Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Oh, dear, we've upset the neighbours.

Well, it depends on your neighbourhood, actually.

According to the Hun, muslims are upset at John Howard suggesting that there is a minority of extremists among them who have beliefs and cultural practices that are antithetical to Australian life and laws. Okay, so it wasn't a suggestion, more like an assertion. But still...

Considering that muslim spokesmen have been claiming for years that their religion has been hijacked, you'd think they'd be happy for this to be acknowledged so publicly.

As Ameer Ali seems to think that if we ignore the extremists they will go away or their offspring wouldn't be as 'radical'. This was not the case in London last year, so I see no reason to give that idea too much of my time.

Keysar Trad thinks that "To single out the Muslim community like this, the Prime Minister is unfortunately playing on pre-existing Islamaphobia."

Mr Trad, why is this stereotype so prevalant?

On a related note from page 13 of the HeraldSun (21/02/06) comes this piece of great interest:

Muslims Fear Backlash
Victoria's peak Islamic body has established a "post-disaster" strategy to protect Melbourne's Muslims from a backlash in the event of a London-style bombing in Australia.

The strategy, including personal protection, guarding mosques and solidarity displays with non-Muslims after an attack, may be ready by next month's Commonwealth Games.

The Islamic Council of Victoria and Victoria Police have discussed how the Muslim community should respond to a terrorist attack and how it could protect itself against vigilante reprisals. - Mark Dunn

I couldn't find this online, hence no links.

What is intriguing is the pre-emptive strategy. Why would they fear a terrorist attack and associated backlash?

There has been relatively little backlash considering the unrest over cartoons. There has been a lot of talk from muslim representatives about how maligned they are, but no move to make themselves more a part of the overall aussie culture. Just that we need to understand them more, and give them more latitude and not upset them.

But again, if Islam is so peace-loving, so warm and fuzzy, why would we and they even consider the possibility of a terrorist attack during the Commonwealth Games?

34 Comments:

At 11:24 PM, Anonymous youcancallmemeyer said...

It appears to be a combination rules 9 and 11 of Taqqiya. See below:

Taqqiya rules:

1. Deny that the perpetrators are "true Moslems". (Redefine terms to eliminate fault - "the universal option")
2. They did it because they were humiliated. (Equivalence defence - "the Cronulla/Maroubra shuffle")
3. They are only "youths". (Rely on western concern for the young - "the Paris option")
4. It's because of Israel. (We offer you a solution no Israel/no bombs)
5. It's because of Iraq. (You attacked us first - 1.2 billion moslems being "us")
6. It's because of the cartoons. (You know we don't accept your rules - just your welfare)
7. The translation is not accurate ("the Hilaly gambit")
8. They are unemployed and socially disadvantaged (change subject rely on western guilt - see "the Paris option")
9. We fear a backlash (make perpetrator the victim - "the bait and switch gambit")
10. Colonialism has caused resentment (moslems equal victims - "the you know no history victim gambit")
11. We fear attacks against you (backhanded threat - "submit or you die classic")
12. It was the clothes she was wearing (all moslem men have no self control - "the it's obvious option")
13. They are good boys - she is a slut (gang rape defence - "the good boy option" - mothers only)
14. They did not know the cultural rules (The Pakistani/moslem rape defence - "the I'm stupid defence")
15. She agreed to have sex with me and my 15 mates (general first line of defence to gang rape charge)

I'm starting a collection. Hope to hone it more.

I've been lurking a short while. Like the blog.

 
At 12:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whilst the world is in shock about the Muslim reaction to the “cartoons”, which were published to demonstrate “freedom of speech, a much smaller scenario has been played out in an Austrian courtroom.

David Irving is a self taught historian. Some of his books are widely respected. He managed to obtain many rare diaries, and had access to a range of sources. Unfortunately his area of interest is German involvement in worlds war 2. I have his “Churchill’s War” on my desk right now, and although I don’t like how it portray Churchill, I have to agree that it is very factual.

But some left wing and Jewish elements didn’t like what he said about the Holocaust – the murder of Jews and “undesirables” by Germany.

Jews have boasted that they have managed to get him banned form Australia. His American opponents relish trying to disrupt his progress, telephoning hotels and restaurants in advance to cancel his bookings. One Jewish website recalls a US tour where Irving was forced to stay in cheap motels.

