Increasing public unrest in Israel

We don't use numbers. It is not the criteria.
Oh, well many Zionists here have boasted that "99.5% of Gaza are still alive, how can you call it genocide" so for her at least, numbers seem to be important.
The criteria is "intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group". In the example given (gas chambers) the number would be zero, as the creation of something as horrific as gas chambers fits the criteria.
This is equating the capability to kill large numbers of people with an intent to kill large numbers. Is this what you mean? if a capability of performing the destruction of said group has been created then we can conclude that there must therefore be an intent?
 
Last edited:
Yes, I am fully aware that the Arabs won't stop fighting until the State of Israel is dismantled and the Jews killed or dispersed or returned to dhimmi status. And I'm fully aware that many here are calling for that very thing. What shocks me is that for all the screaming about genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid, each of these seems to be fine when committed against Jews.
Doubly shocking to me is that most of the screaming is coming from liberals, who purportedly insist they hate racism and bigotry (unless, apparently, when committed against Jews).

Double standards applied to Jews are yet another element of the definition of antisemitism.
 
If you had any argument to refute anything I've written you wouldn't need such snarky and transparent evasions.

Israel's right wing Zionists planned to destroy Gaza and murder / expel its native residents at least ten years ago. ...

"Israeli official calls for concentration camps in Gaza and 'the conquest of the entire Gaza Strip, and annihilation of all fighting forces and their supporters'"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...fighting-forces-supporters.html#ixzz4r533poyd

EXCERPT "Moshe Feiglin, Deputy Speaker of the Israeli Knesset and member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud Party, posted the inflammatory message on his Facebook page at the weekend.

He lays out a detailed plan for the destruction of Gaza - which includes shipping its residents across the world - in a letter he addressed to the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In the letter he expresses his desire for the IDF to find areas on the Sinai border to establish 'tent encampments...until relevant emigration destinations are determined.'

He says that the supply of electricity and water to the Gaza would be disconnected before being 'shelled with maximum fire power.' " CONTINUED

See, and this is exactly why the inflammatory language is inappropriate as it creates a false and demonizing perspective not found in the actual plan suggested by Feiglin, which is:

  • Provide advance warnings for any attacks and encourage non-combatants to flee
  • Provide a protected and safe place for those refugees to wait out the war
  • Accept the surrender of any individual terrorists and Hamas as a whole
  • Eliminate remaining terrorists and all terror infrastructure with precision military attacks
  • Assert Israeli sovereignty over Gaza
  • Encourage Jewish residency in Gaza alongside Arab residency
  • Create trade and economic prosperity
  • Offer generous compensation to any Arab who chooses not to stay
  • Offer full Israeli citizenship to those who stay (in due time)
This is the "save Gaza from Hamas" plan which results in peace and prosperity for everyone. I suggested, with less detail, nearly the exact same plan only a week or so ago. The only difference is that I additionally suggested a referendum to choose either Israeli sovereignty or Gaza independence.
 
This is equating the capability to kill large numbers of people with an intent to kill large numbers. Is this what you mean?
It is not. Designing and building mechanisms for efficient destruction of a group is evidence of intent, of itself.
 
It is not. Designing and building mechanisms for efficient destruction of a group is evidence of intent, of itself.
That's an interpretation of the facts. That a facility could be used for a particular purpose does not prove that the intent is to pursue that purpose. The Germans could have created the gas rooms for purposes other than "to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group", of course with hindsight we know that they did pursue the goal of mass killing.

How could one be 100% certain at the time, that the intent of the Germans was the genocide of the Jews? It was certainly to "dispose" of prisoners and the sick and elderly and in large numbers but does that prove a desire to see all Jews exterminated? The development of gassing rooms alone does not seem to me to prove that the Germans sought the destruction of the race.

Let me stress too, there is no doubt that the Germans did seek the destruction of the Jewish race, this is in no doubt. What is being discussed is how - at the time - one could have looked around and concluded that this was their goal, the existence of rooms suitable for mass gassing doesn't in and of itself prove the intent.

