Notices
Results 1 to 97 of 97
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By kojax
  • 1 Post By Trumptor
  • 1 Post By kojax
  • 1 Post By iceaura

Thread: 1930s: Why did Jewish organizations declare War on Germany?

  1. #1 1930s: Why did Jewish organizations declare War on Germany? 
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Title should read 1930s: Why did Jewish organizations boycott Germany?

    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway


    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany* and a boycott, but...


    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?


    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York(London) paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)

    *The title may be new paper sensationalism/figure of speech and not an actual quote (I dont have exact information)


    Last edited by icewendigo; December 22nd, 2011 at 09:36 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Historically, Germany was one of the more tolerant European nations towards Jews. At least such is Prince's understanding. Yiddish is based largely upon German vocabulary, not so? And in Altneuland, Herzl's very important early Zionist novel, the Zionist state features German, Yiddish, AND Hebrew as common languages.

    Altneuland - Theodor Herzl's Pluralistic Zionist Utopia - 1902


    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway


    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany and a boycott, but...


    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?


    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)
    You're misrepresenting the case a bit. After Hitler became chancelor, Jewish businesses were being harassed and picketed in Germany, and the police refused to do anything about it. There was also a systematic campaign of vandalism and violence being perpetrated immediately after his rise to power. The response was a boycott against an already oppressive regime. Also, there is a big difference between the Jewish call to morally object to economic dealings with fascist Germany, and the German response of painting stars of David on Jewish businesses and stationing guards outside to prevent customers from entering.

    Also, Jews could hardly declare war on Nazi Germany, since they barely managed to even organize a march in protest in the US. There was no unified leader of the Jewish community, but multiple different groups with varying levels of association. This is an old line of anti-semitic historical revision.
    "I almost went to bed
    without remembering
    the four white violets
    I put in the button-hole
    of your green sweater

    and how i kissed you then
    and you kissed me
    shy as though I'd
    never been your lover "
    - Leonard Cohen
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    The Nazis rose to power with a specifically anti-Semitic agenda. By this time Hitler had written Mein Kampf outlining his plans to exterminate the Jews. In 1933 Hitler was given dictatorial powers. And you are wondering why the Jews were worried? What the hell is going on here?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Some timeline info, who did what to whom first.

    As one can deduce, via arithmetic, boycotts organized by national German anti-Jewish organizations against Jewish businesses predated, by years in some cases, boycotts by international pro-Jewish organizations against national German businesses.

    The false dichotomy of "German" vs "Jew" was solidly entrenched in the public discourse of Germany, long before March of 1933.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    So Icewendigo, the question remains, whence came your anti-Jewish take on history? Do you now feel educated by the responses, or will you attempt to justify the implicit anti-semitism of your original post?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway


    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany and a boycott, but...


    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?


    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)
    You're misrepresenting the case a bit. After Hitler became chancelor, Jewish businesses were being harassed and picketed in Germany, and the police refused to do anything about it. There was also a systematic campaign of vandalism and violence being perpetrated immediately after his rise to power. The response was a boycott against an already oppressive regime. Also, there is a big difference between the Jewish call to morally object to economic dealings with fascist Germany, and the German response of painting stars of David on Jewish businesses and stationing guards outside to prevent customers from entering.
    I think you're not looking far enough back in history. I'm pretty sure the boycott in question happened around the time of WW 1. A very long, long time before Hitler, the Nazis, or anyone like that had ever entered the scene.

    A lot of Hitler's platform had to do with the perceived reasons why WW 1 had gone so badly.


    Also, Jews could hardly declare war on Nazi Germany, since they barely managed to even organize a march in protest in the US. There was no unified leader of the Jewish community, but multiple different groups with varying levels of association. This is an old line of anti-semitic historical revision.
    Probably their power base was much stronger in Europe than it was in the USA. We like to think of ourselves as being so very tolerant, but America was highly racist in those days. Jim Crow laws were still in place against black people. Have you ever heard of German Jim Crow laws prior to Hitler?

    The fact their skin tone was white allowed them to dodge a lot of the hatred, but if they went around making a big fuss about their heritage, I'm sure groups like the KKK would take notice of them.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Sheesh, anti-jewish take on history, implicit anti-semitism. You ask a question about Goth and Romans theres no one coming out of the wood work with "hey how come you are anti-roman, you dont like romans is that it" or "where did the implicit anti-gothic inuendos came from?".



    Ok so people say the timeline is wrong, I am surprised. I'll have to look into it.

    "By this time Hitler had written Mein Kampf outlining his plans to exterminate the Jews. "
    Everyone's an expert, I havent read it but I guess I'll have to if I have time eventually, to separate what sounds like hyperbolic claims from fact, but then the league of reactionary correctness will go completely batshit insane ("OMG, he read Mein Kampf! hes a Nazi!!!"). Personally the more people go batshit about a subject the more I get suspicious about the mainstream claims and official narrative.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    "Judea Declares War on Germany" "March 24, 1933 issue of The Daily Express of London"

    "Germany took place on 1 April 1933, soon after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor on 30 January 1933"
    "The Nazi regime was sufficiently concerned by the boycott that they protested internationally and on April 1, 1933 also organized a (one day) counter-boycott of Jewish business in Germany. "

    March 24 comes before April.

    I dont know I' ll have to look into it further
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    I havent read it but I guess I'll have to if I have time eventually, to separate what sounds like hyperbolic claims from fact, but then the league of reactionary correctness will go completely batshit insane ("OMG, he read Mein Kampf! hes a Nazi!!!").
    I've read it, though not in the original German, and I have a copy in my library.

    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    Personally the more people go batshit about a subject the more I get suspicious about the mainstream claims and official narrative.
    The only person going batshit here at present is you, icewendigo. Others have simply pointed out that your knowledge of the time line is flawed and the conclusions you have drawn from that faulty timeline are necessarily warped. Not every rock conceals a conspiracy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    So lets see.
    January: A crazy Christian, who through his writings and speeches over the past ten years and blamed every ill of the German peoples and opened the Jewish memory of a 1000 years of Jewish persecution by German Christians gets a into a position of power.

    February: A German Newspaper who's motto is "The Jews are our misfortune" becomes the official newspaper of the NAZI party, who now IS THE GOVERNMENT.
    Early Marsh NAZI para-military branches of NAZI party instigate riots against the Jews (if that's not a declaration of war...what is?)
    The crazy anti-Semite man gains absolute power.

    And you infer that the Jewish boycotts weren't provoked?
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    In a televised documentary I saw Hitler was quoted as saying the 'Jews' wanted him to attack Russia. I have read that a 'Jew' was one of Hitler's inner circle of advisors. It makes sense that the 'Jews' wanted Hitler to destroy the Russian communist government because so much 'Jewish' property had been nationalized after the revolution. However, who is a Jew? Is a Jew a citizen of the state of Israel? No .. my arab catholic son-in-law was/is a citizen of Israel. Is a Jew a race? No, a Jew (and a Christian for that matter) is a believer in the promise to Abraham; plus, under the Mosaic law a Jew is any person who converts to Judaism. Is a person a convert to Judaism just because he has a Rabbi circumsize him? No. He has to believe in his heart. So .. please identify for me a Jew.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    [QUOTE=Lynx_Fox;297435]So lets see.
    January: A crazy Christian, who through his writings and speeches over the past ten years and blamed every ill of the German peoples and opened the Jewish memory of a 1000 years of Jewish persecution by German Christians gets a into a position of power.
    QUOTE]

    So, you are saying Hitler was a Christian? If so, why would he lead a military empire when Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom was of this world, then would my followers fight. But my kingdom is not hence.'

    Where the Crusaders Chrstians just because an armanent maker with orders from the King painted crosses on armour? How could they be Chistians if they loved their enemies, as Jesus commanded? Is killing someone loving them? Isn't it time all the world's troubles were blamed on someone else other than Christians? Why not the Soviets? Or the Chinese? Or the Americans? Or the Canadians? Or the Jews? Or the Poor? or the rich? Or women? Yes. Let's blame women!
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    The Nazis rose to power with a specifically anti-Semitic agenda. By this time Hitler had written Mein Kampf outlining his plans to exterminate the Jews. In 1933 Hitler was given dictatorial powers. And you are wondering why the Jews were worried? What the hell is going on here?
    Ah. So you have read Mein Kamph?
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway


    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany and a boycott, but...


    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?


    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)
    You're misrepresenting the case a bit. After Hitler became chancelor, Jewish businesses were being harassed and picketed in Germany, and the police refused to do anything about it. There was also a systematic campaign of vandalism and violence being perpetrated immediately after his rise to power. The response was a boycott against an already oppressive regime. Also, there is a big difference between the Jewish call to morally object to economic dealings with fascist Germany, and the German response of painting stars of David on Jewish businesses and stationing guards outside to prevent customers from entering.
    I think you're not looking far enough back in history. I'm pretty sure the boycott in question happened around the time of WW 1. A very long, long time before Hitler, the Nazis, or anyone like that had ever entered the scene.

    A lot of Hitler's platform had to do with the perceived reasons why WW 1 had gone so badly.


    Also, Jews could hardly declare war on Nazi Germany, since they barely managed to even organize a march in protest in the US. There was no unified leader of the Jewish community, but multiple different groups with varying levels of association. This is an old line of anti-semitic historical revision.
    Probably their power base was much stronger in Europe than it was in the USA. We like to think of ourselves as being so very tolerant, but America was highly racist in those days. Jim Crow laws were still in place against black people. Have you ever heard of German Jim Crow laws prior to Hitler?

    The fact their skin tone was white allowed them to dodge a lot of the hatred, but if they went around making a big fuss about their heritage, I'm sure groups like the KKK would take notice of them.
    Actually USA was significantly anti-Semitic during period in question, Jews were regularly denounced by Ford in print and one Father Coughlin over airwaves of radio broadcast. KKK was militantly anti-Semitic and not above lynching Jews.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    The Nazis rose to power with a specifically anti-Semitic agenda. By this time Hitler had written Mein Kampf outlining his plans to exterminate the Jews. In 1933 Hitler was given dictatorial powers. And you are wondering why the Jews were worried? What the hell is going on here?
    Ah. So you have read Mein Kamph?
    Yeah, he can probably even spell it. There is no such thing as forbidden knowledge, or would you have us BURN every volume?
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In a televised documentary I saw Hitler was quoted as saying the 'Jews' wanted him to attack Russia. I have read that a 'Jew' was one of Hitler's inner circle of advisors. It makes sense that the 'Jews' wanted Hitler to destroy the Russian communist government because so much 'Jewish' property had been nationalized after the revolution. However, who is a Jew? Is a Jew a citizen of the state of Israel? No .. my arab catholic son-in-law was/is a citizen of Israel. Is a Jew a race? No, a Jew (and a Christian for that matter) is a believer in the promise to Abraham; plus, under the Mosaic law a Jew is any person who converts to Judaism. Is a person a convert to Judaism just because he has a Rabbi circumsize him? No. He has to believe in his heart. So .. please identify for me a Jew.
    Many leaders of Bolshevik revolution were supposedly Jewish, and Hitler was militantly anti-Communist, much like Nixon in early years. Of course, such bias could be overcome when expedient in the case of each of these evil men. This lends support to icewendigo's observation that truth is difficult to discern at times.

