historians have classified as anti-Semites were
narrow bigots, irrational, or otherwise incapable of acts of altruism
and moral courage. They represented a bewildering range of opinion and
personality types" (Lindemann, 13). And why is this "uncomfortable
[for Jews] to recognize?" Because, by even a child's exercise of logic
and common sense, the common denominator of all such disparate people
can only be the enduring truths about Jews as each observer
experienced them in varying historical and cultural circumstances.
The French Jewish intellectual (and eventual Zionist), Bernard Lazare,
among many others in history, noted this obvious fact in 1894, long
before the Nazi persecutions of Jews and resultant institutionalized
Jewish efforts to deny, or obfuscate, crucial-and central- aspects of
their history:
Wherever the Jews settled one observes the development of
anti-Semitism, or rather anti-Judaism ... If this hostility, this
repugnance had been shown towards the Jews at one time or in one
country only, it would be easy to account for the local cause of this
sentiment. But this race has been the object of hatred with all
nations amidst whom it settled.
Inasmuch as the enemies of Jews belonged to diverse races, as
they dwelled far apart from one another, were ruled by
different laws and governed by opposite principles; as they had
not the same customs and differed in spirit from one another,
so that they could not possibly judge alike of any subject, it
must needs be that the general causes of anti-Semitism have always
resided in [the people of] Israel itself, and not in those who
antagonized it (Lazare, 8).
Excerpts from from When Victims Rule, online at Jewish Tribal Review.
http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/wvr.htm

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Dave Heil
2011-05-21 04:15:47 UTC
Permalink
On 5/19/2011 23 45, Topaz wrote:
>
> Here is a quote from "The Battle for Berlin" by Joseph Goebbels:

Joe G. didn't even bother to stick around for the end of the real battle
of Berlin. He offed himself out of fear.

Nice bunch of heroes you have there, Toupee.
Topaz
2011-05-21 10:29:05 UTC
Permalink
German leaders believe in death before dishonor. They knew the allies
were subhuman monsters:



Eyewitness account by Mrs. Leonora Geier (nee Cavoa, born Oct 22,
1925, Sao Paulo,
Brazil) to Dr. Trutz Foelsche, Ph.D

Deutsche Nationalzeitung, No. 17-65, p. 7:

"On the morning of February, 16, (1945) a Russian detachment
occupied the RAD (Reichsarbeitsdienst) camp Vilmsee near Neustettin.
The Commissar told me in good German language that the camp was
dissolved and that we, as a unit with uniforms (RAD - German Labour
Service, not military uniforms), would be transported to a collection
camp. Since I, as a Brazilian citizen, belong to an allied nation, he
asked me to take over as a leader of the transport that went to
Neustettin, into the yard of the former iron factory. We were about
500 girls (Maidens of the Reichsarbeitsdienst - German Labour
Service).

He said I could come into the orderly room, which I accepted.
Immediately he directed me to make no further contact with other
women, because they were members of an illegal army. On my response
that this what not true, he cut me off with the remark that I would be
shot immediately, if I would repeat in any form a similar statement.

"Suddenly I heard loud screams, and promptly five girls were brought
in by the two Red Armists. The Commissar ordered them to undress. When
they, in a sense of shame, refused to do so, he ordered me to undress
them and follow him with the girls. We walked through the yard to the
former factory kitchen, which was completely cleared out
except for some tables along the window wall. It was dreadfully cold
and the unfortunate girls trembled. In the huge tiled room several
Russians waited for us who were obviously making obscene remarks
because every word was followed by loud laughter.

The Commissar then directed me to watch how one makes sissies out of
'The Master Race'.

Now two Poles, clad in trousers only, entered the room. At their
sight the girls cried out.

Briskly, they seized the first of the two girls and bent her over with
her back over the edge of the table until her joints cracked. I almost
fainted when one of the men pulled his knife and cut off her right
breast in the presence of the other girls. I have never heard a
human being scream as desperately as this young woman. After this
'operation' both men stabbed her several times in the abdomen,
accompanied by the howling of the Russians.

The next girl cried for mercy, in vain, since she was exceptionally
pretty. I had the impression that the 'work' was carried out very
slowly. The other three girls were completely broken down, cried for
their mothers and begged for a speedy death, but also
fate them overtook.

The last of the girls was still half a child, with barely developed
breasts, one tore the flesh literally from her ribs until the white
bone appeared.

