This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Bert the Head Epsom 09 Jun 16 10.14pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
It only a witch hunt if there is no such thing as 'witches' - I automatically assume that anyone using the phrase 'witch hunt' is actually guilty. After all the point of witch hunts, is they tortured, burned and hung tens of thousands of women for something that didn't exist - Witches and magic, based on their own ignorant beliefs. A definition of witch hunt is An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views. Livingstone said something that is an historical fact which is that there is evidence that Zionist corroborated with the Nazis. This was seen as subversive activity and he was harassed to undermine those views. I went to see a documentary by Ken Loach and was surprised to see that he had a play on the same subject (cooperation between Nazis and Zionists) pulled in 1987. This is the description of the event from Wikipedia: Working with writer Jim Allen, Loach was due to direct a play named Perdition, which suggested that Zionists in Hungary collaborated with the Nazis to help the operation of the Holocaust in return for allowing a few Jews to emigrate to Palestine. The play was due to run at the Royal Court in 1987, but its run was cancelled 36 hours before the first night, following widespread protests and allegations of anti-Semitism. It seems historical fact or not the subject must not be discussed. Otherwise it's witch hunt time.
Edited by Bert the Head (09 Jun 2016 10.15pm) Edited by Bert the Head (09 Jun 2016 10.16pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 09 Jun 16 10.21pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Bert the Head
A definition of witch hunt is An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views. Livingstone said something that is an historical fact which is that there is evidence that Zionist corroborated with the Nazis. This was seen as subversive activity and he was harassed to undermine those views. I went to see a documentary by Ken Loach and was surprised to see that he had a play on the same subject (cooperation between Nazis and Zionists) pulled in 1987. This is the description of the event from Wikipedia: Working with writer Jim Allen, Loach was due to direct a play named Perdition, which suggested that Zionists in Hungary collaborated with the Nazis to help the operation of the Holocaust in return for allowing a few Jews to emigrate to Palestine. The play was due to run at the Royal Court in 1987, but its run was cancelled 36 hours before the first night, following widespread protests and allegations of anti-Semitism. It seems historical fact or not the subject must not be discussed. Otherwise it's witch hunt time.
Edited by Bert the Head (09 Jun 2016 10.15pm) Edited by Bert the Head (09 Jun 2016 10.16pm) If you read the document I posted of the transcript of the suspended Labour member, it goes into great detail on the subject that confirms some Jewish factions did in fact collude with nazis.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
NickinOX Sailing country. 09 Jun 16 11.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
If you read the document I posted of the transcript of the suspended Labour member, it goes into great detail on the subject that confirms some Jewish factions did in fact collude with nazis. The existence of the sonderkommando and individual collaborators is not in dispute. What Loach's play was accused of was claiming that specific Jews used the Holocaust to further their Zionist agenda by selecting Jews to send to the death camps, and Zionists who were to be spared and sent to Palestine. That is speculation at best, and is a common accusation from holocaust deniers. Thus when people like Loach, or Corbyn's cronies such as Livingstone, make the accusation, or raise the question they are rightly questioned and there is nothing wrong with them being so. The fact that I have seen no main-stream academic, who is an expert on the topic, step forward to defend the argument speaks volumes. That the argument exists and is only treated seriously by the far right and far left, should tell you something. I find it interesting that you previously challenged me on this and I provided an explanation for why what was going on was racist, as well as pointing out my own experience as a shop steward. I note you agreed to one of my points and didn't challenge the other. That tells me you know there is a problem. Your political views, however, seem to be so dogmatic that you are wedded to ignoring or denying racism where it suits you. When you are arguing for the same thing as David Irving and his ilk, that should tell you something. I see no point in flogging a dead horse, so that's the last I will say on this. Edited by NickinOX (09 Jun 2016 11.57pm)
If you come to a fork in the road, take it. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 10 Jun 16 12.08am | |
---|---|
You know you're living in funny times when you hear the ideological left complaining about witch hunts.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 10 Jun 16 12.30am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by NickinOX
