Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I looked up the piece you quoted and it's not anti-semitic at all and it doesn't deny the holocaust. It says wealthy Jews escaped the holocaust and propertyless Jews didn't.
"Today the Bank of England is still the feifdom of the Global Elite. Gertrude Elias
says that the Bank collaborated with the leading Zionist, Lord Bearsted of Royal
Dutch Shell, to arange the transfer of the assets of wealthy German Zionists to
Palestine. It was these transfers, she says, that helped to build up the economy of
the embryonic Zionist state. 'They were the privileged emigre class while
propertyless Jews were refused asylum and neutralised in the holocaust'."
It's a fact that bankers, both Jewish and Gentile have been part of the global elite for centuries. I don't think Icke is attacking them as Jews, but as bankers.
He does deny some legends about the holocaust such as the Germans making soap out of the incinerated Jews, which he says has no basis in fact. He is arguing for a true and historical view of the facts, but not to deny what actually did occur. Nowhere is he saying the holocaust didn't happen nor that it wasn't an atrocity. He puts it on par with many other genocides such as the genocide of the American Indians. Stalin and Mao committed genocide against their own people killing more than 120 million of them in total.
Why mention Jews or Zionists at all, then? Why not just talk about bankers?
It's a good question. He does seem to want to push back against the Jews taking ownership of being the largest group of victims in the war and developing a national policy based on it. I guess he is asking why no other country or group perpetuates a consciousness of their WWII deaths in this way. In that respect you could say he is critical of those who perpetuate the holocaust in the public consciousness. He seems to be asking why was their genocide more important than the genocides of other groups, who don't perpetuate their stories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
Why mention Jews or Zionists at all, then? Why not just talk about bankers?
It's a good question. He does seem to want to push back against the Jews taking ownership of being the largest group of victims in the war and developing a national policy based on it. I guess he is asking why no other country or group perpetuates a consciousness of their WWII deaths in this way. In that respect you could say he is critical of those who perpetuate the holocaust in the public consciousness. He seems to be asking why was their genocide more important than the genocides of other groups, who don't perpetuate their stories.
Other groups do "perpetuate(s) a consciousness of their WWII deaths".
He does deny some legends about the holocaust such as the Germans making soap out of the incinerated Jews, which he says has no basis in fact. He is arguing for a true and historical view of the facts, but not to deny what actually did occur. Nowhere is he saying the holocaust didn't happen nor that it wasn't an atrocity.
Indeed. We're expected to accept the spoon-fed narrative without question, and anyone who dares question is labeled a "denier" or anti-Semite or both.
I grew up being repeatedly told by history books that 4 Million Jews died at Auschwitz, but today we know that isn't true, and we know that largely thanks to the efforts of those seeking the truth.
The evidence does show that ~6 Million Jews did die, but they were not gassed to death as the narrative leads us to believe. More than half of those died of starvation, starvation-related disease, or typhus which repeatedly swept through camps. Even so, that does not relieve the NAZIs of responsibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
He puts it on par with many other genocides such as the genocide of the American Indians.
Except colonists never wiped out entire tribes, while Native Americans did.
The entire Hopi tribe was annihilated by a group of Plains tribes a few centuries before colonists arrived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez
Stalin and Mao committed genocide against their own people killing more than 120 million of them in total.
Mao actually murdered people, while Stalin simply let them starve to death
The collective farms weren't producing enough crops, and there was famine in Ukraine. Stalin could have fed the Ukrainians, but only at the expense of Russians, White Russians, Georgians, Ossetians, Turks, Uzbegs and others.
Either everyone suffers, or only Ukrainians, and since Stalin didn't like Ukrainians, it was an easy choice for him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World
Icke has done himself no favours, indeed his endorsement of the antisemitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was the start of a lot of all these anti-semitic conspiracy allegations.
Indeed. We're expected to accept the spoon-fed narrative without question, and anyone who dares question is labeled a "denier" or anti-Semite or both.
I grew up being repeatedly told by history books that 4 Million Jews died at Auschwitz, but today we know that isn't true, and we know that largely thanks to the efforts of those seeking the truth.
The evidence does show that ~6 Million Jews did die, but they were not gassed to death as the narrative leads us to believe. More than half of those died of starvation, starvation-related disease, or typhus which repeatedly swept through camps. Even so, that does not relieve the NAZIs of responsibility.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,600,682 times
Reputation: 5697
Isn't speech that's demonstrably false (like denying the Holocaust) not protected speech, even in the US?
If the consequences of that speech is to encourage a climate of hatred, dehumanizing, and abuse of people; then it's doubtful that it should be allowed to run rampant in society. If the First Amendment were such a great thing, then why doesn't Germany's Basic Law (its 1949-to-today constitution) have provision for Freedom of Speech just as broad as our constituion. Same goes for South Africa's constitution, which does allow for free speech but within explicit limits by that constitution's itself. It's not like Western Europe's turned into Russia or China on account of those restrictions. Reporters can still do investigative reports without death threats. Politicians and other prominent figures are still subject to hard uncomfortable questions and comments (look at any video of Question Time in the UK's House of Commons and you'll see those questions and comments certainly are not half-hearted. They make our Congress's look tame by comparison).
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Pukipedia is not a credible source, and the Protocols existed long before Icke was even born, as did the conspiracy theories.
I think it's well documented the Icke fell out with his publishing company after supporting, the discredited antisemitic 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' in his books The Robots' Rebellion and And the Truth Shall Set You Free.
After the publisher to refuse to publish his books due to their antisemitic contenti and he had to self-publish as a result.
As for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, they were used by the Nazi's and in certain Muslim countries to attack the Jews, and were totaly discredited as fraudulent by among others The Times (London) Newspaper in 1920.
The supporting of the Protocols of the Elders of Zions where Icke's problems began and why he is often cited as antisemitic and is now banned from speaking in countries such as Australia.
I've never heard of any of the other groups perpetuating the history of their genocides except for the Armenian genocide in the early 20th century. There's nothing wrong with perpetuating those historical events. I'm just pointing out that Icke seems to be pushing back on the holocaust being the only one that is actively promoted to the current day. It seems to be sancrosanct, while all the others, even more recent ones, seem to fade into history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
Other groups do "perpetuate(s) a consciousness of their WWII deaths".
I've never heard of any of the other groups perpetuating the history of their genocides except for the Armenian genocide in the early 20th century. There's nothing wrong with perpetuating those historical events. I'm just pointing out that Icke seems to be pushing back on the holocaust being the only one that is actively promoted to the current day. It seems to be sancrosanct, while all the others, even more recent ones, seem to fade into history.
The links show you that other groups do perpetuate their historical genocide events. Perhaps some groups do it better, but why should that be a bad thing? Icke does not like Jews. Period.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