This is like someone saying to you that the destruction of all water pumps and tanks and desalination plants within Gaza could be used "to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group" but although that's true, that everyone in Gaza could die from lack of water and appalling conditions of hygiene, the destruction of all sources of water is not itself evidence of intent or is it?
 
Last edited:
It is not. Designing and building mechanisms for efficient destruction of a group is evidence of intent, of itself.

There is no more costly, inefficient and dangerous way to kill a large group of people than the fictional " homicidal gas chamber" of Holocaust lore.

It's common sense.

If millions were killed by homicidal gas chambers, there would have been hundreds of them but not one has been found except for a fake one built by German POWs for Allied / Soviet propaganda purposes.
When inspectors examined the "homicidal gas chamber" they immediately rejected this additional hoax.

Since the work camps included murderers, rapists and other dangerous individuals, people were executed but not by homicidal gas chambers.
 
Yes, Jews like Palestinians and others have been there for thousands of years. But most of the Jews in Israel are either from or are descended from European immigrants who happen to be Jewish, they are from Europe and one can trace their families back generations within Europe. This is where enlightened Jewish culture began with developments in music, art, science and mathematics - none of that happened in the Levant!

Prior to militant Zionism very few Jews outside of the Levant knew anything about it, had never been there, did not know anybody there and had no affinity for the place, it was seen as a poorly developed backwater, they were attracted by the offer of free (stolen) land.

Most of the Jews in Israel are transplants, the goal was since the 1920 to encourage migration of Jews into the Levant in order to swell the numbers are alter the demographics.

I do condemn colonization, it has destroyed millions and millions of lives around the world. Consider the Belgian Congo, the colonizers there make the Nazis look feeble, its estimated between 10 and 15 million indigenous Africans were exterminated - shmolocaust, holocaust.
Still more nonsense from the king of nonsense. First, there is no such thing as militant Zionism. This is just one of those things you invented to try to justify killing Jews.

There is no evidence to support the allegation of Jews stealing land from the Arabs. This is another of your lies to try to justify killing Jews.

While there were some Jewish nationalists who immigrated to Palestine during the Mandatory period, the greatest number of Jews who settled there had wished to emigrate to the US but were stopped by restricted immigration laws instituted by the US and so chose Palestine, which was then a British colony.

There is no evidence to support your wild allegations that either the Jews or the Brits were indifferent to the legal rights of the Arabs who already lived there.
 
That's an interpretation of the facts. That a facility could be used for a particular purpose does not prove that the intent is to pursue that purpose. The Germans could have created the gas rooms for purposes other than "to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group", of course with hindsight we know that they did pursue the goal of mass killing.

How could one be 100% certain at the time, that the intent of the Germans was the genocide of the Jews? It was certainly to "dispose" of prisoners and the sick and elderly and in large numbers but does that prove a desire to see all Jews exterminated? The development of gassing rooms alone does not seem to me to prove that the Germans sought the destruction of the race.

Let me stress too, there is no doubt that the Germans did seek the destruction of the Jewish race, this is in no doubt. What is being discussed is how - at the time - one could have looked around and concluded that this was their goal, the existence of rooms suitable for mass gassing doesn't in and of itself prove the intent.

This is like someone saying to you that the destruction of all water pumps and tanks and desalination plants within Gaza could be used "to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group" but although that's true, that everyone in Gaza could die from lack of water and appalling conditions of hygiene, the destruction of all sources of water is not itself evidence of intent or is it?


I agree with your argument that possession of a deadly device does not mean that the owner intends to use it for homicidal purposes.

For example, I've got a revolver that is the same make, model and age as the one used by David Berkowitz (aka "Son of Sam") but I've killed no one with it and don't plan to do so.

As you are aware both sides used propaganda during WW 2.
The American propaganda ministry was the O.W.I. (Office of War Information) but was dwarfed by the older and more experienced British Propagandists but they both had Hollywood's movie moguls to demonize the Germans and employ atrocity propaganda (4) during and long after the war.

Nothing that Goebbels had could rival British experience in propaganda or Hollywood's masters of creative fantasy and the flood of gruesome fables and grisly hoaxes like the ones in the photo, below, continue to deceive much of the Western world, today.





download.jpg


Even though the Soviets repurposed former German work camps into Soviet gulags, Hollywood, the OWI and the Holocaust Industry made their own theatric alterations that have succeeded in deceiving tourists for generations.