So here we have a man who rightly or wrongly, makes comment upon events 65 years ago, but because a group of people don’t like hat he says, he is protested against, attacked, and banned from some countries.

He is bankrupt, having fought a libel case against a Jewish woman, having been found guilty by a Jewish judge. At the age of 67 he has no money or possessions. The Jewish woman – Deborrah Lipstadt, seized his collection of papers and diaries, destroying somer of them so that he can never appeal, not can the truth ever be determined. Invaluable historic evidence has been shredded so that no one can ever challenge the Jewish version of events.

Last night he was sentenced to 3 years in jail in Austria for something he said 12 years ago.

So don’t worry about publishing cartoons – that is just freedom of speech. But if you say the Jewish version of events is incorrect, they will hunt you down to the end.

Freedom of speech? Only if it suits the Jews.....

 
At 12:51 PM, Blogger MK said...

I think most of us are tired of all the special treatment afforded to Muslims, percieved backlashes and a constant state of victimhood.

The leftists might believe that crap, but most of us know otherwise.

 
At 1:39 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Anon 12.21, as you seem to have all the answers, please enlighten me.

The law in Austria and Germany makes Holocaust denial illegal. Mr Irving knew this, and there was an outstanding warrant for his arrest from 17 years ago.

Why, after all this time, would he set foot in a country that wants to arrest him and put him on trial?

He broke a specific law in a specific country.

As for his jailing being against free speech... He was free to say what he wanted, but he was also free to accept the consequences of that speech.

That's the way it works. Unless you're a Danish cartoonist, Dutch filmmaker, French car etc.

 
At 2:37 PM, Anonymous youcancallmemeyer said...

Anonymous,

It's hard to tell whether you are an anti Semite or just plain stupid, or both.

David Irving commenced a libel action in England against Penguin Books Ltd and Deborah Lipstadt, the publisher and writer respectively, of the book "Denying the Holocaust.

In acting for himself he proved the adage that he who acts for himself has a fool for a client.

All of the materials, which were presented to the Court, are available for public viewing and clearly show that he failed miserably to make his case.

He indulged in the same conspiracy theories that you imply by your statement "having been found guilty by a Jewish judge."

He was shown to be a poor excuse for a historian, having little regard for the facts, distorting sources, fudging translations and outright lying.

His case was a good example of why there should be no laws preventing denial of the Holocaust. Truth and free speech are more effective in shining a light on cockroaches, such as Irving, than taking them off the streets for 3 years.

 
At 7:49 PM, Blogger Olivia said...

why would we and they even consider the possibility of a terrorist attack during the Commonwealth Games?

Oh, it's coming. An attack. Maybe not during the Games, but definitely some time. I think the Games would not be good. Too much security.

They're preparing themselves for this mythical backlash because it's part of the whole victimhood thing they've got going. Getting the Vic Police involved - it'd be better for the cops to spend time keeping us all safe, not listening to these whinging drama queens. But, gotta keep the backlash myth alive. Keep drumming it into the Australian public that we're nasty people, victimising the oppressed Muslim who fears walking the streets. Boo hoo hoo. Maybe we'll be more amenable to special laws and concessions. You know, like, federal religious vilification laws, perhaps an opportunity for them to teach our kids about Islam (i.e., brainwash them with the whitewashed version), more federal funding for multicultural stuff (tribal separateness), etc.

 
At 8:08 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Olivia, I'm happy to point you in the direction of Peter Faris' to see what's on the cards here.

I'm not sure today if I'm in Brackistan, Melbournabad, or Braxtopia. They're all as bad as one another, and looking to get worse.

 
At 8:09 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

bugger. Forgot to close the tag.
Apologies.

 
At 8:33 PM, Blogger meredith said...

Hey anon,

I'd assume Irving puts down Winston Churchill, with facts? a drunkard? the stuff up at Dardanelles? so what..
His redeeming feature is mearly saving the freaking world. I hate people that try to trash Winston Churchill, total idiots!

I haven't read that moron Irvings books they sound to stupid to bother with.