The existence of the sonderkommando and individual collaborators is not in dispute. What Loach's play was accused of was claiming that specific Jews used the Holocaust to further their Zionist agenda by selecting Jews to send to the death camps, and Zionists who were to be spared and sent to Palestine. That is speculation at best, and is a common accusation from holocaust deniers. Thus when people like Loach, or Corbyn's cronies such as Livingstone, make the accusation, or raise the question they are rightly questioned and there is nothing wrong with them being so. The fact that I have seen no main-stream academic, who is an expert on the topic, step forward to defend the argument speaks volumes. That the argument exists and is only treated seriously by the far right and far left, should tell you something. I find it interesting that you previously challenged me on this and I provided an explanation for why what was going on was racist, as well as pointing out my own experience as a shop steward. I note you agreed to one of my points and didn't challenge the other. That tells me you know there is a problem. Your political views, however, seem to be so dogmatic that you are wedded to ignoring or denying racism where it suits you. When you are arguing for the same thing as David Irving and his ilk, that should tell you something. I see no point in flogging a dead horse, so that's the last I will say on this. Edited by NickinOX (09 Jun 2016 11.57pm)
10.33 HG Alright then you very much. So if we move onto the second item which was raised in the original complaint. It was about Zionist collaboration with the holocaust. Following on from the original thing I sent you I have also found this article which the original comments referred to Zionism and the Holocaust TG: Yes thats an article I probably produced in the Weekly Worker. Its quite a long article do you want to comment on any particular aspect since you are worried about it? HG Theres quite a few things in it that I think that I think some people may find TG What is the question? HG One of the comments which is highlighted on page 6 is all wings of the Zionist movement played down reports of annihilation and obstructed the rescue efforts of others. That suggests that everybody who was in favour of Zionism at the time played down the holocaust [I ask HG to point out exact reference, which I then quote from] TG Why did all wings of the Zionist movement play down reports of annihilation and obstruct the rescue efforts. and then I quote Nathan Schwalb. In fact the quotes from Nathan Schwalb were from a letter sent to Rabbi Weissmandel who was a leader of Slovakian Jewry. Slovakia was a separate Nazi puppet state which was created out of the invasion of Czechoslovakia by Hitler in March 1939. He was sent a letter by the leader of Hehalutz Nathan Schwalb, in Switzerland. He actually denied sending it at the time of Perdition [a play in London about 25 years ago which dealt with the collaboration of Hungarian Zionism with the Nazis] I dont suppose you remember the play Perdition about some of those events. It was a controversy in Britain when the play was banned by the Royal Court [Theatre]. He brought legal action for libel and he lost it because he was unable to provide legal proof from his own archives as to whether he had sent the letter. [The letter from Schwalb was reproduced in the article that HG quotes from: It reads: "After the victory [of the Allies], they will once again divide up the world between the nations, as they did at the end of the first war, we must be aware that all the nations of the Allies are spilling much blood and if we do not bring sacrifices, with what will we achieve the right to sit at the table when they make the distribution of nations' territories after the war? ... Because only through blood will the land be ours. And so it would be foolish and impertinent on our side to ask the nations whose blood is being spilled for permission to send money into the land of their enemies in order to protect our own blood. Because rak bdam tihyu lanu haaretz (only through blood will the land be ours). "[S. Beit Zvi, Post-Ugandan Zionism on trial, Tel Aviv 1991, pp.295-96]. The evidence is quite clear. In your researches you probably didnt come across a book by Shabtai beit Zvi Ugandan Zionism in the Crucible of the Holocaust. Its a book by a Zionist, an ultra-Zionist, who went through the papers of the Jewish Agency and the Palestinian press at the time, all of whom played down reports of the holocaust. The Jewish Agency, the Zionist government-in-waiting in Palestine repeatedly denied that there was a holocaust or extermination of the Jews up until its admission on November 23 1942 that there was a holocaust. But even after that they reverted to type and said yes many thousands of Jews were being killed but there was no extermination. The Jewish Agency and the Palestinian press repeatedly did that and they quoted from Nazi papers. This is a matter of historical fact and what I find strange about this suspension process is that what you are questioning me about are matters of history. History which might be disputed but there is no doubt that the Zionist movement obstructed rescue because the Zionist position at the time was a very simple one. They wanted Jews to go to Palestine and there is a famous quote from David Ben-Gurion [the Chairman of the World Zionist Organisation at the time and later first Prime Minister of Israel] that if he had the choice between saving half Germanys Jewish children in Palestine or all of them in England, this is at the time of the Kindertransport. I dont know whether you know anything about the Kindertransport when 10,000 Jewish children were taken to England