    The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime

    Such facts, if facts they are, are quite embarrassing for world Jewry and would naturally be suppressed to the degree possible.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Ah. So you have read Mein Kamph?
    I'd hope so, I had to read it in High school and most Americans should have at least been exposed to key sections as a lesson for the future. Of course I read a translation.

    As for being a Christian, anyone who's read Mein Kamph already knows that is it full of proclamations that he is Christian and builds extensively on Christian verses, imagery, and history to make his case. He considered himself a Christian in those years, and the most Christian nation on Earth, including most of the Christian church leaders agreed with him. As did the Jews.

    I don't think you can make a good case that he wasn't Christian until much later, after Parkinson's disease and attempted assassination messed up his head and Germany had suffered the defeat at Stalingrad; by then you could find support that his faith wained.

    On a personal note I considered not mentioning it because I thought it might be offensive to some, but it was so Germain to the point of views of the Jews in 1933, leaving it out would have missed a big piece and been intellectually cowardice. But I'd rather not turn this into a thread about his faith--all that's important is he was considered Christian by the Jews and by his rhetoric willing to go down the same horrendous road as many other Christians going back to the 11th century genocide of Jews.
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; December 16th, 2011 at 03:12 PM.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post

    I think you're not looking far enough back in history. I'm pretty sure the boycott in question happened around the time of WW 1. A very long, long time before Hitler, the Nazis, or anyone like that had ever entered the scene.

    A lot of Hitler's platform had to do with the perceived reasons why WW 1 had gone so badly.
    There was no organized Jewish boycott of German goods during WW1. Why would there be?

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Probably their power base was much stronger in Europe than it was in the USA. We like to think of ourselves as being so very tolerant, but America was highly racist in those days. Jim Crow laws were still in place against black people. Have you ever heard of German Jim Crow laws prior to Hitler?

    The fact their skin tone was white allowed them to dodge a lot of the hatred, but if they went around making a big fuss about their heritage, I'm sure groups like the KKK would take notice of them.
    The 1933 boycott was orchestrated by American Jewish organizations in New York.
    "I almost went to bed
    without remembering
    the four white violets
    I put in the button-hole
    of your green sweater

    and how i kissed you then
    and you kissed me
    shy as though I'd
    never been your lover "
    - Leonard Cohen
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    "Judea Declares War on Germany" "March 24, 1933 issue of The Daily Express of London"

    "Germany took place on 1 April 1933, soon after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor on 30 January 1933"
    "The Nazi regime was sufficiently concerned by the boycott that they protested internationally and on April 1, 1933 also organized a (one day) counter-boycott of Jewish business in Germany. "

    March 24 comes before April.

    I dont know I' ll have to look into it further
    I provided you with an easily obtained Wikipedia link that outlines the basic relevant sequence of events. If you haven't even got as far as Wikipedia in your "research", you have quite a bit to do.

    You might start by labeling your source for the OP question as the worthless pile of lies it apparently is, and avoid taking anything found there as reliable or informative in any way.

    Anti-Semitism, to the point of organized assault and murder of Jews, goes back hundreds of years in Austria (where Hitler and several other high level Nazis came from), much of the rest of Germany, and many other rigidly Christian regions of Europe. There was no uncertainty about the Nazi Party's religious affiliations or political agenda, only surprise by some at their totalitarian approach - their total rejection of political ethics and human decency.

    So, you are saying Hitler was a Christian? If so, why would he lead a military empire
    Christian leaders of military powers and wannabe military powers litter the European historical landscape of the past thousand years and more - they are more rule than exception. Christians - overt and serious Christians - currently dominate the military leadership of the US, the world's foremost military power (the huge fundie church currently associated with the Air Force command structure, in Colorado, merely one example). Christianity is among the most heavily militarized religions the world has ever seen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    So, you are saying Hitler was a Christian? If so, why would he lead a military empire when Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom was of this world, then would my followers fight. But my kingdom is not hence.'
    You could ask the same of pretty much all European (and New World) kings, queens, emperors, popes and assorted other rules for at least the last 1700 years.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by The Finger Prince View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    The Nazis rose to power with a specifically anti-Semitic agenda. By this time Hitler had written Mein Kampf outlining his plans to exterminate the Jews. In 1933 Hitler was given dictatorial powers. And you are wondering why the Jews were worried? What the hell is going on here?
    Ah. So you have read Mein Kamph?
    Yeah, he can probably even spell it. There is no such thing as forbidden knowledge, or would you have us BURN every volume?
    The Mein Kamph on the web is not accessible. It has, apparently, not been allowed in bookstores in Europe since the war. Perhaps the propanganda doesn't match the book? Spelling? I spelled it as I saw it spelled. I haven't been much interested in that era of history. I see it as just another example of human atrocities, and there are many. Were I to say I see it as a fullfillment of Old Testament prophecy, I might get burned at the stake. In Canada, there were geographical areas of afflent housing where Jews were not allowed right up until, I believe it was, the 1960s.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    "Judea Declares War on Germany" "March 24, 1933 issue of The Daily Express of London"

    "Germany took place on 1 April 1933, soon after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor on 30 January 1933"
    "The Nazi regime was sufficiently concerned by the boycott that they protested internationally and on April 1, 1933 also organized a (one day) counter-boycott of Jewish business in Germany. "

    March 24 comes before April.

    I dont know I' ll have to look into it further
    I provided you with an easily obtained Wikipedia link that outlines the basic relevant sequence of events. If you haven't even got as far as Wikipedia in your "research", you have quite a bit to do.

    You might start by labeling your source for the OP question as the worthless pile of lies it apparently is, and avoid taking anything found there as reliable or informative in any way.

    Anti-Semitism, to the point of organized assault and murder of Jews, goes back hundreds of years in Austria (where Hitler and several other high level Nazis came from), much of the rest of Germany, and many other rigidly Christian regions of Europe. There was no uncertainty about the Nazi Party's religious affiliations or political agenda, only surprise by some at their totalitarian approach - their total rejection of political ethics and human decency.

    So, you are saying Hitler was a Christian? If so, why would he lead a military empire
    Christian leaders of military powers and wannabe military powers litter the European historical landscape of the past thousand years and more - they are more rule than exception. Christians - overt and serious Christians - currently dominate the military leadership of the US, the world's foremost military power (the huge fundie church currently associated with the Air Force command structure, in Colorado, merely one example). Christianity is among the most heavily militarized religions the world has ever seen.
    Because they say they are Christians, does that make it so? Satan has used lies and distortions of truth since he began his war against God. Are Jehovah's Witnesses Christians? They do not participate in wars. Are Mennonites and Hutterites Christians? They do not participate in wars. Actually, a Roman Catholic told me she was not a Christian, but a Roman Catholic. Could that be a generalization of all of denominationalism?
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    The Mein Kamph on the web is not accessible.
    Really? http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt

    It has, apparently, not been allowed in bookstores in Europe since the war.
    I assume just in Germany where, perhaps not surprisingly, they have laws against all things Nazi.

    Perhaps the propanganda doesn't match the book?
    What propaganda?

    I might get burned at the stake.
    When did that last happen to anyone?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Because they say they are Christians, does that make it so?
    I would think so. Or should we ask you to go through all the history textbooks marking which of the people claiming to be Christians are True Christians and which are not? Wasn't there something about, "judge not, unless you be judged"...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post

    I think you're not looking far enough back in history. I'm pretty sure the boycott in question happened around the time of WW 1. A very long, long time before Hitler, the Nazis, or anyone like that had ever entered the scene.

    A lot of Hitler's platform had to do with the perceived reasons why WW 1 had gone so badly.
    There was no organized Jewish boycott of German goods during WW1. Why would there be?
    I was mistaking it for this:

    Stab-in-the-back legend - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    And it is just a legend. There was no deliberate Jewish boycott during WW1, though I'm sure adherents the "Stab-in-the-back" legend of Germany's defeat in WW1 would argue otherwise.

    When you read pro-Jewish blogs, you find that actually a large number of Jewish people fought in the war, as an attempt to prove their status as belonging. Kind of unfortunate that it was so easily forgotten, though I can see why.

    Antisemitism in History: World War I

    Antisemitism in History: World War I

    [/Kojax's personal unsupported opinon] I think the Zionists who run Israel conspire against their own people first and foremost. Those poor saps get caught between one group that has it in for them, and the other that has it in for the first group. [/Kojax's personal unsupported opinion]
    The Finger Prince likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus
    Because they say they are Christians, does that make it so?
    It's pretty good supporting evidence. If their entire society and surrounding population agrees with them, they are members of a Christian church, they observe the holidays and rituals, then the matter is settled.

    How else would anyone be labeled a Christian?

    I notice that no one has brought up the question of whether the people boycotting the Nazis were "real Jews". They said they were, society agreed, the matter was settled.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    " you find that actually a large number of Jewish people fought in the war "

    Can't find a reference just now - but there were certainly some WW1 German armed forces units that had kosher kitchens.

    Apparently Jews in the armed services were taken for granted to the extent that their dietary rules were properly accommodated.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4
    It's ridiculous that people who supposedly have some education can sit around and be so blatantly bigoted. How is it ok to say that Hitler was a bad Christian. What if somebody said Stalin was a bad Athiest resposible for millions of deaths. Or that Enver Pasha was a bad Muslim responsible for the genocide of millions of "Orthodox Christian" Armenians? Was Alexander the Great a bad Pagan for the atrocities throughout Asia Minor? A bigoted view by people attacking the easiest target they know won't fight back. Everybody is afraid to say anything against Islam or Judaism for fear of retribution, but Christians are a popular target because there is no retribution and it's almost become chic to attack Christianity.