Again, five girls were brought in. This time, they had been selected
carefully. All were developed and pretty. When they saw the bodies of
their predecessors, they began to cry and scream. Weak as they were,
they tried to defend themselves but to no avail; the Poles became more
cruel every time. One of the girls, they cut open her womb and trunk
over the whole length; poured a can of machine oil into the mutilated
body and tried to set fire to it. Another was shot in the genitals by
a Russia, before they cut off her breasts.

A great howling began when someone brought a saw from a toolbox.
Now, using the saw, they set to work to the breasts of the girls to
pieces, which in a short period of time led to the floor being covered
with blood. A blood rage seized the Russians. Continuously
one of them brought more and more girls.

Like a red fog, I saw the gruesome happenings again and again and I
perceived the inhuman screaming at the torture of their breasts and
the load groaning at the mutilation of their private parts. When my
legs failed me I was forced into a chair. The Commissar persistently
watched me to make sure I was looking toward the torture scenes. In
fact, when I had to vomit, they even paused with their tortures. One
girl had not undressed completely, she may have been somewhat older
than the rest of the girls who were about 17-years old. One of the
torturers soaked her bra with oil and ignited it and, while she cried
out, another drove a thin iron rod into her vagina until it emerged at
her naval.

In the yard they liquidated entire groups of girls, after they had
selected the prettiest ones for the torture room. The air was filled
with the death cries of many hundreds of girls. But in view of what
happened here, the slaughter outside could be considered more humane.
It was a dreadful fact that not one of the girls brought into the
torture room lost here consciousness.

In their horror all were equal in their expressions. It was always
the same; the begging for mercy, the high-pitched scream when their
breasts were cut and their genitals mutilated. Several times the
slaughter was interrupted to sweep out the blood and to clear away the
corpses.

That evening I sank into a severe nerve fever. From then on I lack
any recollection until the moment I awoke in a military hospital.
German troops had recaptured Neustettin temporarily, and had liberated
us. As I learned later, approximately 2,000 girls were murdered during
the first three days of the first round of Russian occupation."


http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Harold Burton
2011-05-18 22:36:55 UTC
Permalink
In article <Xv-***@giganews.com>,
***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:

> by Glenn Davis
>
> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.
>
> It wasn’t so much a Christianity-bashing session as it was Maher bashing
> what he saw as hypocrisy with lines like, “Capping thine enemy is not
> exactly what Jesus would do – it’s what Suge Knight would do,” and
> “Martin Luther King gets to call himself a Christian because he actually
> practiced loving his enemies, and Gandhi was so fucking Christian he
> was Hindu” (okay, that last one bashed Christianity a bit).
>
> Maher pointed out that “non-violence was kind of Jesus’s trademark,”
> and couldn’t reconcile it with the factoid that “more evangelical
> Christians than any other religion” support torture (for the record,
> these seem to be the numbers [1] Maher was talking about, but that
> same link also says, “[P]arty and ideology are much better predictors
> of views on torture than are religion and most other demographic
> factors”).
>
> And Maher didn’t absolve our black ninja gangster president [2] from his
> criticism, either: he said he, like so many others, was “missing the
> message” on the non-violent teachings of Christianity. Then again,
> Maher also once went on record thinking Obama’s not really Christian.
> And while Maher made it clear he doesn’t have any personal problem
> with celebrating bin Laden’s demise:
>
> “My favorite new government program is surprising violent
> religious zealots in the middle of the night and shooting
> them in the face”
>
> …he’s also not conflicted. Why not? “[B]ecause I’m a non-Christian…just
> like most Christians.” This was much closer to Maher at his best than
> when he just goes after religions in general – the specific focus on
> the hypocrisy angle made it reminiscent of The Daily Show with more
> cursing…and we’re fine with that. Video below, via HBO.
> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-celebrating-bin-laden-death-not-christia
> n/
>
>
> [1]:
> http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/The-Religious-Dimensions-of-the-Tor
> ture-Debate.aspx
> [2]:
> http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-obama-black-ninja-gangster-president/



"One should forgive one's enemies, but not before they are hanged."

Heinrich Heine
Jim Austin
2011-05-24 20:08:11 UTC
Permalink
On May 17, 2:34 am, ***@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) wrote:
> by Glenn Davis
>
> Reaction to Osama bin Laden’s death was overwhelmingly not just
> positive, but gleeful – and let’s face it, it’s not tough to see
> why. Bill Maher, though, tonight pointed out on Real Time that
> Christians who celebrate the death of even someone as evil as bin
> Laden are disobeying the part of their faith that instructs them to
> love their enemies – and, being Bill Maher, delighted in saying so.