from the Greater German Reich in 1938-9, [repeat of quote]. That was the Zionist policy throughout the war. Its a fact. [the full quote was: If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel. The Burning Ground 1886-1948, p.855 Shabtai Teveth, official biography of Ben-Gurion] HG: But my point was that you contend that there was collaboration between the Nazis and the Zionists TG: Well there was, its not what I contend HG: But that point in the article suggests that all wings of the Zionist movement. TG: All wings did but not all Zionists did. There is a complete difference. Im talking about the leadership of the Zionist groups. Do you know anything about .? The problem is that you dont know a great deal about this. The Warsaw ghetto resistance included Zionists in it, leaders of the Zionist youth movements. It was led by the Bund, the major anti-Zionist Jewish group (which in the last free elections in Warsaw in 1938 gained 17 out the 20 Jewish council seats compared to one for the Zionists) but the Zionist youth led by Mordechai Anielwicz they had to rebel against their own Zionist parties, all of whom opposed the resistance. [I could have added the Zionist parties in Palestine sent orders not to take part in further resistance!] So yes, Zionists participated in resistance without a doubt, but the leaders of those movements, without exception, collaborated. There was a major trial in Israel, are you aware of the Kasztner trial? 1954-58, when the leader of Hungarian Zionism [Rudolf Kasztner] brought a libel action against someone [Malchiel Greenwald, a Hungarian Jew and survivor of the holocaust] who had accused him of collaboration, he was the leader of the Jewish Agency in Hungary. He lost the libel action in the lower courts. It was reversed on what was a technical legal point in the Supreme Court on appeal, by which time Kasztner was dead because he was assassinated. Kasztner made a deal with Eichmann and the deal was to take the elite Jews out of Hungary, 1684 to be precise, out of Hungary, out of Budapest on the night of July 1st 1944. In exchange he [Kasztner] kept silent about where the trains were going because most Jews believed they were being resettled. Thats what it was called, resettlement in the East. They believed they were being taken to a fictitious place called Kenyermeze. This is all a matter of history. The people who made the allegations against the Labour Zionists, because the Labour Zionists were worse than the right-wing Zionists, the Revisionists, now Likud, were the survivors of the Hungarian holocaust whod been tricked to going on the trains , who had been rounded up by the Jewish Councils in Hungary. Zionism is a movement of collaboration based on the idea that you cant fight anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism now is a different creature from what anti-Semitism was traditionally understood as. Yes its a matter of fact, but do I say all Zionists collaborated, absolutely not. No. HG I assume that these are your comments and that you stand by them. [TG confirms that is the case] Thank you very much. So if we move on to the next comment which is made on a Monday by Scotnet that Zionism is a form of anti-Semitism. That follows on from what you were just saying. 18.30 TG If I said Jewish people were vermin do you think that would be anti-Semitic? HG Its not for me to answer comments at this point TG If I said that someone Jewish was a piece of vermin, would that be anti-Semitic? HG: And Im saying that if this were to go to the NCC then you would have every right to ask me as many questions as you like. TG Im asking you now, do you think that a comment such as are Jewish people vermin anti-Semitic? Yes or no? Christine Shawcroft (silent witness) Harry cant answer the question. TG: Fine, you wont answer. Was Zionism a form of Jewish anti-Semitism? Yes of course I stand by that. HG: Has it always been so? TG: Yes it always has been. It was always seen by Jewish people as a form of anti-Semitism. HG: Can you elaborate on that? TG: I will quote from this article. Its in the Journal of Israeli Studies (Studies in Zionism I show HG the article) where Pinhas Rosenbluth who became the first Israeli Minister of Justice, says Palestine is an institute for the fumigation of Jewish vermin. Hence why I asked you that question. He wasnt idiosyncratic, he wasnt alone in that. The whole attitude of Zionism towards Jewish people outside of Israel or Palestine as it was at that time, was that they were sinful creatures who deserved everything they got because they were living in exile. They refused to go to Palestine and reclaim their national soil etc. It was a blood and soil movement. So Zionism was seen by most Jewish people as a form of anti-Semitism. Although you probably wont know of it, the only Jewish member of Lloyd Georges war cabinet in 1917 was Sir Edwin Montague, who later became the Secretary of State for India, and he was also the only person to oppose the Balfour Declaration, in which British imperialism promised Palestine to the Zionist movement over the heads of the people who lived there. The Palestinians. Montague said, [in a paper] that this was a form of anti-Semitism by his fellow cabinet members. They didnt want Jews in Britain so they wanted to send them to Palestine That was how it was seen by the vast majority of Jewish people. So when I said that Zionism was a form of Jewish anti-Semitism, yes, thats a matter of record. Today we see