Suckers to the nazis hey, the Jews SURVIVED and did better than any nazi 3rd reign psycho fantasy.


You think the Jews tried to hunt Irving down n slaughter him? He's still here isnt he?
I doubt they bothered.

Denying the actual Holocaust is a little different to harmless cartoons that offend a vulgar religion that hasnt seen the light of modernity yet.

Banning Irving, is a lil different to boycotting industry killing rioting and destroying embassy buldings. Beheading people.

But still i think its a silly law let the nut jobs like Irving, Hitler and BinLadin speak freely so we can know who and what they are. It's good seeing freaks dig their own graves.

 
At 10:42 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As neither a Jew not a Muslim I don’t find denying the holocaust any more offensive than the cartoons.

Funny though how everyone suddenly starts jumping up and down (even here) about Irving.

His right to comment upon history is the same right exercised by the cartoonists. You cannot have one without the other…

Why would Irving visit Austria? Why would Flemming Rose commission or publish the cartoons? Its an exercise in the same freedom of speech.

Try reading “Hitlers War” – its free on the Internet. Please read it and tell me where it denies the Holocaust. Or are you scared to read something that interferes with your own beliefs?

I’m stupid? Maybe. I have 5 degrees including an MBA, and my IQ would get me into Mensa. At least I have read the book and can argue from knowledge than rhetoric.

You know, the fear and loathing you are showing to Irving is EXACTLY the same as the fear and loathing the radical Islamists show to the West……

Or is the hatred of Islam just a Jewish thing.

Ross (I made the original post)

 
At 1:07 PM, Anonymous meredith said...

anon

"As neither a Jew not a Muslim I don’t find denying the holocaust any more offensive than the cartoons."

Look mate your being way to PC here to make any valid point. Of course they same tone of beige under the neutral thought police, it is legal to have an opinion you know, we are allowed to make judgments you know.


“I have 5 degrees including an MBA, and my IQ would get me into Mensa.”

5 degrees Wow, 20 odd years at uni huh, and your not a Doctor of something?

“I’m stupid? Maybe.”

Drop the maybe.


“You know, the fear and loathing you are showing to Irving is EXACTLY the same as the fear and loathing the radical Islamists show to the West……”

Not true, Harmless drawings that result in murder and mayhem and Holocaust denial that gets you 3 years (I’d rather the 3 years for the more extreme position, than be killed over a drawing)

A lot of people want Irving to be able to speak, cuz we value the freedom of speech and exposure of freaks it enables.

“Or is the hatred of Islam just a Jewish thing.”

Nah most islam free people world wide …strongly dislike islam...

 
At 1:16 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Ross (anon) I know what you mean about not finding holocaust denial any more offensive than cartoons.

The problem arises when people take holocaust denial to the extreme and use it as a tool to bludgeon Israel with further. (Iran, anyone?)

I put Irving visiting Austria with an outstanding warrant hanging over him with Polanski visiting Disneyland. He knew he would be arrested if he went there after all these years.

Whether the law is good bad or indifferent, that's up to Austria to decide. I also disagree with it, but it's Austria, not Australia. There are a lot of silly laws around regardless of the country you are in.

The cartoons were and are a litmus test for self-imposed dhimmitude in Denmark. It just happens that they've sparked a conflagration.

Irving and his backers are taking huge advantage of the 'free speech' issue to hide the fact that he broke the law.

 
At 11:34 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Anti Islamic feelings (And believe me i am strongly anti Islamic - read my earlier comments) could be seen as simliar to the anti semite feelings prior to WW2.

I am bright enough (just) to see that history is one perspective of the truth.

Why does holocaust denial get any greater protection than (say) Yugosalvia or Rowanda? Why is it not a crime to say that Stalins "great purge" was a myth? Or to say that the "Cultural Revolution" was the best thing that ever happened ot China?

Or are you arguing that Jews have more "value" than Gentiles????

Listen - before you go calling me stupid - remember that the Muslim cartoons were PUBLISHED IN AUSTRIA IN JANUARY, long before they apparead in France, Germany, Spain etc.

so in Austria we have this double standard - insult a Muslim and your fine, insult Jew and you get 3 years.

We really need to tidy up our own back garden before we start sorting out the rest of the world.