Actually, there is something to that. Given the Christian virtues of
humility, meekness, servility, submissiveness, pacifism, Christianity
does not legitimize or validate resistance to terrorism, tyranny and
aggression.

> It wasn’t so much a Christianity-bashing session as it was Maher bashing
> what he saw as hypocrisy with lines like, “Capping thine enemy is not
> exactly what Jesus would do – it’s what Suge Knight would do,” and
> “Martin Luther King gets to call himself a Christian because he actually
> practiced loving his enemies, and Gandhi was so fucking Christian he
> was Hindu” (okay, that last one bashed Christianity a bit).

Gandhi's approach during World War II was to urge Great Britain to
surrender and to advise Jews facing extermination at the hands of the
Nazis to throw themselves into the ocean from the hills and cliffs of
Europe, in effect, saving Nazi Germany the trouble and expense of
killing then. One doesn't get much more Christian than that.

> Maher pointed out that “non-violence was kind of Jesus’s trademark,”
> and couldn’t reconcile it with the factoid that “more evangelical
> Christians than any other religion” support torture (for the record,
> these seem to be the numbers [1] Maher was talking about, but that
> same link also says, “[P]arty and ideology are much better predictors
> of views on torture than are religion and most other demographic
> factors”).

Evangelical Christians have attempted to insert the right of self
defense into Christian doctrine, but they haven't done a very good job
of that.

> And Maher didn’t absolve our black ninja gangster president [2] from his
> criticism, either: he said he, like so many others, was “missing the
> message” on the non-violent teachings of Christianity. Then again,
> Maher also once went on record thinking Obama’s not really Christian.
> And while Maher made it clear he doesn’t have any personal problem
> with celebrating bin Laden’s demise:
>
>         “My favorite new government program is surprising violent
>         religious zealots in the middle of the night and shooting
>         them in the face”

Pacifism is very much part of the liberal ideology, and thus it isn't
surprising that Bill Maher would ridicule anything that would
inconvenience terrorists.

> …he’s also not conflicted. Why not? “[B]ecause I’m a non-Christian…just
> like most Christians.” This was much closer to Maher at his best than
> when he just goes after religions in general – the specific focus on
> the hypocrisy angle made it reminiscent of The Daily Show with more
> cursing…and we’re fine with that. Video below, via
> HBO.http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-celebrating-bin-laden-death-not...

Christians who act against aggressors are indeed hypocritical.
However, in this case, I would prefer hypocrisy to pure, undiluted
Christianity which would mean pure, unadulterated pacifism.

> [1]:http://pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/The-Religious-Dimensions-o...
> [2]:http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bill-maher-obama-black-ninja-gangster-pres...
>
> --
> "If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
> 21st century."

Obama has long past Jimmy Carter.
Dano
2011-05-24 20:44:58 UTC
Permalink
"Jim Austin" wrote in message
news:ec1aeaa1-c9c0-43a0-bae7-***@q12g2000prb.googlegroups.com...



Christians who act against aggressors are indeed hypocritical.
However, in this case, I would prefer hypocrisy to pure, undiluted
Christianity which would mean pure, unadulterated pacifism.

===================================

I'd prefer that ALL religious nuts keep their twisted fucking bullshit to
themselves. But not enough to ban their speech. Everyone has a right to
make an ass of himself.
Topaz
2011-05-25 10:35:52 UTC
Permalink
by James Buchanan

Let's say the Germans merely removed the Jews from positions of
political power and banned them from the legal profession. Germany
went from devastating economic poverty in 1932 to full employment just
a couple years later. If an incredible economic improvement can be
achieved, merely by removing the Jews from power (and replacing them
with patriotic nationalists), then every Gentile nation in the world
should give this a try.

Obviously the Jews don't want anyone else getting the idea of removing
them to create prosperity. The Jews control the mass media in most
Western countries. Most people don't know about the Balfour
Declaration. During World War One, Zionist Jews offered to use their
control of the press to bring America into World War One if Britain
would promise them Palestine. This offer was dubbed the Balfour
Declaration. If the Jews had enough media control and influence to
push America into World War One in 1917, what else have they done with
their power?