I have lived, worked with and known over a dozen Holocaust survivors, former Russian WW 2 survivors and German WW 2 Veterans and even more American WW 2 Veterans.
A "White" Russian woman whose family was murdered and home burned by the "Red" Russians was captured by Allied and Axis forces during the course of the war and maintained that the Germans treated her the best.

Based on their collective experiences, studying salient documents in the original German and about 60 years independent research I cannot believe that Hitler either hated or ordered the destruction of Europe's Jews.

I attempt to be objective even though even the mention of the name, Hitler, incites strong emotions not always based on fact that it is difficult to discuss him calmly, honestly or objectively.

I suspect that as long as Hollywood continues to churn out melodramatic and one dimensional Holocaust fiction it will be a while before JFK's prediction comes true:

“You can easily understand how that within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived,” Kennedy wrote in his diary in 1945.”

I also suspect that if the war crimes of Allied leaders received the same through and objective scrutiny that they, too would have met the gallows at Nuremberg .

Re: Let me stress too, there is no doubt that the Germans did seek the destruction of the Jewish race, this is in no doubt.

I have found absolutely nothing to support the contention that: "...the Germans did seek the destruction of the Jewish race,"

First, unlike, Stalin, Churchill, Mao, Eisenhower and Pol Pot, there are no written orders from Hitler for he mass killing of Europe's Jews:

“To the present day a written order by Hitler regarding the destruction of the European Jewish community has not been found, and, in all probability, this order was never given.”

- Walter Laqueur, Was niemand wissen wollte: Die Unterdruckung der Nachrichten uber Hitlers Endlösung (What Nobody Wanted to Know: The Suppression of News About Hitler’s “Final Solution”), (Berlin-Vienna, 1981), p.190

Additionally, there were about 150,000 Jews in Hitlers military (1), (2) and there were also high ranking Nazi Party officials who were Jewish.(3)

On top of that, Hitler's doctor was Jewish, his driver was Jewish, he was a "Pen Pal" with a young Jewish girl who shared the same birthday.

I'm interested in your thoughts at what I have tried to look at objectively.

Thanks,




(1). “Hitler’s Jewish Army”
http://counterpsyops.com/2013/02/14/...-hitlers-army/


EXCERPT “Thousands of men of Jewish descent and hundreds of what the Nazis called ‘full Jews’ served in the German military with Adolf Hitler’s knowledge and approval.

In approximately 20 cases, Jewish soldiers in the Nazi army were awarded(*)Germany’s highest military honor, the Knight’s Cross.

Jews also served in the Nazi police and security forces as ghetto police(Ordnungdienst)()and concentration camp guards()(kapos).

So what happens to the claim that Hitler sought to exterminate all Jews, when he allowed some of them to join in his struggle against Bolshevism and International finance capitalism?

“If the Jews were permitted to serve in Hitler’s armed forces then there could not have been a Holocaust.”CONTINUED



(2). "Historian claims Hitler personally approved officers of Jewish descent to fight for Nazis"

ADOLF HITLER personally allowed at least 77 army officers of Jewish descent, including 25 generals, to fight for the Nazi cause…



EXCERPT ""In many cases, Hitler decided personally what should be done with soldiers of Jewish descent - and he made different decisions from case to case."

The most senior general of Jewish origin was Field Marshall Erhard Milch, who rose to be general inspector of the Luftwaffe and was convicted of war crimes after 1945." CONTINUED



(3). “List of Nazis of non-Germanic descent”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nazis_of_non-Germanic_descent

EXCERPT “Notably, there were several high-ranking Nazis of full and partial Jewish descent. “ CONTINUED


(4). “The Director of the Holocau$t - Khazar Expatriate Billy Wilder”

EXCERPT “Almost all the films you've ever seen of the Holocaust were staged. Using Allied propaganda as a rough script, directors from Hollywood were shipped to Germany and Poland to direct propaganda films for post-war use. One of the most notable of these was Billy Wilder, director of meny very well known films, such as "Some Like It Hot" with Marilyn Monroe." CONTINUED
 

Attachments

  • download.webp
    download.webp
    44.8 KB · Views: 6
Last edited:
Still more nonsense from the king of nonsense. First, there is no such thing as militant Zionism. This is just one of those things you invented to try to justify killing Jews.