 
At 11:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Meredith, $50 says you are Jewish, which highlights the problem with Muslim bashing – it suits the Jews!!!

The world would be far better if the Jews kept their disagreement with Muslims in their own country. Exporting it to the rest of the world is as disagreeable as exporting fundamental Islamic beliefs. Yes – Muslims are a pain in the arse. But so are Jews.

Jews are just another Middle Easter tribe squabbling over a piece of land, just like middle eastern tribes have squabbled for thousands of years. (DNA evidence shows that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population ((M.F. Hammer, Proc. Nat'l Academy of Science, May 9, 2000)

But of course Jews don’t want to be classed as “just another bunch of lunatic Arabs. So they create some great legend about being the “chosen ones” and try to stamp on any research that proves otherwise.

Remember – the emperor is only naked when the little boy can speak.

ross

 
At 3:46 AM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

anonymous ross

Is that you Ross May?

http://images.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.takver.com/history/sydney/gay_pride19730915-9.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.takver.com/history/sydney/gay_pride1973.htm&h=425&w=425&sz=22&tbnid=z7EsP-KlpwGlKM:&tbnh=122&tbnw=122&hl=en&start=1&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dross%2Bmay%2Bskull%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official_s%26sa%3DG

 
At 3:49 AM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

you know, the handsome Ross May.

http://www.takver.com/history/sydney/gay_pride19730915-9.jpg

The Nazi Party pin up boy Ross May.

 
At 10:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No..... either your are dumb enough not to know that Ross is a popular name, or its an attempt to damage my credibility because you dont like what I say.

Why not just lock me up for 3 years. Or stone my house.

 
At 11:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

youcancallmemeyer said...
"He indulged in the same conspiracy theories that you imply by your statement "having been found guilty by a Jewish judge."

Are you claiming that the Hon Mr Justice Gray is NOT Jewish?

Dont you think there might have been a conflict of interest?

Have you ACTUALLY read the judgement?

 
At 1:07 PM, Anonymous youcancallmemeyer said...

Anonymous,

I have in fact read the Judgement and I suggest you do likewise. It can be found here:

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david/judgment-13-01.html

I also suggest that you read the devastating (to Irving) Appeal Judgement of Selby J. It can be found here:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/irving-david/sedley.html

The Court did not find Irving guilty as you allege. It, in fact, found that Irving had been defamed by the Defendants. It was a civil trial commenced by Irving in which the defendants successfully raised the defence of justification (see part IV of the judgement).

The defence relied heavily on the historian Evans to shred Irving’s credibility. From the judgement:

13.10 Whilst it is by no means a conclusive consideration, it is right that I should bear in mind that the criticisms which the Defendants make of Irving's historiography are supported by the evidence of historians of the greatest distinction. They are set out (along with many other similar criticisms that the Defendants have not pressed in the submissions made in these proceedings) in the meticulous written report of Evans, who is himself an historian of high standing. In the course of his prolonged cross-examination, Evans justified each and every one of the criticisms on which the Defendants have chosen to rely. In several instances his criticisms were supported by the Defendants' other experts, van Pelt, Browning and Longerich. I am satisfied that each of them is outstanding in his field. I take note of the fact that the expert witnesses who were summoned by Irving to give evidence on his behalf did not in their evidence dispute the validity of the points made by Evans; nor did they seek to support or justify Irving's portrayal of Hitler.

Were Evans, Browning, van Pelt and Longerich Jewish? Was Selby J Jewish?

Irving chose the venue, commenced the proceedings, acted as his own advocate and had his sorry arse kicked because he was revealed for the anti Semite and fraudulent historian that he was. Unfortunately for him, his lack of ability as a historian was only exceeded by his lack of ability as a barrister.

As far as I am aware Irving never raised, before or during the hearing or during the appeal, that Gray J was Jewish. I take your word for it that he was in fact Jewish because it has no relevance in my mind.

I only agree with you on one thing. Holocaust denial should not be a crime and I believe it is wrong that Irving is sent to gaol for speaking anti Semitic nonsense.

I note that Holocaust denial was not at the time of the proceedings, and is still not, a crime in England.

 
At 1:19 PM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

Anonymous,

For a person with 5 degrees including an MBA, and an IQ that would get you into Mensa you seem somewhat dull in recognising irony when it hits you in the face.