It was a huge embarrassment for the Jews to see Germany so prosperous
in the mid-1930s after removing them from power. They considered this
a dangerous precedent. To deal with this "problem" the Jewish World
Congress declared war on Germany in 1933. This declaration of war at
least encouraged a world-wide boycott against Germany and at worst
encouraged other nations of the world to become hostile toward
Germany. (The Jews curiously sanctioned the Germans before the Germans
passed any laws restricting the Jews.) More importantly the Jews
pushed vicious anti-German slander in all the Jewish-owned newspapers
in the West in the years leading up to World War Two. The Communist
mass murder of 30 million people in Russia and the Ukraine received
almost no publicity in the Jewish media. Most people in the West only
heard a serious mention of these Communist mass murders beginning in
the 1980s. Instead, the Jewish media focused all their hatred and
agitation against Germany and its allies.

After six years of relentless agitation, the Jews pushed England and
France into war with Germany. Only two years later, FDR and his cabal
of Jews provoked a war with Japan (and Germany).

Naturally, the Jews did not want future historians to say: "World War
Two was provoked by the Jewish media in retaliation for Germany
removing the Jews from power." The Jews needed a new reason for World
War Two. A reason that painted their enemies as unquestionably evil.
So they invented the Holocaust.

The Holocaust stood mostly unchallenged for decades after the war
because people feared being branded "Nazi-sympathizers" for
questioning its details. The truth always comes out in the long run.
Professor Arthur Butz published his famous work "The Hoax of the 20th
Century" in 1977 detailing a very solid argument against this war
propaganda. Dr. Butz pointed out that the world population of Jews
remained at about 16 million before and after the war. He also noted
that half a million Jews remained in Paris after four years of German
occupation. Both these facts strongly suggest the Holocaust is a
fraud, but the political power of the Jews has suppressed and punished
any public questioning of the Holocaust to this day. David Irving
joined the ranks of Revisionist historians several years ago and went
from a famous successful author to a pariah thanks to persecution by
the Jews.

The Institute for Historical Review has done great work exposing the
Holocaust as a great historical fraud. Anyone interested in looking
for historical truth should visit their website. It's a shock for many
people to see how much propaganda we've been force fed.

http://www.ihr.org

http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Michael Ejercito
2011-05-25 16:06:35 UTC
Permalink
On May 25, 3:35 am, Topaz <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
> by James Buchanan
>
> Let's say the Germans merely removed the Jews from positions of
> political power and banned them from the legal profession. Germany
> went from devastating economic poverty in 1932 to full employment just
> a couple years later.  If an incredible economic improvement can be
> achieved, merely by removing the Jews from power (and replacing them
> with patriotic nationalists), then every Gentile nation in the world
> should give this a try.
>
> Obviously the Jews don't want anyone else getting the idea of removing
> them to create prosperity. The Jews control the mass media in most
> Western countries. Most people don't know about the Balfour
> Declaration. During World War One, Zionist Jews offered to use their
> control of the press to bring America into World War One if Britain
> would promise them Palestine. This offer was dubbed the Balfour
> Declaration. If the Jews had enough media control and influence to
> push America into World War One in 1917, what else have they done with
> their power?
>
> It was a huge embarrassment for the Jews to see Germany so prosperous
> in the mid-1930s after removing them from power. They considered this
> a dangerous precedent. To deal with this "problem" the Jewish World
> Congress declared war on Germany in 1933. This declaration of war at
> least encouraged a world-wide boycott against Germany and at worst
> encouraged other nations of the world to become hostile toward
> Germany. (The Jews curiously sanctioned the Germans before the Germans
> passed any laws restricting the Jews.) More importantly the Jews
> pushed vicious anti-German slander in all the Jewish-owned newspapers
> in the West in the years leading up to World War Two. The Communist
> mass murder of 30 million people in Russia and the Ukraine received
> almost no publicity in the Jewish media. Most people in the West only
> heard a serious mention of these Communist mass murders beginning in
> the 1980s. Instead, the Jewish media focused all their hatred and
> agitation against Germany and its allies.
>
> After six years of relentless agitation, the Jews pushed England and
> France into war with Germany. Only two years later, FDR and his cabal
> of Jews provoked a war with Japan (and Germany).
>
> Naturally, the Jews did not want future historians to say: "World War
> Two was provoked by the Jewish media in retaliation for Germany
> removing the Jews from power." The Jews needed a new reason for World
> War Two. A reason that painted their enemies as unquestionably evil.
> So they invented the Holocaust.
>
> The Holocaust stood mostly unchallenged for decades after the war
> because people feared being branded "Nazi-sympathizers" for
> questioning its details. The truth always comes out in the long run.
> Professor Arthur Butz published his famous work "The Hoax of the 20th
> Century" in 1977 detailing a very solid argument against this war
> propaganda. Dr. Butz pointed out that the world population of Jews
> remained at about 16 million before and after the war. He also noted
> that half a million Jews remained in Paris after four years of German
> occupation. Both these facts strongly suggest the Holocaust is a
> fraud, but the political power of the Jews has suppressed and punished
> any public questioning of the Holocaust to this day. David Irving
> joined the ranks of Revisionist historians several years ago and went
> from a famous successful author to a pariah thanks to persecution by
> the Jews.
>
> The Institute for Historical Review has done great work exposing the
> Holocaust as a great historical fraud. Anyone interested in looking
> for historical truth should visit their website. It's a shock for many
> people to see how much propaganda we've been force fed.
>
> http://www.ihr.org
>
> http://www.ihr.org/   http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org
>
> http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
This article explains how Holocausts happen.