    Hitler was a bad PERSON, of which there are many of all races and religions. I'd like for one of you bigots to read about the Christian woman, Mother Teresa, and her life from her meager upbringing in Yugoslavia to her enormous contributions to people in a far away land of a totally different faith, her selflessness and her strength and the thousands of other good Christians that have dedicated their lives to doing a whole lot more good than any of you will ever do for the world.

    Christians have been persecuted against since the ancient Roman Empire. They still live in fear all over Africa, parts of Asia and the Pacific, and now even in parts of Europe. I can only assume this will be a growing problem as Christianity wanes, since most Christians are so by name alone and don't believe in most of the teachings (myself included) while other religions are growing rapidly.

    For those that were sick during this important kindergarten teaching let me summarize...

    There are good and bad... men, women, blacks, whites, hispanics, Germans, Russians, Americans, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Muslims, rich, poor, and eveybody in between. I haven't met anyone yet that has said, "whew, good thing I'm predisposed to being a good person." You choose to be a good person or a bad person. I've blabbed on enough, now back to your crucifiction of Christians on this perfect time of year, I'm sure it gives you a nice warm feeling inside.
    Harold14370 likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    The relationship between Christianity and anti-semitism isn't arbitrary though. Martin Luther, who stands at the base of most German protestant sects, wrote extensive anti-Jewish tracts. It's easier today to dissociate them because the antisemitic discourses are largely racialized, but historically they have often been explicitly about differences of religion. In many ways the Nazi party was in some ways a spiritual successor to the antisemitic Christian Social Party, which had official connections to the Lutheran church (its founder was the Lutheran minister to the Kaiser). This is often difficult to appreciate from those used to the more secularized politics of America or the British Commonwealth, but officially protestant or Catholic parties are a mainstay of many European right-wing politics.
    "I almost went to bed
    without remembering
    the four white violets
    I put in the button-hole
    of your green sweater

    and how i kissed you then
    and you kissed me
    shy as though I'd
    never been your lover "
    - Leonard Cohen
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    In the days when anti-semitism really spread, Europe was dominated by a kind of caste system. If you were the son of blacksmith, you became a blacksmith. If you were the son of a shoemaker you became a shoemaker. If you were the son of a merchant or banker, you became a merchant or banker. And a highly disproportionate number of Jewish people were merchants and bankers.

    Thing is, people instinctively dislike the "middle man". The value they add to the economy is hard to perceive and sometimes not equal to the money they collect from you, so in bad economic times people start wanting to squeeze them. I don't think it had anything to do with wearing funny hats or picky eating habits. Those are just scape goats the victim group uses to make themselves feel like their persecution had a trivial cause. (Not saying it was fair for them to be picked on, just blaming it on a silly thing like a hat is kind of overplaying one's hand.)
    Amaroq likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    [QUOTE=Aristarchus in Exile;297450]
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    So lets see.
    January: A crazy Christian, who through his writings and speeches over the past ten years and blamed every ill of the German peoples and opened the Jewish memory of a 1000 years of Jewish persecution by German Christians gets a into a position of power.
    QUOTE]

    So, you are saying Hitler was a Christian? If so, why would he lead a military empire when Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom was of this world, then would my followers fight. But my kingdom is not hence.'

    Where the Crusaders Chrstians just because an armanent maker with orders from the King painted crosses on armour? How could they be Chistians if they loved their enemies, as Jesus commanded? Is killing someone loving them? Isn't it time all the world's troubles were blamed on someone else other than Christians? Why not the Soviets? Or the Chinese? Or the Americans? Or the Canadians? Or the Jews? Or the Poor? or the rich? Or women? Yes. Let's blame women!
    In Matthew 10:32-34, is stated: "32 Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. 34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword."

    Therefore Jesus Himself seems to be anti-Semitic, like His Father before Him, read the Old Testament for details of numerous divine punishments inflicted on the Jews for their obstinate refusal to honor God with sufficient fidelity.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    This will blow stupid Anglophiles away, but when Jewish refugees came across Channel to UK to avoid being put into concentration camps, where do you think British put these desperate supplicants?

    In concentration camps.

    Is true, also true is fact that British INVENTED concentration camps in Boer War.

    Dreadfully civilized chaps, what?
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Trumptor View Post
    It's ridiculous that people who supposedly have some education can sit around and be so blatantly bigoted. How is it ok to say that Hitler was a bad Christian. What if somebody said Stalin was a bad Athiest resposible for millions of deaths. Or that Enver Pasha was a bad Muslim responsible for the genocide of millions of "Orthodox Christian" Armenians? Was Alexander the Great a bad Pagan for the atrocities throughout Asia Minor? A bigoted view by people attacking the easiest target they know won't fight back. Everybody is afraid to say anything against Islam or Judaism for fear of retribution, but Christians are a popular target because there is no retribution and it's almost become chic to attack Christianity.

    Hitler was a bad PERSON, of which there are many of all races and religions. I'd like for one of you bigots to read about the Christian woman, Mother Teresa, and her life from her meager upbringing in Yugoslavia to her enormous contributions to people in a far away land of a totally different faith, her selflessness and her strength and the thousands of other good Christians that have dedicated their lives to doing a whole lot more good than any of you will ever do for the world.

    Christians have been persecuted against since the ancient Roman Empire. They still live in fear all over Africa, parts of Asia and the Pacific, and now even in parts of Europe. I can only assume this will be a growing problem as Christianity wanes, since most Christians are so by name alone and don't believe in most of the teachings (myself included) while other religions are growing rapidly.

    For those that were sick during this important kindergarten teaching let me summarize...

    There are good and bad... men, women, blacks, whites, hispanics, Germans, Russians, Americans, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Muslims, rich, poor, and eveybody in between. I haven't met anyone yet that has said, "whew, good thing I'm predisposed to being a good person." You choose to be a good person or a bad person. I've blabbed on enough, now back to your crucifiction of Christians on this perfect time of year, I'm sure it gives you a nice warm feeling inside.
    You mean "crucifixion", dotcomrade. And such martyrs should be pleased to suffer for Christ's sake, according to His word, so what the Hell are you bitching about? Let's not get into the Reformation, shall we? And just so you know, there are still plenty of Christians who do NOT see this season as anything special at all and in fact disapprove of this seasonal practice. They went to death camps too, and nobody gave them a country for their very own, or even a lousy t-shirt.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    " you find that actually a large number of Jewish people fought in the war "

    Can't find a reference just now - but there were certainly some WW1 German armed forces units that had kosher kitchens.

    Apparently Jews in the armed services were taken for granted to the extent that their dietary rules were properly accommodated.
    There were Jewish officers in WWII who became "Aryan" through administrative means, as they were too valuable to replace. Besides, taking care of one's own is a cardinal military virtue, essential for morale. Haber was ardent German nationalist who happened to be Jew. Very ironic, and in fact, tragic. Read more:

    Amazon.com: The Alchemy of Air: A Jewish Genius, a Doomed Tycoon, and the Scientific Discovery That Fed the World but Fueled the Rise of Hitler (9780307351784): Thomas Hager: Books
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    It's ridiculous that people who supposedly have some education can sit around and be so blatantly bigoted. How is it ok to say that Hitler was a bad Christian.
    How can anyone downplay the importance of the Christian religion and its institutions in Hitler's rise, alliances and support, and choice of enemies? These were overtly and professedly Christian, including the selection of the Jews as his target of scapegoating and blame.
    Everybody is afraid to say anything against Islam or Judaism for fear of retribution, but Christians are a popular target because there is no retribution and it's almost become chic to attack Christianity.
    Any idea what planet this post is from?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Ah. So you have read Mein Kamph?
    I'd hope so, I had to read it in High school and most Americans should have at least been exposed to key sections as a lesson for the future. Of course I read a translation.

    As for being a Christian, anyone who's read Mein Kamph already knows that is it full of proclamations that he is Christian and builds extensively on Christian verses, imagery, and history to make his case. He considered himself a Christian in those years, and the most Christian nation on Earth, including most of the Christian church leaders agreed with him. As did the Jews.

    I don't think you can make a good case that he wasn't Christian until much later, after Parkinson's disease and attempted assassination messed up his head and Germany had suffered the defeat at Stalingrad; by then you could find support that his faith wained.

    On a personal note I considered not mentioning it because I thought it might be offensive to some, but it was so Germain to the point of views of the Jews in 1933, leaving it out would have missed a big piece and been intellectually cowardice. But I'd rather not turn this into a thread about his faith--all that's important is he was considered Christian by the Jews and by his rhetoric willing to go down the same horrendous road as many other Christians going back to the 11th century genocide of Jews.
    You mean "waned" and "germane", esteemed moderator. Oh, this English of yours, such a tortured language! Of possible relevance: Were Hitler and Mussolini Catholic?
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post
    It's ridiculous that people who supposedly have some education can sit around and be so blatantly bigoted. How is it ok to say that Hitler was a bad Christian.
    How can anyone downplay the importance of the Christian religion and its institutions in Hitler's rise, alliances and support, and choice of enemies? These were overtly and professedly Christian, including the selection of the Jews as his target of scapegoating and blame.
    Everybody is afraid to say anything against Islam or Judaism for fear of retribution, but Christians are a popular target because there is no retribution and it's almost become chic to attack Christianity.
    Any idea what planet this post is from?
    From Earth planet Old Testament is full of God persecuting Jews for Golden Calf and other naughtiness: Golden calf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway


    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany and a boycott, but...


    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?


    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)
    Jews most certainly DID boycott anti-Semite Ford, who was decorated by Hitler. Nowadays Jews not only drive Ford but Volkswagen and Porsche, oy, such a deal already...
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4
    Oops I mispelled "crucifixion". Thanks for pointing that out and improving my grammar henceforth. In the spirit of tit for tat, it's, "nobody gave them a country of their very own". The rest of what you say is nonsense. Who was a martyr? Mother Teresa? She died peacefully in old age. And what does this mean anyway, "such martyrs should be pleased to suffer for Christ's sake, according to His word"? Do you know any Christians, dotcomrade?

    Most "Christians" don't want to be martyrs or want to suffer in anyone's name, but want to crack open a beer and watch Football (European or American). They want what's best for their kids. They want to better themselves financially. And they don't want some hypocrite that doesn't think life is fair to turn their misfortunes and blame Christians for their problems. A huge majority of Christians and the mainstream churches DO celebrate Christmas.

    The Reformation? Which century are we in? The vast majority of people in the US are Christians(77%) and I'll let you know, they don't walk around in togas and sandals working for the Pope collecting money for their loved ones in Limbo. I haven't seen my neighbors driving nails through their palms on Easter or seen people hoping to be martyrs so they can get into heaven. They wouldn't be considered Christians, but crazy.