You take offence because my allusion to Ross May is seen by you as being an attempt to damage your credibility because I dont like what you say. Is not alleging that the Judge and Defendant are Jewish, rather than argue the merits of the matter, somewhat similar?

I had assumed that a person so well endowed as yourself would get it. Apparently not.

 
At 10:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The only irony I see is a man in jail for the same free speech that was used as an argument for publishing the cartoons. Or don’t you see that?

Historians now accept that Jews were never “made into soap”. They accept that although Dachau did have a gas chamber, it was never used. They accept that there were no gas chambers at Belsen. Twenty years ago you would be pilloried for even suggesting it.

 
At 1:29 AM, Blogger youcancallmemeyer said...

anonymous,

Yes, I do see the irony, in the sense that the cartoon free speech argument is incongruous with locking Irving up for denying the Holocaust. I've said as much twice on this thread:

"His case (for holocaust denial in Austria) was a good example of why there should be no laws preventing denial of the Holocaust."

and

"I only agree with you on one thing. Holocaust denial should not be a crime..."

But is it not just as incongruous that you object to being alluded to as Ross May the Nazi, because it is an ad hominem attack, yet you see it as normal to attack Lipstadt and Gray because they are Jewish, without addressing the issues? The old adage that "irony is wasted on the stupid" seems to apply to you.

Fowler's Modern English Usage might help you when someone is being ironic:

... a form of utterance that postulates a double audience, consisting of one party that hearing shall hear and shall not understand, and another party that, when more is meant than meets the ear, is aware of that more and of the outsider's incomprehension.

As for your other nonsense. What historians accept your demonstrably untrue statements? Names and links?

I think your mom said you had ASTHMA not that you would get into MENSA.

 
At 11:32 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once again you are inferring that I am stupid, yet once again I seem to be in possession of the facts:


http://www.cercles.com/review/r25/shephardH.htm#_ftn9
“Belsen was not a death camp as such, in the sense that no planned gassing ever took place there [9] —the mounting death toll came from disease and starvation, as the new arrivals were simply left to die a "natural" death through medical neglect, brutal treatment and deprivation of food. Ben Shephard documents all this with poignant survivors" testimonies.”


http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/publications/articles/leslegiiihm986.htm
“However, the gas chamber did indeed work: it was tested with Cyclon B gas and possibly combat gasses as well. But it was never used for the systematic murder of prisoners; perhaps because by the time it was completed, deaths due to mistreatment, malnutrition and disease already surpassed the capacity of the crematorium. The explanation was probably an overly sensitive reaction to claims that no one was ever gassed at Dachau.”


The Northern California Jewish Bulletin
April 27, 1990
________________________________________
Holocaust expert rejects charge that Nazis made soap from Jews
by Hugh Orgel
Tel Aviv (JTA) -- Professor Yehuda Bauer, head of the Hebrew University's Holocaust history department and regarded as one of the foremost researchers of the Holocaust, has denied the frequently quoted charge that the Nazis used the bodies of Jewish death camp victims to make soap.
The technical possibilities for transforming human fat into soap were not known as that time, Bauer said Sunday at a Holocaust memorial meeting for Yom Hashoah.
"The Nazis did enough horrible things during the Holocaust. We do not have to go on believing untrue stories," Bauer said.
Unsubstantiated rumors about the use of bodies of British soldiers to make soap had circulated during both World War I and World War II, he said.
Raoul Hilberg, professor of political science at the University of Vermont and a pre-eminent historian of the Holocaust, agrees that the soap rumor, although widespread, was probably unfounded.
"There were all kinds of rumors," he said, noting that a New York Times article during the war suggested that Jews were given lethal injections before deportation and arrived at the extermination camps already dead.
Other rumors speculated that Jews were killed in the Belzec camp by electrocution in water; some thought the Jews were gassed in the trains.
"All of these rumors are untrue, based on nothing at all," Hilberg said. "No evidence has turned up" to suggested that the Nazis used human fat to make soap.

 
At 11:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"As for your other nonsense. What historians accept your demonstrably untrue statements? Names and links?"