How does a Holocaust happen?

by Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Herald
March 30, 1992

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/5710/how-does-a-holocaust-happen


ONE DAY 16 OR 17 YEARS AGO, my father, who rarely blows up over
anything, lost his temper over a piece of bread.

It was lunchtime, and my siblings and I were goofing around at the
table. One of us, in play, threw a slice of bread at another. My
father exploded.

"What's the matter with you? That's food! Don't you ever let me see
you treat food like again!"

I remember being startled by his angry outburst. The words, however,
didn't really register. It wasn't until much later -- years later --
that I finally understood that flash of anger: To a man who has lived
through hunger, seen those around him die of starvation, nearly
starved to death himself -- to such a man, a piece of bread is not a
joke.

On Passover, which ended a few days ago, observant Jews do not eat
ordinary bread. Instead they eat matzo -- the dry, flat, unleavened
"bread of affliction" meant to remind them of their forebears'
deliverance from slavery in Egypt. At the ceremonial Passover meal,
they read aloud from the Haggadah, which tells the story of the
Exodus:

For in every single generation, they rise against us to annihilate
us.

In all the generations of Jewish history, never did "they" come as
close to succeeding as the Germans did in this very century, one brief
generation ago.

On the last day of Passover in 1944, the Nazis arrived in my father's
village of Legina -- a microscopic dot in the Slovak countryside, hard
by the border with Hungary. The knock on the Jakubovices' window came
on a Sunday morning before daybreak; like Legina's other Jews, they
were ordered to gather their things and be ready to leave in half an
hour's time. They were put on horse-drawn wagons and carried to
Satoraljaujhely ("Ujhely" for short), a large Hungarian town a few
miles away.

For six weeks, they stayed in Ujhely's Jewish ghetto, which grew
increasingly crowded as Jews from all over the region were brought in.

After a month, the transports began. A tenth of the ghetto's
population was removed at a time; my father and his family were taken
away in the third transport. On a Thursday, with only the belongings
they could carry by hand, they and 3,000 other Jews were marched
through the streets to the train station -- to the waiting boxcars. As
each car filled, its doors were chained and padlocked.

They were bound for a place called Auschwitz.

The train heading north into Poland, my father assumed, was taking him
and his family and the other Jews who'd been corralled into Ujhely to
a work site somewhere.

How could he have known otherwise?

How could he have guessed that he and all those boxcars crammed with
Jews were just a tiny fragment of the vast works that had been
constructed to annihilate the Jews of Europe? How could he have
understood that all over the continent, Jews by the millions were
being uprooted from their homelands -- lands, in some cases, where
Jews had dwelled for 900 years -- to be sent to special killing
grounds where all the science, industry, and manpower at Germany's
command would be pooled for purposes of quickly and efficiently
exterminating them? How could he have imagined that the world would
allow this horror to take place -- a horror so unprecedented that a
new word, genocide, had to be invented to contain it? How could he
have dreamed that in less than seven years, two out of every three
Jews in Europe would be a corpse, or the ashes of a corpse?

The train out of Ujhely moved for three days. It stopped early on a
Sunday morning, six weeks exactly since that knock on the window in
Legina. The doors were unchained. Suddenly there were screaming
guards, barking dogs, floodlights. The boxcar opened onto a ramp, at
the top of which a man with a crop in his hand waved people to the
right and to the left.