    I assume this is the case for most of the people in the world. 99% mind their own business, worrying about day to day matters, enjoying watching their kids grow, celebrating what they had fond memories of celebrating since they were toddlers, and don't care what anyone else believes as long as it doesn't threaten their loved ones or themselves in any way.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    I admire your ability to be consistently wrong:
    The Mein Kamph on the web is not accessible.
    http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt


    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    It has, apparently, not been allowed in bookstores in Europe since the war.
    e.g. Amazon.fr*: mein kampf

    Spelling? I spelled it as I saw it spelled.
    Typical of your failure to ever check your data. Maintaining the wrong spelling after being corrected is also typical of your general approach.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    Sheesh, anti-jewish take on history, implicit anti-semitism. You ask a question about Goth and Romans theres no one coming out of the wood work with "hey how come you are anti-roman, you dont like romans is that it" or "where did the implicit anti-gothic inuendos came from?"
    No, you presented a complex question, a question designed to force a certain point. In this case, the point was a piece of standard anti-semetic propaganda.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    No, you presented a complex question, a question designed to force a certain point. In this case, the point was a piece of standard anti-semetic propaganda.
    Bullcrap, I asked a question, period. You and others interpret it the way you want, period. I got some answer leads from various commenters such as iceaura, which provided an additional and different perspective. As for a piece of standard anti-semetic propaganda, I am sorry but I did see a documentary that portrayed the response to the boycott by Nazis WITHOUT mentioning ANYTHING about the Jewish Boycott to show just how bad the Nazis were, but that is propaganda, WHY? because that was not a comment or a question it was a DOCUMENTARY, as such it should have included the Jewish Boycott to provide an accurate context by not doing so as a Documentary it was 1) misleading, and 2) When you DO find out about the boycott you cant help but feel you have been played and bamboozled and wonder "holy crap, is there anything else that is distorted or that we are not being told?". Considering all the WAR PROPAGANDA about justifications to bomb the ENEMY we have seen time and again, its logic to be skeptical about accounts about just how bad enemis are and how righteous it is to bomb their population, during WW1 it was reported that germans were cutting limbs off babies which was utter bullshit but reported as the Truth.

    In addition, ethnic tensions have been fueled, triggered and exacerbated in many occasions by agents of foreign powers throughout history, even Machiavelli wrote about this tactic of divide to conquer(or to simply undermine a rival power). British special forces were cought disguised as arabs just about the time when Shiite and Sunni started a civil war in Iraq, just like CIA-MI6 used terrorism (Operation Ajax) to kill Iranians in such a way that the Government was to be blamed for it thus destabilizing the area to facilitate a coup d'etat by the Shah. Its reasonable to assume NATO secret services are exacerbating tensions between ethnic groups(or any group) in an opponent government targeted for destabilization and regime change. In Venezuela agents opposed to Hugo Chavez shot in a crowd of protesters Opposed to Chavez, I repeat, sniper agents opposed to Chavez shot opponents of Chavez. I realize there's not such operations in all cases (conspiracy behind every rock) but by their very nature when such destabilization operations do work no one knows about it.

    The information provided in the thread makes it a bit less suspicious, though it's nonetheless apparent that jewish people inside germany did not benefit from the jewish boycott, on the contrary. If anyone benefited strategically it wasnt jewish people in germany nor germans.
    Last edited by icewendigo; December 19th, 2011 at 10:17 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    The Mein Kamph on the web is not accessible.
    Really? http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt

    It has, apparently, not been allowed in bookstores in Europe since the war.
    I assume just in Germany where, perhaps not surprisingly, they have laws against all things Nazi.

    Perhaps the propanganda doesn't match the book?
    What propaganda?

    I might get burned at the stake.
    When did that last happen to anyone?
    Thanks for the Mein Kamph url, Strange .. it was a good partial education. It would be interesting to know if Hitler's portrayals of the worst among the Jewish people in Vienna were true (organizers of prostitution and publishers of smut for instance .. and please don't ask me what I regard as smut. Smut is smut.) In any case, it's obvious Hitler's initial acceptance of the jews and revulsion for their persecution was changed by influence of his socialist heroes, and also seemingly by what he saw as the evil nature of some of the Jews themselves. It's unfortunate for him that he didn't investigate their culture further, to get out of the dark streets and into homes of faithful Jews. However, it's also obvious that he was instrument for fullfillment of the old testament prophecy telling of the Jewish expulsion from Israel with resulting one-third destroyed because of their rebellion against God .. much as the Kings of Babylon, Persia and Syria were used in their day to punish the kingdoms of Israel and Judah for their rebellions against God. It's also clear that Hitler was an instrument of capitalist England and U.S.A. in their effort against Russian communism, with the goal of regaining nationalized property. If the German V-2 rocket was not the first step in German capability of nuking Washington the U.S. would not have entered the war with Russia as ally. I suppose the Americans did not realize Russian capability for nuclear weapons, and would not recognize the whole threat until Sputnick. Hitler's biggest mistake, like George Bush Senior and Junior and many other examples, was that he could not accept that if a person was a Christian they are not called to war and earthly kingdoms. So it is not religion which is the cause of evil, ("love of money is the root of all evil") but the false religions resulting from rebellion from the Word, that rebellion led by love of money.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by The Finger Prince View Post
    You mean "waned" and "germane", esteemed moderator. Oh, this English of yours, such a tortured language! Of possible relevance: Were Hitler and Mussolini Catholic?
    What language are you comparing it against, if you don't mind my asking?

    Quote Originally Posted by Trumptor View Post

    Most "Christians" don't want to be martyrs or want to suffer in anyone's name, but want to crack open a beer and watch Football (European or American). They want what's best for their kids. They want to better themselves financially. And they don't want some hypocrite that doesn't think life is fair to turn their misfortunes and blame Christians for their problems. A huge majority of Christians and the mainstream churches DO celebrate Christmas.
    Most Christians are really just secularists/atheists that lean toward Jesus Christ as the least implausible superstition among a host of what they see as highly implausible superstitions. When it's politically beneficial, they go to church. When it's not, they stay home and watch Sunday football.

    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    No, you presented a complex question, a question designed to force a certain point. In this case, the point was a piece of standard anti-semetic propaganda.
    Bullcrap, I asked a question, period. You and others interpret it the way you want, period. I got some answer leads from various commenters such as iceaura, which provided an additional and different perspective. As for a piece of standard anti-semetic propaganda, I am sorry but I did see a documentary that portrayed the response to the boycott by Nazis WITHOUT mentioning ANYTHING about the Jewish Boycott to show just how bad the Nazis were, but that is propaganda, WHY? because that was not a comment or a question it was a DOCUMENTARY, as such it should have included the Jewish Boycott to provide an accurate context by not doing so as a Documentary it was 1) misleading, and 2) When you DO find out about the boycott you cant help but feel you have been played and bamboozled and wonder "holy crap, is there anything else that is distorted or that we are not being told?". Considering all the WAR PROPAGANDA about justifications to bomb the ENEMY we have seen time and again, its logic to be skeptical about accounts about just how bad enemis are and how righteous it is to bomb their population, during WW1 it was reported that germans were cutting limbs off babies which was utter bullshit but reported as the Truth.
    So, just to be clear: did the Jewish boycott come first or the Nazi boycott? I don't want to make the mistake of spreading disinformation, so whichever you believe it is, I would appreciate if you could direct me to a reliable source for that.

    There's so much propaganda on the internet about this issue, directed both ways, that I'm really not sure what to believe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    It's also clear that Hitler was an instrument of capitalist England and U.S.A. in their effort against Russian communism, with the goal of regaining nationalized property.
    Yeah. He was well liked in the USA also, as the "man who defeated the communists". Since the Communist party was one of his chief contenders. (At #3, with the Social Democratic Party at #2)

    German federal election, March 1933 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    If the German V-2 rocket was not the first step in German capability of nuking Washington the U.S. would not have entered the war with Russia as ally. I suppose the Americans did not realize Russian capability for nuclear weapons, and would not recognize the whole threat until Sputnick. Hitler's biggest mistake, like George Bush Senior and Junior and many other examples, was that he could not accept that if a person was a Christian they are not called to war and earthly kingdoms. So it is not religion which is the cause of evil, ("love of money is the root of all evil") but the false religions resulting from rebellion from the Word, that rebellion led by love of money.
    Germany never got close to completing a nuke, though. The program was never seriously funded because Heisenberg told them it was impossible (or rather, that it required an absurd amount of Uranium Germany had no hope of obtaining). Historians disagree somewhat as to whether he actually believed that, or just told them so to stop them from trying.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    Bullcrap, I asked a question, period.
    You did the equivalent of this:

    "I realize that the victors write history and think there's a lot of disinformation about the Cold War (truth is the first caualty of war) and so few might have information other than what we have been spoonfed, but here is goes anyway

    I can understand why the USSR abandoned the space race AFTER the US claimed to have visited the Moon, but...

    Why did the US (really) fake the Moon landing in the first place?"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    "So, just to be clear: did the Jewish boycott come first or the Nazi boycott? I don't want to make the mistake of spreading disinformation, so whichever you believe it is, I would appreciate if you could direct me to a reliable source for that."
    AFIK, which isnt very far, it appears clear that the Jewish Boycott came before the most official and publicized of Nazi Boycott, Ive not met someone that contradict this timeline. However, if I understand correctly, what people are claiming is that there were a host of discrimination and unofficial boycotts against jewish citizens that occured before the Jewish boycott, which would justify the initial official jewish boycott that evidently poured gasoline on the fire, as individuals wishing to fuel the flames of ethnic havoc could not in their wildest dreams hope for a better gift than an front page declaration of war against germany and the hardships that came with the boycott that could easily be blamed on one segment of the population.
    I dont have the time to search for a reliable source and provide links, wikipedia is not 100% realiable but it has references to the dates as being march for jewish boycott and april for nazi boycott. The link provided by iceaura as additional information to look into.



    There's so much propaganda on the internet about this issue, directed both ways, that I'm really not sure what to believe.
    No kidding, theres propaganda and bashing of people asking questions or doubting the "official" version (red flag).


    "Hitler was an instrument of capitalist England and U.S.A. in their effort against Russian communism"
    This is a plausible hypothesis. Its not unlike England to steer to rivals into mutual destruction and there were many Fascist Industrialists in the US (which happened to support libertarian slogans and the American Liberty League).