that Zionist groups often work with, are allied with and welcome to Israel people who are anti-Semites. Herr Strache, the leader of the Austrian Freedom Party, has only just come back from a visit to Jerusalem and Israel invited by Likud. Even though he was a leader of a party set up by neo-Nazis. If someone tells me today that I dont belong in England and that I should either go to Israel or Palestine they are either an anti-Semite or a Zionist . HG Is there no difference between saying that you should move to Israel or that you have the option of moving to Israel? TG No there isnt because Israel is a Jewish state. Do you know what a Jewish state means? The Zionist ideology. A Jewish state, as Netanyahu made clear when he came to Paris in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo murders, is a state that claims rights and responsibilities over all Jews. There isnt an Israeli nationality. Israel is unique in not having a nationality of its own citizens. That is because Israel is a Jewish state of not only Jewish citizens of Israel but Jews living outside Israel. Therefore I am a potential national of the Israeli state as is every other Jewish person living outside Israel. This is the situation as it exists so clearly Zionism makes that claim and thats what Netanyahu said in Paris that your true homeland is in Israel not in France. That is an anti-Semitic position. HG So obviously you admit saying it and you stand by your comments? TG Yes, absolutely. HG So the next thing I was going to ask you about your alleged post on FB about how Israels policy is about waiting for the remaining holocaust survivors to die. I know you said in the email that that was referencing a story from a newspaper. TG: I can show you a copy [hands a copy to HG] Haaretz [6 February 2013] Israel is waiting for its holocaust survivors to die. Are you suggesting that Haaretz, which is a liberal Israeli paper is anti-Semitic? HG No, no, Im not suggesting anything at this point. I was asking you because in my original email I sent that to you to ask you for TG I dont understand what the problem is about what Ive said. Why would you want to question me on it? What is controversial about that? HG Could you just summarise the story? TG Yes, Israel obtained reparations as a result of the holocaust from West Germany after the war. They were billions of Marks. Israel has been extremely parsimonious in doling them out. Israel has used much of the money for other projects. It has been a running sore (you can Google it). Most of the holocaust survivors in Israel are living in poverty, they have to choose between food and heat. This story in Haaretz is simply making the point that Israel is waiting for them to die off so that it doesnt have any have any further liability to keep them alive. Thats a fact. Israel uses the holocaust as a propaganda weapon, but in terms of the actual people who lived through the holocaust their reception in Israel was horrific in many ways. When they first arrived they were greeted extremely coldly in Israel after the war. They were cannon fodder for Israels expansion in 1947-8. They were called, the popular term was, and you can read a book [The Seventh Million] by Tom Segev, a well-known critical Zionist historian, who worked for Haaretz, sapon (soap) which was a reference to a popular myth that Jewish bodies were used to make soap once they have been gassed and murdered. In fact that didnt happen. That is actually a myth although it was a widepread belief [amongst Polish people] as to what happened and that was what they were called sapon (soap), so yes I stand by what is written in Haaretz, yes. Now maybe I'm being naive , but that does seem a good argument. I'm more than happy and open to be corrected on this. Edited by nickgusset (10 Jun 2016 12.31am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 10 Jun 16 5.51am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
You know you're living in funny times when you hear the ideological left complaining about witch hunts. What I find disturbing is the willingness of the left to sweep it under the carpet and dismiss it as a witch hunt, when some of the comments reported are disgusting (for example saying Jews financed the slave trade and praising 'my man Hitler'). I have said it before and will say it again that if the same percentage of UKIP supporters made the similar comments about a minority, then the left would be up in arms.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship. - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 10 Jun 16 5.57am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
10.33 HG Alright then you very much. So if we move onto the second item which was raised in the original complaint. It was about Zionist collaboration with the holocaust. Following on from the original thing I sent you I have also found this article which the original comments referred to Zionism and the Holocaust TG: Yes thats an article I probably produced in the Weekly Worker. Its quite a long article do you want to comment on any particular aspect since you are worried about it? HG Theres quite a few things in it that I think that I think some people may find TG What is the question? HG One of the comments which is highlighted on page 6 is all wings of the Zionist movement played down reports of annihilation and obstructed the rescue efforts of others. That suggests that everybody who was in favour of Zionism at the time played down the