There is no evidence to support the allegation of Jews stealing land from the Arabs. This is another of your lies to try to justify killing Jews.

While there were some Jewish nationalists who immigrated to Palestine during the Mandatory period, the greatest number of Jews who settled there had wished to emigrate to the US but were stopped by restricted immigration laws instituted by the US and so chose Palestine, which was then a British colony.

There is no evidence to support your wild allegations that either the Jews or the Brits were indifferent to the legal rights of the Arabs who already lived there.
Very well, so you were unable to find or recognize evidence of these things yet I and other people can.
 
Still more nonsense from the king of nonsense. First, there is no such thing as militant Zionism. This is just one of those things you invented to try to justify killing Jews.

There is no evidence to support the allegation of Jews stealing land from the Arabs. This is another of your lies to try to justify killing Jews.

While there were some Jewish nationalists who immigrated to Palestine during the Mandatory period, the greatest number of Jews who settled there had wished to emigrate to the US but were stopped by restricted immigration laws instituted by the US and so chose Palestine, which was then a British colony.

There is no evidence to support your wild allegations that either the Jews or the Brits were indifferent to the legal rights of the Arabs who already lived there.
Jesus nearly your entire post is wrong. Lol. How do you get so fucking dumb?
 
Very well, so you were unable to find or recognize evidence of these things yet I and other people can.
You present no evidence for these things, just a willingness to tell outrageous lies to try to justify killing Jews.

There is no evidence of an "invasion" by the Jews, no evidence of anything that can be called "militant Zionism,", no evidence of land theft, no evidence of ethnic cleansing, no evidence of apartheid and no evidence of genocide and no evidence of any ambitions other than to live in peace and prosper, first under British colonial rule and then within the state of Israel.

The only evidence you ever provide in any of your posts is of your desire to justify killing Jews.
 
You present no evidence for these things, just a willingness to tell outrageous lies to try to justify killing Jews.
I've presented a variety of evidence since starting to discuss this subject in this forum since July 1.
There is no evidence of an "invasion" by the Jews, no evidence of anything that can be called "militant Zionism,", no evidence of land theft, no evidence of ethnic cleansing, no evidence of apartheid and no evidence of genocide and no evidence of any ambitions other than to live in peace and prosper, first under British colonial rule and then within the state of Israel.
Well, that you don't regard evidence as evidence is not my concern, I'm not trying to change your views either, you can believe whatever you want.

But here, here's some more evidence - again if you don't like it or think it's not evidence then fine, I don't care.

1726180452653.png

The only evidence you ever provide in any of your posts is of your desire to justify killing Jews.
You're confusing me with the Germans, it was German Nazis that justified killing Jews, not me.
 
Last edited:
I've presented a variety of evidence since starting to discuss this subject in this forum since July 1.

Well, that you don't regard evidence as evidence is not my concern, I'm not trying to change your views either, you can believe whatever you want.

But here, here's some more evidence - again if you don't like it or think it's not evidence then fine, I don't care.

View attachment 1010659


You're confusing me with the Germans, it was German Nazis that justified killing Jews, not me.
Again, you have presented no evidence at all, just wild allegations about Jews to try to justify killing them.
 
Hell yeah! That terrorist asswipe was a hero to many. Adios, rape-monkey!



449940D7-9B20-4BC0-8FB0-1FB2885A5B91.webp
 
It is not a question of belief; it is a fact that you are unable to provide any evidence for your outrageous lies about Israel.
If you don't want to see evidence then of course, it will look to you like there is none, people see what they want to see, since you believe the Zionist narrative, this is very much a matter of belief.

I too once believed it (thirty years ago) but unlike you I wasn't afraid to question my beliefs, some people never quite manage to do that.
 
Back
Top Bottom