My grandparents, David and Leah Jakubovic, were waved to the right. So
were their 10-year-old son, Yrvin, and 8-year-old daughter, Alice.
They died in the gas chamber that day.

My father's teen-aged brother, Zoltan, was gassed a few days later.
His sister Franceska suffered horribly for a while; she died the
following spring.

Somehow my father survived Auschwitz, the death march to Mauthausen,
the camps at Melk and Ebensee. Somehow he survived the typhoid fever,
the unstoppable diarrhea, the starvation that reduced him -- at 19
years of age -- to 65 pounds.

I cannot explain the miracle of his survival, let alone the fact that
he can still laugh, and love. That was -- is -- God's doing.

But the Holocaust was man's. The Germans could get away with
systematically butchering 6 million Jews because good men and women,
through their indifference, let them get away with it.

For in every single generation generation, they rise against us to
annihilate us.

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day, a part of the struggle against
indifference, a reminder that what could never happen has happened.

And can again.

For only one thing can stop a holocaust: memory. On this one day, at
least, let us remember the millions of innocents who died, and honor
the few who survived. But above all let us reflect, if only briefly,
that in the end nothing can shield us from the building of a new
Auschwitz except our undimmed rage at the old Auschwitz.

(Jeff Jacoby is the Boston Herald's chief editorial writer.)
Topaz
2011-05-26 20:59:38 UTC
Permalink
The Holocaust Cowing and Milking of Nations By Alex Linder

'Holocaust': The Means by Which the Richest Group in the World
Contrives to Cow and Milk the Rest of the Us in the Guise of Victims
who are Persecuted and Due Eternal Restitution.

Reading through a thousand blog reactions to Duke v Blitzer on CNN, a
generalization crystallizes. People confuse being told something six
million times with knowing something. They are not the same. "It ain't
what you don't know, it's what you know that just ain't so." The
average man 'knows' the Holocaust exists because:

1) everybody uses the term;
2) he has seen photos of stacked bodies;
3) he has read Anne Frank's book;
4) authorities agree that questioning any of this is 'hate.'

In other words, the average man believes in the Holocaust for no
logical reason, but out of simple mammalian conformity.
'Holocaust' is a loaded, dishonest term. You can't debate with
undefined terms without making a joke of yourself, but the average man
does not realize this. It is the part of public school, reinforced by
mass media, to disable his thinking so that he's worse positioned to
defend himself because he can't understand how he is manipulated to
accept the illogical. Debate in the mass media of a democracy is
nothing but the shuffling of loaded terms.

'Holocaust' is no ordinary noun. Rather, it is a loaded gun leveled at
the head of the West and the rest. Give them their money and their
pride of place or get your head and reputation blown off. You will
notice that never, ever does debate in the captive media condescend to
deconstruct the Zionist Privilege embodied in and sanctified by the
designer label 'Holocaust.' Worship the Zionists and submit to their
demands - that is what the term Holocaust means.

A demand for special privilege protected by a shell of pseudo-history;
that is an objective description of the term. The heart of the
'Holocaust,' taking at face value the term's pretension to historical
designation, is the claim that six million Jews were murdered by Nazi
Germany, most of them by gassing. The evidence for the gassing is
never discussed. Photos of crematories and bodies stacked like cord
wood are shown. No context or explanation of the reason for showing
them is given. The connection is to be assumed. But never is any
ordinary evidence, let alone proof, of the gassing allegation
advanced. That Jews were gassed is treated as though it were already
proved and therefore unquestionable, save by the depraved. Thus, the
practical job of the media and the well intentioned everyman is to
smear and ostracize anybody who argues against settled truth. We all
know that Jews were gassed, and that those who say otherwise are
deniers driven by hate. But it ain't so just because "everybody knows"
it is.

We are told repeatedly that the 'Holocaust' is both the worst thing
that ever happened and the best documented thing in human history. We
are to take these assertions on authority, since no genuine debate is
allowed.

There are men who can prove the 'Holocaust' is a Big Lie. You can find
them in jail. Their imprisonment is scarcely mentioned in the mass
media. Their imprisonment goes unlamented by the mass columnists. To
discuss these men and their work would endanger the Propa-sphere the
media construct. They must disappear. But we know, mass media. And
we're not going away. We're getting louder and stronger. And there's
nothing you can do to stop us.



http://www.ihr.org/ http://www.natvan.com http://www.nsm88.org

http://heretical.com/ http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/
Loading...