    "You did the equivalent of this:


    "I realize that the victors write history and think there's a lot of disinformation about the Cold War (truth is the first caualty of war) and so few might have information other than what we have been spoonfed, but here is goes anyway


    I can understand why the USSR abandoned the space race AFTER the US claimed to have visited the Moon, but...


    Why did the US (really) fake the Moon landing in the first place?" "
    I dont think so, because unless I am still mistaking, no one is disputing the information that the major jewish boycott (that is under-reported if at all in mainstream documentaries) occurred on March 24, 1933 and that the highly publicized major Nazi boycott occurred on 1 April 1933. So the answer can be simply be, before April 1933 the Nazi did A) this and B) that, which explains the boycott without contradicting the timeline in the question. There. Also, if the big Nazi boycott had occurred in 1932 and the jewish boycott way later in 1939, you could still simply answer, "you made a mistake in your question, the jewish boycott occured 7 years after the big NAzi boycott thats typically used in documentaries". There.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by icewindego
    AFIK, which isnt very far, it appears clear that the Jewish Boycott came before the most official and publicized of Nazi Boycott, Ive not met someone that contradict this timeline.
    What has been contradicted is your description of that one particular Nazi boycott as being somehow more significant than all their previous boycotts and other oppressions of Jews.

    And your description of a call for voluntary boycott, by some international religious organizations, as a "declaration of war".

    The Nazis did many things bad to Jews after March of 1933, as well as before March of 1933. You seem to be considering blaming what they did after March of 1933 on what some Jews did then, and you claim to be unsure of why "the Jews" would attempt to boycott Nazi Germany in March of 1933. You feel badly betrayed by the omission of actions of some of several international - non-German - Jewish organizations, in a documentary that appears to have been focused mainly on events inside Germany in the first place.

    Why?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    500
    "Nazis. I hate these guys."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    " your description of a call for voluntary boycott, by some international religious organizations, as a "declaration of war". "
    its the front page headline news of the Daily Express of FRIDAY MARCH 24 1933 "Judea declares war on Germany"

    As for the rest, If you have information according to which the April boycott was not a clear escalation compared to what occurred previously but just the same old business as usual and nothing special compared to pre-april 1933, I will be interested and glad to look into it.


    To me if the government of the US made mandatory country-wide government actions to segregate and oppress african americans back in 1955, it would be a clear departure from 1950s policy, even if people would claim that segregation in various places and states was business as usual, I for one would not consider this same old. The link you provided appears at a glance to indicate that there was oppression of jewish people in ways that can be similar to US segregation, racism and lynchings, groups such as KKK, etc, in that although serious did not appear to be border to border organized national government sponsored oppression. Maybe Im wrong here, but lacking your potent mastery of history(hence why I ask), what Ive seen so far leads me to think this.
    Last edited by icewendigo; December 19th, 2011 at 06:52 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    " your description of a call for voluntary boycott, by some international religious organizations, as a "declaration of war". "

    its the front page headline news of the Daily Express of FRIDAY MARCH 24 1933 "Judea declares war on Germany"
    So? Your topic was not "antiSemitic propaganda of the early 1930s", was it? Your endorsement of such a headline, your presentation of that language as representing historical fact in need of explanation, appears to be an endorsement of the political cause and worldview behind it.

    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    To me if the government of the US made mandatory country-wide government actions to segregate and oppress african americans back in 1955, it would be a clear departure from 1950s policy, even if people would claim that segregation in various places and states was business as usual,
    Of course - the 1950s were a time of declining national and official racism in the US, not increasing.

    The early 1930s were a time of increasing official anti-Semitism in Germany, dramatically exemplified by the election victories of the Nazi Party. Anything done by Jews with regard to German politics in 1933 was done in a context of severe and dramatically increasing official anti-Semitism.

    If I were to choose an era of increasing official racism in the US, pick out one of the notable events many years into it, and then try to implicate some racially identified civil rights action just prior to that event as the basis of that event and subsequent racism in the US, would you take me seriously?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Regardless of discriminations, the boycott was a colossal tactical blunder for the Jewish community. We're talking about a nation that already feels horribly humiliated by its economic circumstances, and perceives that a disproportionately large portion of the Jewish community is doing fine in spite of it (a perception that was largely correct.) Kicking them in the pocketbook would just motivate them to be more vicious.

    Furthermore, the timing was idiotic, occurring within 2 months of Hitler's election (30 January 1933)

    [kojax's unsupported opinion]

    This further indicates that perhaps a small number of Zionist Jews within the larger Jewish community did, and have been, conspiring against the greater majority for their own purposes. That is, conspiring both against their own people, and against the rest of the world, like a mafia family does. Both sides are right. The Nazis were right that there is a conspiracy, and the Jewish media is right in saying that this conspiracy does not extend to the majority of the Jewish community. (Not only are most Jewish people totally innocent of it, but probably they would be opposed to it if they were aware of it.)

    Maybe the Zionists wanted a holocaust? (Or wanted something like that, maybe a bit less severe.)

    [/kojax's unsupported opinion]

    In the early stages of the persecution, Jews were not only allowed to freely leave the country, but even encouraged to. The only ones who ended up in camps were the ones who were either too poor, too obstinate, or too naive to see the writing on the wall and take the opportunity to go. Probably they just didn't want to believe that they were going to be kicked out of a country where they felt themselves to be full citizens and decided to dig in and defy the prevailing political climate. (And after things got to their worst, most Germans believed the trains to Auschwitz were still really just deportations to outside the country.)
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    World War II was NOT a heroic crusade to save world Jewry, though it is often cast in such a light today. Interestingly, the Nazis promoted a form of Zionism called the Madagascar Plan, but lagged behind British with Uganda Plan of 1903. Actually, much of what is found distasteful today about Nazis such as militarism, goose-stepping, genocidal barbarism, as well as concentration camps previously noted, was originated by British.

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

    British always have been glad to generously give away that which is not theirs to begin with, sort of a holiday from stealing as it were.

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


    Prince is inclined to agree with kojax that if not for Nazi Holocaust or similar events, support for Zionist ideology would be much weaker.
    Last edited by The Finger Prince; December 19th, 2011 at 09:02 PM.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by The Finger Prince View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In a televised documentary I saw Hitler was quoted as saying the 'Jews' wanted him to attack Russia. I have read that a 'Jew' was one of Hitler's inner circle of advisors. It makes sense that the 'Jews' wanted Hitler to destroy the Russian communist government because so much 'Jewish' property had been nationalized after the revolution. However, who is a Jew? Is a Jew a citizen of the state of Israel? No .. my arab catholic son-in-law was/is a citizen of Israel. Is a Jew a race? No, a Jew (and a Christian for that matter) is a believer in the promise to Abraham; plus, under the Mosaic law a Jew is any person who converts to Judaism. Is a person a convert to Judaism just because he has a Rabbi circumsize him? No. He has to believe in his heart. So .. please identify for me a Jew.
    Many leaders of Bolshevik revolution were supposedly Jewish, and Hitler was militantly anti-Communist, much like Nixon in early years. Of course, such bias could be overcome when expedient in the case of each of these evil men. This lends support to icewendigo's observation that truth is difficult to discern at times.

    The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime

    Such facts, if facts they are, are quite embarrassing for world Jewry and would naturally be suppressed to the degree possible.
    Evidently White Russians were virulently anti-Semitic, which would not be surprising given evidence of pogroms in Tsarist Russia.

    Following is curious lore regarding PRO-Semitic Axis power: Japan!

    Is truth stranger than fiction?

    Judge for yourselves, dotcomrades: Jewish settlement in Imperial Japan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Fertile ground for controversy, this thread. Please forgive Prince's digressions from original topic, investigation of subject has been fascinating.

    "This is a plausible hypothesis. Its not unlike England to steer to rivals into mutual destruction and there were many Fascist Industrialists in the US (which happened to support libertarian slogans and the American Liberty League)."- icewendigo

    Above statement is absolutely correct- and there were Fascist and anti-Semitic movements in both USA and UK under William Dudley Pelley,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Dudley_Pelley

    and Oswald Mosely, respectively.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Mosely
    Last edited by The Finger Prince; December 19th, 2011 at 09:17 PM.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    its the front page headline news of the Daily Express of FRIDAY MARCH 24 1933 "Judea declares war on Germany"
    I suspect that in 1933 the Daily Express was about as anti-Semitic as you are today.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Regardless of discriminations, the boycott was a colossal tactical blunder for the Jewish community. We're talking about a nation that already feels horribly humiliated by its economic circumstances, and perceives that a disproportionately large portion of the Jewish community is doing fine in spite of it (a perception that was largely correct.) Kicking them in the pocketbook would just motivate them to be more vicious.

    Furthermore, the timing was idiotic, occurring within 2 months of Hitler's election (30 January 1933)

    [kojax's unsupported opinion]

    This further indicates that perhaps a small number of Zionist Jews within the larger Jewish community did, and have been, conspiring against the greater majority for their own purposes. That is, conspiring both against their own people, and against the rest of the world, like a mafia family does. Both sides are right. The Nazis were right that there is a conspiracy, and the Jewish media is right in saying that this conspiracy does not extend to the majority of the Jewish community. (Not only are most Jewish people totally innocent of it, but probably they would be opposed to it if they were aware of it.)

    Maybe the Zionists wanted a holocaust? (Or wanted something like that, maybe a bit less severe.)

    [/kojax's unsupported opinion]

    In the early stages of the persecution, Jews were not only allowed to freely leave the country, but even encouraged to. The only ones who ended up in camps were the ones who were either too poor, too obstinate, or too naive to see the writing on the wall and take the opportunity to go. Probably they just didn't want to believe that they were going to be kicked out of a country where they felt themselves to be full citizens and decided to dig in and defy the prevailing political climate. (And after things got to their worst, most Germans believed the trains to Auschwitz were still really just deportations to outside the country.)
    Okay, let's blame the Jews for the holocaust. Nice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Regardless of discriminations, the boycott was a colossal tactical blunder for the Jewish community. We're talking about a nation that already feels horribly humiliated by its economic circumstances, and perceives that a disproportionately large portion of the Jewish community is doing fine in spite of it (a perception that was largely correct.) Kicking them in the pocketbook would just motivate them to be more vicious.

    Furthermore, the timing was idiotic, occurring within 2 months of Hitler's election (30 January 1933)

    [kojax's unsupported opinion]

    This further indicates that perhaps a small number of Zionist Jews within the larger Jewish community did, and have been, conspiring against the greater majority for their own purposes. That is, conspiring both against their own people, and against the rest of the world, like a mafia family does. Both sides are right. The Nazis were right that there is a conspiracy, and the Jewish media is right in saying that this conspiracy does not extend to the majority of the Jewish community. (Not only are most Jewish people totally innocent of it, but probably they would be opposed to it if they were aware of it.)