holocaust [I ask HG to point out exact reference, which I then quote from] TG Why did all wings of the Zionist movement play down reports of annihilation and obstruct the rescue efforts. and then I quote Nathan Schwalb. In fact the quotes from Nathan Schwalb were from a letter sent to Rabbi Weissmandel who was a leader of Slovakian Jewry. Slovakia was a separate Nazi puppet state which was created out of the invasion of Czechoslovakia by Hitler in March 1939. He was sent a letter by the leader of Hehalutz Nathan Schwalb, in Switzerland. He actually denied sending it at the time of Perdition [a play in London about 25 years ago which dealt with the collaboration of Hungarian Zionism with the Nazis] I dont suppose you remember the play Perdition about some of those events. It was a controversy in Britain when the play was banned by the Royal Court [Theatre]. He brought legal action for libel and he lost it because he was unable to provide legal proof from his own archives as to whether he had sent the letter. [The letter from Schwalb was reproduced in the article that HG quotes from: It reads: "After the victory [of the Allies], they will once again divide up the world between the nations, as they did at the end of the first war, we must be aware that all the nations of the Allies are spilling much blood and if we do not bring sacrifices, with what will we achieve the right to sit at the table when they make the distribution of nations' territories after the war? ... Because only through blood will the land be ours. And so it would be foolish and impertinent on our side to ask the nations whose blood is being spilled for permission to send money into the land of their enemies in order to protect our own blood. Because rak bdam tihyu lanu haaretz (only through blood will the land be ours). "[S. Beit Zvi, Post-Ugandan Zionism on trial, Tel Aviv 1991, pp.295-96]. The evidence is quite clear. In your researches you probably didnt come across a book by Shabtai beit Zvi Ugandan Zionism in the Crucible of the Holocaust. Its a book by a Zionist, an ultra-Zionist, who went through the papers of the Jewish Agency and the Palestinian press at the time, all of whom played down reports of the holocaust. The Jewish Agency, the Zionist government-in-waiting in Palestine repeatedly denied that there was a holocaust or extermination of the Jews up until its admission on November 23 1942 that there was a holocaust. But even after that they reverted to type and said yes many thousands of Jews were being killed but there was no extermination. The Jewish Agency and the Palestinian press repeatedly did that and they quoted from Nazi papers. This is a matter of historical fact and what I find strange about this suspension process is that what you are questioning me about are matters of history. History which might be disputed but there is no doubt that the Zionist movement obstructed rescue because the Zionist position at the time was a very simple one. They wanted Jews to go to Palestine and there is a famous quote from David Ben-Gurion [the Chairman of the World Zionist Organisation at the time and later first Prime Minister of Israel] that if he had the choice between saving half Germanys Jewish children in Palestine or all of them in England, this is at the time of the Kindertransport. I dont know whether you know anything about the Kindertransport when 10,000 Jewish children were taken to England from the Greater German Reich in 1938-9, [repeat of quote]. That was the Zionist policy throughout the war. Its a fact. [the full quote was: If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel. The Burning Ground 1886-1948, p.855 Shabtai Teveth, official biography of Ben-Gurion] HG: But my point was that you contend that there was collaboration between the Nazis and the Zionists TG: Well there was, its not what I contend HG: But that point in the article suggests that all wings of the Zionist movement. TG: All wings did but not all Zionists did. There is a complete difference. Im talking about the leadership of the Zionist groups. Do you know anything about .? The problem is that you dont know a great deal about this. The Warsaw ghetto resistance included Zionists in it, leaders of the Zionist youth movements. It was led by the Bund, the major anti-Zionist Jewish group (which in the last free elections in Warsaw in 1938 gained 17 out the 20 Jewish council seats compared to one for the Zionists) but the Zionist youth led by Mordechai Anielwicz they had to rebel against their own Zionist parties, all of whom opposed the resistance. [I could have added the Zionist parties in Palestine sent orders not to take part in further resistance!] So yes, Zionists participated in resistance without a doubt, but the leaders of those movements, without exception, collaborated. There was a major trial in Israel, are you aware of the Kasztner trial? 