Funny how its nonsense until i show you it being written by Professor Bauer head of the Hebrew University Holocaust History Department! Or when a Professor of History at the University of Vermont agrees!

Funny how it is nonsense until I show you it being written by a highly respected medical historian like Dr Ben Shephard!!!

Funny how it is nonsense until I show you it being written by Associate Professor Harold Marcuse, Department of History, University of California

Or do you not believe these historians either?

Just wipe that egg off mate, it makes you look a fool!

 
At 12:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Editor
The Jewish Standard
385 Prospect Avenue
Hackensack, NJ 07601
USA

Dear Sir,

It is only at this late date that the issue of your paper of May 25, 1990, reached me, with a letter by Mr. George Starkman, disputing my statement that there is no evidence whatsoever to substantiate the claim that Nazis made soap out of bodies of Jews.

Mr. Starkman states that the soap was distributed in Poland on rationing stamps starting in 1941 and bore the inscription RJF, which he translates as "rein Juden fett."

In fact, the bars of soap, some of which can be seen in Jewish Memorial museums, including in Jerusalem, have the letters "R.I.F." written on them, and they mean "Reichsstelle fuer Industrielle Fettversorgung," or Reich Center for Industrial Supplies of Fats. The terms "rein Juden fett" spelt in this form does not exist in German in any case, and in 1941, when Mr. Starkman correctly states the soap was being distributed, there were as yet no extermination camps in existence. The first, Chelmno, started operating on December 8, 1941, the second, Belzec, in March. Auschwitz had experimental gassings going on since January, 1942.

The source of the legend was a rumor current in World War I, spread by the British, that the Germans were using bodies of their own soldiers for fat or manure production -- the rumor was disproved after 1918. The Nazis resuscitated the rumor, and used it as a form of additional sadism, in words this time, on their Jewish victims: it was the Nazis who told the Jews they would be made into soap, and the Poles heard it from the Nazis.

At the end of the war, the Russians uncovered, near Gdansk [then known as Danzig (JD)], a small laboratory in which parts of human bodies were used, of Polish and Russian slave workers probably, for some chemical purposes. These experiments could possibly have involved attempts to make soap out of human fats (which we know today is an almost impossible thing to do), but the Nazis apparently never managed to go beyond the experimental stage, if indeed that is what they were trying to do there. The laboratory was small, and it had been established only towards the end of the war. It did not involve Jewish bodies. The Russian prosecutor at Nuremberg brought the issue up in the trials, but had to drop it because no proof could be presented that these were actual experiments for the production of soap.

One has to fight wrong perceptions of the Holocaust, even if large numbers of survivors accept them as true. It is not as though the Nazis were not capable of this atrocity -- they certainly were -- but they, factually, did not do it. To claim, on the basis of Polish antisemitic slogans, or on the basis of rumors current in the camps -- in Auschwitz this was an accepted rumor -- that soap was produced of Jewish bodies, simply plays into the hands of the deniers of the Holocaust, who can easily prove that nothing of the kind ever happened. I deeply respect survivors' testimonies, and Mr. Starkman's is one of these, but that does not mean to say that such testimonies are free from misperceptions.


Sincerely,
Yehuda Bauer
Professor of Holocaust Studies

 
At 8:09 PM, Blogger Caz said...

You only need an IQ somewhere around 125 or above to "get into" Mensa - it ain't that difficult.

Funny how some people sighting their potential (never actual) Mensa credentials believe that it makes them WAY up there in the stratosphere of "genius".

The serious genius people have IQs above about 150. An IQ of around 145 would make a person really, really, stupendiously clever, but not necessarily a genius.

Let's revisit the baseline entry level for Mensa eligibility: IQ of 125. Pretty ordinary, in other words.

Having an MBA is definitely nothing to boast about either, in fact, it could be something better hidden than admitted these days. Dime a dozen?

 
At 8:15 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Heh. Caz, I passed all the tests for Mensa when I was 15, but Mum refused to let me join. In any case, it's the top 2% IQ. That's 1 in 50, which doesn't look as marvellous.

In any case, you can be intelligent and still as dumb as a box of hammers.

 
At 10:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

An MBA doesnt mean shit - i just paid money, sat in a classroom for a couple of years, wrote a few assignments. You are right, dime a dozen.