    Maybe the Zionists wanted a holocaust? (Or wanted something like that, maybe a bit less severe.)

    [/kojax's unsupported opinion]

    In the early stages of the persecution, Jews were not only allowed to freely leave the country, but even encouraged to. The only ones who ended up in camps were the ones who were either too poor, too obstinate, or too naive to see the writing on the wall and take the opportunity to go. Probably they just didn't want to believe that they were going to be kicked out of a country where they felt themselves to be full citizens and decided to dig in and defy the prevailing political climate. (And after things got to their worst, most Germans believed the trains to Auschwitz were still really just deportations to outside the country.)
    Okay, let's blame the Jews for the holocaust. Nice.
    Actually, kojax was saying ZIONISTS were aided in their goal by Holocaust, pay attention, Harold. If you disagree, be kind enough to defend your position with such evidence as you see fit.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Behind the enlightening rod.
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by PhysBang View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    its the front page headline news of the Daily Express of FRIDAY MARCH 24 1933 "Judea declares war on Germany"
    I suspect that in 1933 the Daily Express was about as anti-Semitic as you are today.
    Prince suspects that the facts of the matter will remain the same regardless of how Pro-Semitic or anti-Semitic any member of forum may be. It might be most productive, therefore, to confine our interest to such facts.
    The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding go out to meet it.- Thucydides
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    In the early stages of the persecution, Jews were not only allowed to freely leave the country, but even encouraged to.
    It might be most productive, therefore, to confine our interest to such facts.
    They had to leave their possessions behind, surrender their citizenship, and live as refugees.

    The fate of the wealth these very well educated and hardworking citizens possessed is one of the more informative facts: one enlightening way to analyze a fascist government is simply as an organized criminal enterprise engaged in a large scale con, heist, or smash and grab. Or, as here, armed robbery.
    Last edited by iceaura; December 19th, 2011 at 11:31 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by The Finger Prince View Post
    Prince suspects that the facts of the matter will remain the same regardless of how Pro-Semitic or anti-Semitic any member of forum may be. It might be most productive, therefore, to confine our interest to such facts.
    One of the facts is that Antisemitism was rampant in the early 20th C. So to present a headline from the 30s as if it accurately represents this situation is to attempt to sneak that Antisemitism in as a fact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    I suspect that in 1933 the Daily Express was about as anti-Semitic as you are today.
    attempt to sneak that Antisemitism in as a fact.
    This projection and accusation festival reminds me of the religious preacher that was outraged because a teletuby toddler-tv-show character was gay (in his own gayness obsessed mind in which the teletuby was indeed gay).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    While you did not quack like a duck, in the first few posts you definitely walked like one. I'm surprised you didn't lay an egg.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    "While you did not quack like a duck, in the first few posts you definitely walked like one. I'm surprised you didn't lay an egg."
    This is as gratuitous ad hominem and as ridiculous as it gets. Do you realize I dont even recognize the validity of the arbitrary race concept in the first place? Its as ridiculous as accusing me of being anti-unicorn.

    I have to adapt to neanderthal mind set or what, while people keep a straight face while discussing mass murder technology and get offended by the mention of a newspaper title, I need to freeze myself and get back in the 23rd century when discussions free of retarded 20th century legacy can be had.

    (On the other hand, observing projections can be fascinating)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by PhysBang View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    Bullcrap, I asked a question, period.
    You did the equivalent of this:

    "I realize that the victors write history and think there's a lot of disinformation about the Cold War (truth is the first caualty of war) and so few might have information other than what we have been spoonfed, but here is goes anyway

    I can understand why the USSR abandoned the space race AFTER the US claimed to have visited the Moon, but...

    Why did the US (really) fake the Moon landing in the first place?"
    The Russians have always been ahead in space. The International Space Station could not have been built without Russian boosters. The U.S. is only now hoping to put a lander on Venus, something Russia did 30 years or more ago. Russian space technology and weapons far exceeds U.S. Yes, the U.S. landed men on the moon but they only did it with Canadians at the helm of the program, every department head was a Canadian from the Avro Arrow, which was scrapped because the U.S. had nothing to shoot it down with. U.S. superiority is a hollywood screen.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post
    It's ridiculous that people who supposedly have some education can sit around and be so blatantly bigoted. How is it ok to say that Hitler was a bad Christian.
    How can anyone downplay the importance of the Christian religion and its institutions in Hitler's rise, alliances and support, and choice of enemies? These were overtly and professedly Christian, including the selection of the Jews as his target of scapegoating and blame.
    Everybody is afraid to say anything against Islam or Judaism for fear of retribution, but Christians are a popular target because there is no retribution and it's almost become chic to attack Christianity.
    Any idea what planet this post is from?
    Don't forget that Jehovah's Witnesses are persecuted in whatever nation they are in, and they were in Nazi Germany also, because they preach non-vioence, non-participation in wars. Did Roman Catholic clergy and Lutheran clergy in Nazi Germany preach non-participation inwars as a Christian doctrine? Not likely. If they did they had their license to preach removed. So who are the Christians? Who were following the teachings of Jesus?
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Could this possibly be the reason for the rise of Nazism in the world? (Let's not forget, the whole world abandoned the Jews to the European Naziism. for instance, Canada refused to allow a shipload of Jews to land, and they had to return to Germany.

    Is it any wonder Israel rules the world today?

    Ezekiel 5:12 (Whole Chapter)
    A third part of thee shall die with the pestilence, and with famine shall they be consumed in the midst of thee: and a third part shall fall by the sword round about thee; and I will scatter a third part into all the winds, and I will draw out a sword after them.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Is it any wonder Israel rules the world today?
    It does ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Is it any wonder Israel rules the world today?
    It does ?
    Aside from God, that is. Whose orders do you think the U.S., Canada, and Europe are following in their destruction of the arab/Muslim countries? The Jewish temple has to be built, so the Dome of the Rock must come down. The muslim nations must be rendered powerless for the dome to be destroyed.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Whose orders do you think the U.S., Canada, and Europe are following in their destruction of the arab/Muslim countries? The Jewish temple has to be built, so the Dome of the Rock must come down. The muslim nations must be rendered powerless for the dome to be destroyed.
    Any evidence for this fantasy?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Whose orders do you think the U.S., Canada, and Europe are following in their destruction of the arab/Muslim countries? The Jewish temple has to be built, so the Dome of the Rock must come down. The muslim nations must be rendered powerless for the dome to be destroyed.
    Any evidence for this fantasy?
    How's a news photo of Canada's Prime Minister grovelling before the Prime Minister of Israel?

    How about old testament prophecy? (You'll have to look them up.)
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    How's a news photo of Canada's Prime Minister grovelling before the Prime Minister of Israel?
    I kind of expected a link to go along with that. But why would that prove some sort of international conspiracy? You must have very low standards of proof. (Did you know the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary; no, don't bother to look: it's not there. Trust me.)


    How about old testament prophecy? (You'll have to look them up.)
    What should I look for? "Israel tells US President and EU what to do"? Do those words appear in the OT? On the other hand, I could just say it is a historically dubious collection of stories.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    "While you did not quack like a duck, in the first few posts you definitely walked like one. I'm surprised you didn't lay an egg."
    This is as gratuitous ad hominem and as ridiculous as it gets. Do you realize I dont even recognize the validity of the arbitrary race concept in the first place? Its as ridiculous as accusing me of being anti-unicorn.
    Yeah. I'm getting tired of the ad hominem as well. Attempting to look at anything objectively when society has a skewed view of it tends to result in that "Don't listen to him!!" "He's one of them!!!" responses. Factionalism at its finest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Is it any wonder Israel rules the world today?
    It does ?
    It rules Hollywood, which is basically the same thing, at least for now. (Maybe in a few decades perhaps Ballywood productions will pull ahead and Bombay will be the town to rule.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Regardless of discriminations, the boycott was a colossal tactical blunder for the Jewish community. We're talking about a nation that already feels horribly humiliated by its economic circumstances, and perceives that a disproportionately large portion of the Jewish community is doing fine in spite of it (a perception that was largely correct.) Kicking them in the pocketbook would just motivate them to be more vicious.

    Furthermore, the timing was idiotic, occurring within 2 months of Hitler's election (30 January 1933)

    [kojax's unsupported opinion]

    This further indicates that perhaps a small number of Zionist Jews within the larger Jewish community did, and have been, conspiring against the greater majority for their own purposes. That is, conspiring both against their own people, and against the rest of the world, like a mafia family does. Both sides are right. The Nazis were right that there is a conspiracy, and the Jewish media is right in saying that this conspiracy does not extend to the majority of the Jewish community. (Not only are most Jewish people totally innocent of it, but probably they would be opposed to it if they were aware of it.)

    Maybe the Zionists wanted a holocaust? (Or wanted something like that, maybe a bit less severe.)

    [/kojax's unsupported opinion]

    In the early stages of the persecution, Jews were not only allowed to freely leave the country, but even encouraged to. The only ones who ended up in camps were the ones who were either too poor, too obstinate, or too naive to see the writing on the wall and take the opportunity to go. Probably they just didn't want to believe that they were going to be kicked out of a country where they felt themselves to be full citizens and decided to dig in and defy the prevailing political climate. (And after things got to their worst, most Germans believed the trains to Auschwitz were still really just deportations to outside the country.)
    Okay, let's blame the Jews for the holocaust. Nice.
    How about let's not unanimously assign all blame to one side. No war in history was ever that clear cut (unless you listen exclusively to the victors' version, in which case of course it's all perfectly clear cut.)
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post

    How's a news photo of Canada's Prime Minister grovelling before the Prime Minister of Israel?

    How about old testament prophecy? (You'll have to look them up.)
    Then if I find news photos of the President of the United States groveling before the king of Saudi Arabia, the emperor of Japan, the Premier of China, and the Queen of England, what does that mean?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    "While you did not quack like a duck, in the first few posts you definitely walked like one. I'm surprised you didn't lay an egg."
    This is as gratuitous ad hominem and as ridiculous as it gets. Do you realize I dont even recognize the validity of the arbitrary race concept in the first place? Its as ridiculous as accusing me of being anti-unicorn.