1954-58, when the leader of Hungarian Zionism [Rudolf Kasztner] brought a libel action against someone [Malchiel Greenwald, a Hungarian Jew and survivor of the holocaust] who had accused him of collaboration, he was the leader of the Jewish Agency in Hungary. He lost the libel action in the lower courts. It was reversed on what was a technical legal point in the Supreme Court on appeal, by which time Kasztner was dead because he was assassinated. Kasztner made a deal with Eichmann and the deal was to take the elite Jews out of Hungary, 1684 to be precise, out of Hungary, out of Budapest on the night of July 1st 1944. In exchange he [Kasztner] kept silent about where the trains were going because most Jews believed they were being resettled. Thats what it was called, resettlement in the East. They believed they were being taken to a fictitious place called Kenyermeze. This is all a matter of history. The people who made the allegations against the Labour Zionists, because the Labour Zionists were worse than the right-wing Zionists, the Revisionists, now Likud, were the survivors of the Hungarian holocaust whod been tricked to going on the trains , who had been rounded up by the Jewish Councils in Hungary. Zionism is a movement of collaboration based on the idea that you cant fight anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism now is a different creature from what anti-Semitism was traditionally understood as. Yes its a matter of fact, but do I say all Zionists collaborated, absolutely not. No. HG I assume that these are your comments and that you stand by them. [TG confirms that is the case] Thank you very much. So if we move on to the next comment which is made on a Monday by Scotnet that Zionism is a form of anti-Semitism. That follows on from what you were just saying. 18.30 TG If I said Jewish people were vermin do you think that would be anti-Semitic? HG Its not for me to answer comments at this point TG If I said that someone Jewish was a piece of vermin, would that be anti-Semitic? HG: And Im saying that if this were to go to the NCC then you would have every right to ask me as many questions as you like. TG Im asking you now, do you think that a comment such as are Jewish people vermin anti-Semitic? Yes or no? Christine Shawcroft (silent witness) Harry cant answer the question. TG: Fine, you wont answer. Was Zionism a form of Jewish anti-Semitism? Yes of course I stand by that. HG: Has it always been so? TG: Yes it always has been. It was always seen by Jewish people as a form of anti-Semitism. HG: Can you elaborate on that? TG: I will quote from this article. Its in the Journal of Israeli Studies (Studies in Zionism I show HG the article) where Pinhas Rosenbluth who became the first Israeli Minister of Justice, says Palestine is an institute for the fumigation of Jewish vermin. Hence why I asked you that question. He wasnt idiosyncratic, he wasnt alone in that. The whole attitude of Zionism towards Jewish people outside of Israel or Palestine as it was at that time, was that they were sinful creatures who deserved everything they got because they were living in exile. They refused to go to Palestine and reclaim their national soil etc. It was a blood and soil movement. So Zionism was seen by most Jewish people as a form of anti-Semitism. Although you probably wont know of it, the only Jewish member of Lloyd Georges war cabinet in 1917 was Sir Edwin Montague, who later became the Secretary of State for India, and he was also the only person to oppose the Balfour Declaration, in which British imperialism promised Palestine to the Zionist movement over the heads of the people who lived there. The Palestinians. Montague said, [in a paper] that this was a form of anti-Semitism by his fellow cabinet members. They didnt want Jews in Britain so they wanted to send them to Palestine That was how it was seen by the vast majority of Jewish people. So when I said that Zionism was a form of Jewish anti-Semitism, yes, thats a matter of record. Today we see that Zionist groups often work with, are allied with and welcome to Israel people who are anti-Semites. Herr Strache, the leader of the Austrian Freedom Party, has only just come back from a visit to Jerusalem and Israel invited by Likud. Even though he was a leader of a party set up by neo-Nazis. If someone tells me today that I dont belong in England and that I should either go to Israel or Palestine they are either an anti-Semite or a Zionist . HG Is there no difference between saying that you should move to Israel or that you have the option of moving to Israel? TG No there isnt because Israel is a Jewish state. Do you know what a Jewish state means? The Zionist ideology. A Jewish state, as Netanyahu made clear when he came to Paris in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo murders, is a state that claims rights and responsibilities over all Jews. There isnt an Israeli nationality. Israel is unique in not having a nationality of its own citizens. That is because Israel is a Jewish state of not only Jewish citizens of Israel but Jews living outside Israel. Therefore I am a potential national of the Israeli state as is every other Jewish person living outside Israel. This is the situation as it exists so clearly Zionism makes that claim and thats what Netanyahu said in Paris that your true homeland is in Israel not in France. That is an anti-Semitic position. HG So obviously you admit saying it and you stand by your comments? TG Yes, absolutely. HG So the next thing I was going to ask you about your alleged post on FB about how Israels policy is about waiting for the remaining holocaust survivors to die. I know you said in the email that that was referencing a story from a newspaper. TG: I can show you a copy [hands a copy to HG] Haaretz [6 February 2013] Israel is waiting for its holocaust survivors to die. Are you suggesting that Haaretz, which is a liberal Israeli paper is anti-Semitic? HG No, no, Im not suggesting anything at this point. I was asking you because in my original email I sent that to you to ask you