I did get mine from a very well respected university but its just a piece of paper. Last time I looked 0.025 of the population had an MBA, and most of those were shonky "Executive MBA"s or came form the Univeristy of Lower WoopWoop.

MENSA - yep, one in 50 can get in, and its bullshit.

I got a few other degrees, (just more classes, more assignments), an Army Commission (hard fucking work), and a few other bits of paper.

But your right. Non of it means a squirt of pee on a wet day...

 
At 10:39 PM, Blogger Nilk said...

Anon, I've been keeping out of the fray because I have nothing to contribute. It's educational, though.

And while I know that might sound sarcastic, it's not intended to be.

I think the Army Commission is worth more respect than the pieces of paper anyway.

I never went to uni. Did get a diploma in beauty therapy years ago and extra film/theatre makeup quals, but again, pieces of paper. It's what we do with them.

I've often thought of doing a uni course, but I'd be thrown out within the first week for upsetting the faculty, I reckon.

If you've managed to sit through several years and several bits of paper, you're much more patient than I am.

I'm not sure what to think about your and Meyer's debate. I know the Holocaust happened, but the extent? Beyond belief. Were there exaggerations as you point out? I've never considered it.

Should David Irving be locked up for Holocaust denial? In my opinion, no.

In the court of Austria's opinion, yes.

His going to Austria at this time with an outstanding warrant against his name smacks of some ploy. If he's bankrupt, then it's a good way to raise his profile and garner sympathy (and support, fiscal or otherwise), wouldn't you say?

That's my beef with him. I've not got enough information on any of this to get into further discussion.

Keep posting, though. :)

 
At 12:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

University – a wasted time. It only serves to allow others to measure the hoops you have jumped through.

Irving – yes, he is seeking publicity. He will get funding from the Arabs, and sympathy from people who will see a 70 year old man in jail because of “those Jews”.

Its all very sad. The holocaust did happen and it didn’t happen. Its all a matter of perspectives. I didn’t get into how many were actually murdered, but that is highly controversial these days. Pretty well everyone agrees that 6 million Jews were not murdered in the camps. Estimates now run from 4 million to 600,000. The number doesn’t matter, the scales doesn’t impact the horror of it.

Why did so many stories arise? It’s a bit like all US men wanting to have been in Vietnam. Any Jew of that era feels that he/she has to contribute. So they all claim to have seen something, lost someone. Sometimes they have, sometimes they have not.

My problems are with the credibility – once you find out that some of the stories are fabricated, who can you trust? I also have a problem with the insistence by many people that the holocaust absolutely CANNOT be challenged.

I think Irving is/was wrong (notwithstanding that he makes a VERY good case, and has a lot of accurate facts at his disposal). But I also KNOW that what I was taught about the holocaust was wrong (Belsen, soap, Dachau etc).

Remember one thing – how we look upon Muslims today is how Europe looked on Jews in the 1930s.

 
At 8:01 AM, Blogger Nilk said...

Remember one thing – how we look upon Muslims today is how Europe looked on Jews in the 1930s.

Anon, I can't agree wholeheartedly with you on that one.

In a small part, with the demonisation of muslims and their characterisation as other, maybe.

However, and it's a bloody big however, we need to consider the behaviour and beliefs of muslims as a whole. That is where the analogy comes unstuck.

The propaganda may seem to fit, but look under the surface. There are now so many instances of violence perpetrated by muslims that defy belief, and these are being documented.

If we have an opportunity to put a stop to the atrocities carried out in the name of Allah, then I'm all for it.

I have a 3 year old daughter. I remember Beslan and imagine her being shot. Sure, the Russian authorities have been blamed for allowing it to happen, but what sort of people can think up something so depraved? I've never heard of jews or christians considering such a thing.

We can look at Nick Berg, or Daniel Pearl, or Margaret Hassan. Look at the incidences of stonings and hangings of women. These are not ancient history, they are happening now.

We can be culturally relative and say, well, it's over there, so that's okay. It's their culture and while I don't like it, it's their choice.

But we have muslims here who wish for sharia law - there seems to be some confusion on their part about how sharia should be enacted. It it's in line with the qu'ran ahadith, then the hangings and stonings and beheadings and sexual abuse are all in order.