    Yeah. I'm getting tired of the ad hominem as well. Attempting to look at anything objectively when society has a skewed view of it tends to result in that "Don't listen to him!!" "He's one of them!!!" responses. Factionalism at its finest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Is it any wonder Israel rules the world today?
    It does ?
    It rules Hollywood, which is basically the same thing, at least for now. (Maybe in a few decades perhaps Ballywood productions will pull ahead and Bombay will be the town to rule.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Regardless of discriminations, the boycott was a colossal tactical blunder for the Jewish community. We're talking about a nation that already feels horribly humiliated by its economic circumstances, and perceives that a disproportionately large portion of the Jewish community is doing fine in spite of it (a perception that was largely correct.) Kicking them in the pocketbook would just motivate them to be more vicious.

    Furthermore, the timing was idiotic, occurring within 2 months of Hitler's election (30 January 1933)

    [kojax's unsupported opinion]

    This further indicates that perhaps a small number of Zionist Jews within the larger Jewish community did, and have been, conspiring against the greater majority for their own purposes. That is, conspiring both against their own people, and against the rest of the world, like a mafia family does. Both sides are right. The Nazis were right that there is a conspiracy, and the Jewish media is right in saying that this conspiracy does not extend to the majority of the Jewish community. (Not only are most Jewish people totally innocent of it, but probably they would be opposed to it if they were aware of it.)

    Maybe the Zionists wanted a holocaust? (Or wanted something like that, maybe a bit less severe.)

    [/kojax's unsupported opinion]

    In the early stages of the persecution, Jews were not only allowed to freely leave the country, but even encouraged to. The only ones who ended up in camps were the ones who were either too poor, too obstinate, or too naive to see the writing on the wall and take the opportunity to go. Probably they just didn't want to believe that they were going to be kicked out of a country where they felt themselves to be full citizens and decided to dig in and defy the prevailing political climate. (And after things got to their worst, most Germans believed the trains to Auschwitz were still really just deportations to outside the country.)
    Okay, let's blame the Jews for the holocaust. Nice.
    How about let's not unanimously assign all blame to one side. No war in history was ever that clear cut (unless you listen exclusively to the victors' version, in which case of course it's all perfectly clear cut.)
    That's disgusting.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    "While you did not quack like a duck, in the first few posts you definitely walked like one. I'm surprised you didn't lay an egg."
    This is as gratuitous ad hominem and as ridiculous as it gets.
    Excellent. So you are decidedly not anti-semitic. (If I had accused Hitler of anti-semitism he would have welcomed it as a compliment, not treated it as an ad hominem.) So as someone who abhors anti-semitism I would have thought you would have welcomed a heads up on how you came across in your first few posts. Since you prefer not to receive such insights I'll let you wallow in a sea of misunderstanding in the future. Good luck with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    How about let's not unanimously assign all blame to one side. No war in history was ever that clear cut (unless you listen exclusively to the victors' version, in which case of course it's all perfectly clear cut.)
    Herding people into gas chambers is not normally considered a reasonable practice, even in war.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    I have to say, I did not see the anti-Semitic overtone some of you guys have been seeing in icewendigo's posts. For argument's sake, let's say the Jews, without any provocation, did instigate boycotts (please, for goodness sake, I am not saying they did!). How twisted would you have to be to think that the Jews would then be to blame for what happened to them? The idea is so ridiculous that I did not for a moment suspect icewendigo of trying to push some anti-Semitic agenda. His point about history being slanted is perfectly valid and his questions have from the start looked simply like a quest for the truth to me. I think people often like to pounce on any gut interpretation of anti-PC views, before looking at the situation logically and objectively.

    It should be an obvious fact, surely, that no matter what the Jews did or didn't do, the blame can only squarely sit on the shoulders of Hitler and his regime.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    It should be an obvious fact, surely, that no matter what the Jews did or didn't do, the blame can only squarely sit on the shoulders of Hitler and his regime.
    I don't think Icewendigo starts with that premise at all. He says the winners write history, so we don't really know. The allies won the war, so all that demonization of the Nazis could just be BS. It doesn't matter how many books were written, how many documentary films have been made about the history of antisemitism in Europe, the rise of the Nazis, their racial supremacy theories, the scapegoating of the Jews, none of that matters. And so it is perfectly reasonable that the Nazis would boycott Jewish businesses. Of course they would.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    You are overstating his initial post imo.

    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway
    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany and a boycott, but...
    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?
    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)
    In his post he notes the tendency of history to be written by the victors, which is true, and that the opposition are often vilified beyond the truth for propaganda purposes, which is also true. He was thinking non-German Jews declared war against Germany before Germany started boycotting Jewish businesses and he asked why they did. Immediately he is accused of having an anti-Jewish agenda. In his second post he expresses his surprise at the reaction, an acknowledgement that he might have gotten the time line wrong and expresses a desire to investigate the matter further. Yet, still he gets pigeon holed.

    He has also consistently reacted with outrage at being accused of anti-Semitism. Did people just miss this completely?

    I would have hoped that on a forum such as this, that we can more objectively discuss difficult topics without having to pussyfoot around them for fear of igniting the wrath of some overly sensitive, PC-conscious person?
    Last edited by KALSTER; December 21st, 2011 at 05:19 AM.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    I realize that the victors write history and think there's lot of disinformation about war (truth is the first casualty of war), and so few might have information other than what we have been spoon fed, but here it goes anyway


    I can understand why Germany imposed a boycott against jewish businesses AFTER international jewish groups declared War on germany and a boycott, but...


    Why did the international jewish goups (really) had a boycott against Germany in the first place?


    (there might be an article about the declaration of war on germany by jewish groups in a New York paper, Ill have to look into it to see what the 'official' reasons claimed were)


    If you realize what you realise, ask yourself this: why did France lose international diplomacy centuries before WW1 in their bougious ransakining of those who had a line of communication with Rome?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    "If you realize what you realise, ask yourself this: why did France lose international diplomacy centuries before WW1 in their bougious ransakining of those who had a line of communication with Rome?"
    This sounds interesting but I have no idea what it means. If you can rephrase and add details to flesh out what you are trying to say I'll be able to ask myself this puzzling question.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Gas chambers or mass burrials. Victors' history would say the same thing about them. But they would not readily admit that the Allies bombing of Buchenwald killed many Jewish prisoners/slave labourers at the camp which turned out hi-tech equipment .. those bodies piled up in huge rows when the Allied 'Victors' marched in. This is history but not easily found. I found it in the story of the development of the palm sized mechanical pocket computer which immediately preceeded electronic computers.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post

    How's a news photo of Canada's Prime Minister grovelling before the Prime Minister of Israel?

    How about old testament prophecy? (You'll have to look them up.)
    Then if I find news photos of the President of the United States groveling before the king of Saudi Arabia, the emperor of Japan, the Premier of China, and the Queen of England, what does that mean?
    That's bad news too. I'm totally disgusted by Barack Obama's forgetfulness about the American tradition of never bowing to royalty. I would actually like to see him sacked in the next election over that.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    "While you did not quack like a duck, in the first few posts you definitely walked like one. I'm surprised you didn't lay an egg."
    This is as gratuitous ad hominem and as ridiculous as it gets.
    Excellent. So you are decidedly not anti-semitic. (If I had accused Hitler of anti-semitism he would have welcomed it as a compliment, not treated it as an ad hominem.) So as someone who abhors anti-semitism I would have thought you would have welcomed a heads up on how you came across in your first few posts. Since you prefer not to receive such insights I'll let you wallow in a sea of misunderstanding in the future. Good luck with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    How about let's not unanimously assign all blame to one side. No war in history was ever that clear cut (unless you listen exclusively to the victors' version, in which case of course it's all perfectly clear cut.)
    Herding people into gas chambers is not normally considered a reasonable practice, even in war.
    I'm not suggesting we call it a 50/50 split, if that's what you're implying. But 100/0 is an unreasonable split as well. I shouldn't be required to totally ignore every mistake made by the victim group just to conform to my culture's orthodoxy.

    In the first place, there are two issues at stake here. Moral high ground, and tactical high ground. The Jewish community's mistakes were mostly on the tactical side. They were in the middle of a racial powder keg and decided to ignite it. Not a morally wrong move, but a tactically stupid one. They played right into Hitler's hands. They can either blame Hitler for that or they can blame themselves for being dumb. If they choose the second option, they can affect the probability of it happening again. If they choose the first option then they're doomed to repetition. It's not like there won't be another Hitler.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Not a morally wrong move, but a tactically stupid one.

    This is one of the reasons why I asked the original question.

    They played right into Hitler's hands.
    I must add that the British Empire, whom may have seen Industrial Germany as a threat/primary rival, may also have benefited from the ethnic tensions inside a rival power. Fostering division inside rival powers is the oldest trick in the Imperialist book, dates back to long before Machiavelli wrote about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Then if I find news photos of the President of the United States groveling before the king of Saudi Arabia, the emperor of Japan, the Premier of China, and the Queen of England, what does that mean?
    There's a difference between groveling and showing respect. The US is far to accustomed to using force to get respect. It's much better to show some if you want some in return.

    --
    On a personal note I learned this as a military advisor. I watched sister teams with the same mission who refused to show respect towards their Iraqi counterparts and found themselves shut off from operations, giving any advise, or getting information--in short unable to do their mission. Meanwhile, I was often barefoot drinking tea with an Iraqi Colonel and almost every night talking politics, family, culture, religion and eventually get around to operations (its just their way). He showed the utmost respect for me and my team and each of us were very successful at doing our jobs, whether that was patrolling a marsh, raiding a village, negotiating with some local sheiks, or shearing in the promotions and other celebrations of our peoples. We protected each other, him through his large numbers of infantry we walked with, and us through our ability to call in lots of intell gathering assets (aerial recon) or firepower (AH-64s and F16s) if needed. Neither of us took personal offense when we disagreed because we had that kind of relationship. I think international politics works much the same at the strategic as at the tactical level--you get a lot of traction from mutual respect for one another.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    This projection and accusation festival
    You are the guy who posted, as evidence that we had been betrayed by a biased winner's history of WWII, a New York (winning side, btw) newspaper headline that read "Judea declares war on Germany"

    in reference to a 1933 boycott of Hitler's corporate support within Germany for its continuing and increasingly foul treatment of Jewish German citizens, proposed by a few international Jewish organizations.

    Apparently you don't recognize even the most blatant of anti-Semitism, in historical documents. That's a hell of a blind spot.

    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo
    "They played right into Hitler's hands."


    I must add that the British Empire, whom may have seen Industrial Germany as a threat/primary rival, may also have benefited from the ethnic tensions inside a rival power.
    Fascinating take: apparently, we are all agreed that Hitler succeeded in accomplishing what he set out to do, that providing a propaganda excuse for the continuation of the ongoing persecution and robbery and eventual wholesale slaughter of German citizens whose mothers were born to Jewish mothers was "playing into Hitler's hands".