for TG I dont understand what the problem is about what Ive said. Why would you want to question me on it? What is controversial about that? HG Could you just summarise the story? TG Yes, Israel obtained reparations as a result of the holocaust from West Germany after the war. They were billions of Marks. Israel has been extremely parsimonious in doling them out. Israel has used much of the money for other projects. It has been a running sore (you can Google it). Most of the holocaust survivors in Israel are living in poverty, they have to choose between food and heat. This story in Haaretz is simply making the point that Israel is waiting for them to die off so that it doesnt have any have any further liability to keep them alive. Thats a fact. Israel uses the holocaust as a propaganda weapon, but in terms of the actual people who lived through the holocaust their reception in Israel was horrific in many ways. When they first arrived they were greeted extremely coldly in Israel after the war. They were cannon fodder for Israels expansion in 1947-8. They were called, the popular term was, and you can read a book [The Seventh Million] by Tom Segev, a well-known critical Zionist historian, who worked for Haaretz, sapon (soap) which was a reference to a popular myth that Jewish bodies were used to make soap once they have been gassed and murdered. In fact that didnt happen. That is actually a myth although it was a widepread belief [amongst Polish people] as to what happened and that was what they were called sapon (soap), so yes I stand by what is written in Haaretz, yes. Now maybe I'm being naive , but that does seem a good argument. I'm more than happy and open to be corrected on this. Edited by nickgusset (10 Jun 2016 12.31am) Please do point out where in this link: The councillors 'criticism of the Israeli state' is being confused with anti semtism? You are clutching at straws Gusset. Anti semitism is rife within Labour and the introduction of 200,000 entryist Trots and assorted Leftie weirdos, only amplifies this.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship. - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 10 Jun 16 7.35am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by matt_himself
Please do point out where in this link: The councillors 'criticism of the Israeli state' is being confused with anti semtism? You are clutching at straws Gusset. Anti semitism is rife within Labour and the introduction of 200,000 entryist Trots and assorted Leftie weirdos, only amplifies this. On the face of it. Looks like she is bang to rights. Now would would like to comment on Tony Greenstein's defence in the link I posted as you promised you would. Thanks
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 10 Jun 16 8.02am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
On the face of it. Looks like she is bang to rights. Now would would like to comment on Tony Greenstein's defence in the link I posted as you promised you would. Thanks So, just a one liner? No words on how disgusting it is, similar to when you reference Boris Johnson's racist comments? Double standards Gusset. i said I would read your time when I had time. It's a long document and it needs verifying as authentic. I know that you lefties use dark arts when defending your own sort, Comrade Alpha being a prime example of the depths you lot will plummet.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship. - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 10 Jun 16 8.12am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by matt_himself
So, just a one liner? No words on how disgusting it is, similar to when you reference Boris Johnson's racist comments? Double standards Gusset. i said I would read your time when I had time. It's a long document and it needs verifying as authentic. I know that you lefties use dark arts when defending your own sort, Comrade Alpha being a prime example of the depths you lot will plummet. OK taken in the context of the article it is odious. In what context are her tweets, what has she responded to. When this is verified, I will comment further.
I read you every day and look forward to a further display of your mind reading powers telling me what I think. Edited by nickgusset (10 Jun 2016 8.18am)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 10 Jun 16 8.39am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
OK taken in the context of the article it is odious. In what context are her tweets, what has she responded to. When this is verified, I will comment further.
I read you every day and look forward to a further display of your mind reading powers telling me what I think. Edited by nickgusset (10 Jun 2016 8.18am) Gusset taking the moral high ground = deflection. You still cannot and will not admit that this is problem for the left. That is what I find disgusting about it.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship. - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 10 Jun 16 8.54am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by matt_himself
Gusset taking the moral high ground = deflection. You still cannot and will not admit that this is problem for the left. That is what I find disgusting about it. Asking for more context = taking the moral high ground? I'll let others decide. Now I'd hate for either of us to get a yellow card for boring the pants off of everyone with tit for tat nonsense.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.