There is a major identity problem within Islam in the infidel lands, and it's not going away. If muslims here can't recognise that these activities are part and parcel of their religion and need to be excised, then it's going to continue to get worse.

For any muslimahs from infidel lands reading this, you are not mentally deficient as Mohammed declared, you are easily worth the same as a man, and you should not be murdered because a man abused you.

There is a reason we are living in Dar ul Harb. This is not Dar ul Islam. It is the House of War, and will remain so until Islam conquers all, or all conquers Islam.

The jews never declared war on the rest of the world. That's a big difference.

 
At 9:55 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with your comments – but please note I didn’t say that the Jews in the 1930s behaved in the way that some Muslims are behaving today. I said “how we look upon Muslims today is how Europe looked on Jews in the 1930s”.

The Jews were not totally innocent during that period. The Betar movement, founded in1923, had its own uniformed army, which trained and exercised within OTHER countries borders. The Polish Betar army alone had 100,000 members trained in weapons and tactics. Can you imagine if an unofficial uniformed army started holding exercises in our National Parks?

Menachem Begin even wore his Betar army uniform to his wedding!

This sort of thing worried the crap out of the average Pole, German, Frenchman etc.

 
At 1:45 PM, Blogger Caz said...

I do think it's a different kettle of fish. Religion, culture, politics - Islam wraps the whole lot up into a single bundle, plus they have a few too many reasons to justify blowing up other people.

This is rather different to the Jews, or how they were percieved. But, hey, I wasn't there, so I'm commenting in ignorance. I've never read anything from history to suggest that the Jews were taking actions for world domination, or that they wished others dead, as a normal matter of course, or that they were hell bent on converting everyone to their beliefs.

The believe base, the motivation, the goals, the absolute conviction - all very different.

I think it's a very long bow to draw much of an analogy. It's also a bit lazy really, no offence meant. It's like the film reviews that insist on listing a little box of "If you liked this film..." with their review of a new film, so that people don't have to think for themselves (and presumably they can keep going to see the same, or similar, films over & over again).

The Muslim situation has hovered & brewed over decades, and is unique.

 
At 9:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unique? BOLLOCKS!!!!

Sometimes I just don’t understand why people don’t do a little research before they post…

Anti Semitism had been in existence for over 600 years before Hitler picked up the idea.

Martin Luther in 1543 wrote:

Secondly, their homes should likewise be broken down and destroyed. For they perpetrate the same things there that they do in their synagogues. For this reason they ought to be put under one roof or in a stable, like gypsies in order that they may realize that they are not masters in our land as they boast, but miserable captives, as they complain of us incessantly before God with bitter wailing. Thirdly, they should be deprived of their prayerbooks and Talmuds in which such idolatry, lies, cursing, and blasphemy are taught. Fourthly, their rabbis must be forbidden under threat of death to teach any more. Fifthly, passport and traveling privileges should he absolutely forbidden to the Jews. For they have no business in the rural districts since they are not nobles, not officials, nor merchants, nor the like. Let them stay at home. Sixthly, they ought to be stopped from usury. All their cash and valuables of silver and gold ought to be taken from them and put aside for safekeeping. For this reason, as said before, everything that they possess they stole and robbed from us through their usury. For they have no other means of support. This money should he used in the case (and in no other) where a Jew has honestly become a Christian, so that he may get for the time being one or two or three hundred florins, as the person may require. This, in order that he may start a business to support his poor wife and children and the old and feeble. Such evilly acquired money is cursed, unless, with God's blessing, it is put to some good and necessary use. Seventhly, let the young and strong Jews and Jewesses be given the flail, the ax, the hoe, the spade, the distaff, and spindle, and let them earn their bread by the sweat of their noses as is enjoined upon Adam's children. For it is not proper that they should want us cursed Goyyim to work in the sweat of our brow and that they, pious crew, idle away their days at the fireside in laziness, feasting, and display. And in addition to this, they boast impiously that they have become masters of the Christians at our expense. We ought to drive the rascally lazy bones out of our system

Take a look at:

http://www.snunit.k12.il/seder/anti/english/hate6eng.html

 

Post a Comment

<< Home