    We are apparently debating whether foreign Jews, non-German Jews, are partly responsible for what Hitler set out to do years before and succeeded in doing despite opposition from these foreign Jews, Hitler's hands and their deeds, because they did not oppose him in the tactically best manner.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    They can either blame Hitler for that or they can blame themselves for being dumb. If they choose the second option, they can affect the probability of it happening again. If they choose the first option then they're doomed to repetition. It's not like there won't be another Hitler.
    It isn't?

    You anticipate another industrial slaughtering operation of some country's Jewish population, that can be forestalled by carefully not boycotting or otherwise interfering with said operations corporate support and financing?
    Last edited by iceaura; December 21st, 2011 at 06:27 PM.
    PhysBang likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    About not recognizing anti-semitism in historical documents. Which document are you claiming that i dont recognize the anti-semitic virulence? Mein Kampfor the daily express? If its the daily express, whether its anti-semite or not is irrelevant and besides the point(except for the separate topic below), it just establishes the boycott and the date. And if publicizing what jewish group want to publicize is anti-semite then the word has become so diluded anything is anti-semite. Again whether daily express repeated what jewish organization said, used metaphore for sensationalism, nobody thinks "jews" were litteraly engaging in military warfare in 1933. As far as i know its the boycotts effect that triggered the counter-boycott, not the headline of a paper most germans probably never saw, and if it did exacerbate tensions the only thing interesting about it as a london paper is that the British Empire might, might have evaluated that ethnic tension within germany was destabilizing a rival of BE.I dont see the link between the paragraphs that follow "interesting take" and the comment about ethnic tension as divide opponent tactic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    I would have hoped that on a forum such as this, that we can more objectively discuss difficult topics without having to pussyfoot around them for fear of igniting the wrath of some overly sensitive, PC-conscious person?
    Best comment on the net in 2011!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    As far as i know its the boycotts effect that triggered the counter-boycott...
    Not so sure about that. Sounds an awful lot like the domestic tyrant who punches out the teeth of the cook because the meal wasn't served on time. "It's your own fault. I said 6 o'clock on the dot, you idiot! What's the matter with you!" All of us know that this person wasn't just looking for an excuse to lash out, they were setting it up so that they were guaranteed to get an opportunity to do so. And the reaction is way, way out of proportion to the 'offence'.

    The feeble bleatings of people overseas who have neither the power nor the opportunity to affect whatever a rogue government has already decided to do - some time or another, some way or another - are another such 'provocation'.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by iceaura View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    They can either blame Hitler for that or they can blame themselves for being dumb. If they choose the second option, they can affect the probability of it happening again. If they choose the first option then they're doomed to repetition. It's not like there won't be another Hitler.
    It isn't?

    You anticipate another industrial slaughtering operation of some country's Jewish population, that can be forestalled by carefully not boycotting or otherwise interfering with said operations corporate support and financing?
    When the world starts to be upset with them over mistreatment of the Palestinians, they should try not to go and do brutal or heavy handed things to assert themselves. They're not so vulnerable to other nations' internal racism anymore because any Jews pushed out of a place like Georgia or Nigeria or some place like that would find Israel waiting for them with open arms.

    However, they could hurt their country if they don't know when to back off. A Pali leader could rise up who knows how to bait them just like Hitler knew how to bait them. Maybe instead of terrorism, some Palis will get the idea to use civil disobedience? Or maybe like the Nazis did in their early stages, they'll learn to threaten but not always follow through (break windows on shops in Jewish settlements in Gaza, instead of strapping bombs to their chests.)
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    Not so sure about that. Sounds an awful lot like the domestic tyrant who punches out the teeth of the cook because the meal wasn't served on time. "It's your own fault. I said 6 o'clock on the dot, you idiot! What's the matter with you!" All of us know that this person wasn't just looking for an excuse to lash out, they were setting it up so that they were guaranteed to get an opportunity to do so. And the reaction is way, way out of proportion to the 'offence'.

    The feeble bleatings of people overseas who have neither the power nor the opportunity to affect whatever a rogue government has already decided to do - some time or another, some way or another - are another such 'provocation'.
    I need more hard information on the real and the perceived impact of the jewish boycott on the german people, before I can evaluate its impact on the reaction that followed.

    Ive read somewhere (I dont remember where, nor if its reliable) that the boycott had a severe impact including a negative effect on germany's ability to import food(presumably because of a reduction in export revenus), maybe its not the case, on the other hand maybe people underestimate the boycott's effect. In one case (real impact) it reasonable to assume it contributed to a sharp negative reaction from the people (in a context of acerbating pre-existing tension obviously) and perfect propaganda material for the Nazis, in the other case (not real but perceived impact) it still provided perfect propaganda material on a silver platter for the Nazis.

    I think there is a possibility that without the boycott nothing would have been different, that is possible, but Im far from sure about that, at this point in time I think its more probable that it made the situation even worst than it would otherwise have been.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #92  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    Not a morally wrong move, but a tactically stupid one.

    This is one of the reasons why I asked the original question.

    They played right into Hitler's hands.
    I must add that the British Empire, whom may have seen Industrial Germany as a threat/primary rival, may also have benefited from the ethnic tensions inside a rival power. Fostering division inside rival powers is the oldest trick in the Imperialist book, dates back to long before Machiavelli wrote about it.
    Actually, what better way of getting rid of a group of people but to give it a homeland in the midst of its enemies who are far superior in number? Sound familiar. Funny it didn't work, eh? I wonder if maybe there was some kind of supernatural power moving the pawns?
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #93  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by icewendigo View Post
    Not so sure about that. Sounds an awful lot like the domestic tyrant who punches out the teeth of the cook because the meal wasn't served on time. "It's your own fault. I said 6 o'clock on the dot, you idiot! What's the matter with you!" All of us know that this person wasn't just looking for an excuse to lash out, they were setting it up so that they were guaranteed to get an opportunity to do so. And the reaction is way, way out of proportion to the 'offence'.

    The feeble bleatings of people overseas who have neither the power nor the opportunity to affect whatever a rogue government has already decided to do - some time or another, some way or another - are another such 'provocation'.
    I need more hard information on the real and the perceived impact of the jewish boycott on the german people, before I can evaluate its impact on the reaction that followed.

    Ive read somewhere (I dont remember where, nor if its reliable) that the boycott had a severe impact including a negative effect on germany's ability to import food(presumably because of a reduction in export revenus), maybe its not the case, on the other hand maybe people underestimate the boycott's effect. In one case (real impact) it reasonable to assume it contributed to a sharp negative reaction from the people (in a context of acerbating pre-existing tension obviously) and perfect propaganda material for the Nazis, in the other case (not real but perceived impact) it still provided perfect propaganda material on a silver platter for the Nazis.
    Germany's economy was in a pretty bad state. I can hardly imagine the event would not have caused great suffering in some sections of society.

    I'm sure it inflicted pain, but the tactical error the Jews made is that the boycott was an attempt to flex their financial muscles. German society was already thinking very strongly of seizing their property anyway, so basically they were turning to the one tactical asset they had the least ability to keep hold of. Dumb move.



    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    As far as i know its the boycotts effect that triggered the counter-boycott...
    Not so sure about that. Sounds an awful lot like the domestic tyrant who punches out the teeth of the cook because the meal wasn't served on time. "It's your own fault. I said 6 o'clock on the dot, you idiot! What's the matter with you!" All of us know that this person wasn't just looking for an excuse to lash out, they were setting it up so that they were guaranteed to get an opportunity to do so. And the reaction is way, way out of proportion to the 'offence'.
    How did the cook come to be in this state? At the moment you're describing I would say the cook should stab his master with a knife and kill him. But maybe he can't for some reason? Why not? What mistakes did he or his community make that lead to him ending up a chattel slave to a tyrant in the first place?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #94  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    How did the cook come to be in this state? At the moment you're describing I would say the cook should stab his master with a knife and kill him. But maybe he can't for some reason? Why not? What mistakes did he make to end up a chattel slave to a tyrant in the first place?
    Domestic tyranny is for another thread. Though I suppose there may be a, very tenuous, psychological parallel. It's well known that women are in most danger of being killed by such partners around the time of 'making the move' to get out. There's also another peak in these kinds of murders at other critical points. Divorce or custody proceedings, service of notices etc. Many women seem to know this instinctively, so they stay where they are. Same thing goes for some employees and domestic servants when they feel their lives / homes / safety are out of their own control. Remember back to the days of the tied housing run by various mining companies. People didn't stay because they liked the job or the vile treatment that was handed out. They stayed because they had nowhere to go.

    I can probably construct a whole psychological panorama linking domestic violence and intimidation to the official kind. But I won't. It's just worth bearing in mind that people will continue to put up with horrible circumstances - when it's been made very clear to them that worse awaits if they try to do anything about it.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #95  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    While I'm not really in favor of blaming the victim in those situations (because the offender really is the guy doing the attacking), I do think there are stages in the process where decisions are made that could lead to a woman escaping or falling prey, and as long as humanity exists there will always be men disposed toward domestic violence. You can't change that fact. It can be reduced by increased public consciousness, but it can't easily be stopped entirely. What we can do is teach women how to avoid and/or defeat it. That has a higher probability of success in any given situation.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #96  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,849
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    While I'm not really in favor of blaming the victim in those situations (because the offender really is the guy doing the attacking), I do think there are stages in the process where decisions are made that could lead to a woman escaping or falling prey,
    So to extend this to your comments above, since we all know abusers are most dangerous when their victims attempt to escape, attempting to escape is a dumb move?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #97  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    We also know that a very large number of abusers ultimately kill their victims regardless. It just happens sooner if you try to escape. However, if you attempt to escape there is a chance you may succeed and live out the rest of the years of your life in freedom. If you stay, you'll die a prisoner.

    I think I'd rather live 2 weeks with hope rather than 10 years with no hope.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Returning to Germany.
    By mmatt9876 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: August 1st, 2011, 11:31 AM
  2. Lifestyle check for volunteers/members of ENV Organizations?
    By EPACampus in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2011, 12:41 AM
  3. Is anyone here from Germany or Austria?
    By icewendigo in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 30th, 2007, 02:35 AM
  4. I declare...
    By sderenzi in forum Introductions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: June 22nd, 2007, 12:23 AM
  5. Greetings from Germany!
    By K.I.T.T. in forum Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2007, 04:31 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •