Was just a  having a look at the terrorism thread and a comment by Aussie Nationalist sparked an interest of mine..a burning question..


Why did Hitler hate Jews and why did he believe they were a global threat to his ambition to dominate the world.?

Ive heard that Jews are in monetary positions of power the world over..banks, treasurey..John Howard for example I was told he was a jew and he was treasurer here for a period.

Your thoughts Aus. Nat? and everyone of course. 8-)

I think a bigger question is why do so many people hate Jews? Hitler's views were not exactly rare at the time. I think it's just envy. If you are poor and you see someone from a different background doing much better than you, you suspect that they are scheming against you.

So jews were generaly more affluent than the Germans? and other cultural groups..?

So the start of WW2 was based in envy ? Money being the 'root of all evil'? ::)

I'm not sure if they were generally more affluent, though it is possible. It was more to do with being a visible minorty group, one of the few that isn't generally poorer. They were a convenient scapegoat when things went wrong. People always used to blame the jews for the plague.

freediver wrote on Mar 8^th, 2007 at 5:35pm:

I'm not sure if they were generally more affluent, though it is possible. It was more to do with being a visible minorty group, one of the few that isn't generally poorer. They were a convenient scapegoat when things went wrong. People always used to blame the jews for the plague.

yeah that's true, it seems that whenever a country has a problem of some sort they just point the finger at the minority group saying it's all their fault. it's just easier that way, rather than having to actually solve the problem.

it still happens today, first we hated jews, then we hated communists, then asians, and now muslims.

but there was a rumour that Hitler himself was Jewish. but that hasn't been proven, so i don't believe it.

Ill answer tomorrow, im off to the pub. [smiley=beer.gif]

---

Good to see so many people 'in the know' about issues such as this.  ::)

Hitler was too ambitious. End of story. That's how he failed. It wasn't because of the Americans entering the war, nor was it his 'failed' invasion of Britain. It was because he elected to invade the USSR. Funny thing is... he almost got away with it. It was his hunger and ambition that was the end of him. He thought that Germany was powerful enough to fight two wars on two fronts. Of course, we now know that this was inevitable failure.

Onto the issue of the Jews...


Quote:

Why did Hitler hate Jews and why did he believe they were a global threat to his ambition to dominate the world.? Ive heard that Jews are in monetary positions of power the world over..banks, treasurey..John Howard for example I was told he was a jew and he was treasurer here for a period.

This is true, and it's still true to this very day. I don't think there are many Jews within the OBVIOUS positions of power throughout the world... ie... politics. But there is DEFINITELY a presence of Jews in other less obvious positions of power... World Banks, LAW, business leaders, MEDIA.
This was the same thing back in the 30's. Were they prominent in politics? No. Were they prominent in Business, Law and the media? Hell yeah.
For example, look at Hollywood producers and TV executives in America (The most powerful country in the world). They control the hearts and minds of America and large sections of the western world. What's a greater power? -To control the Government, or to control the minds of the masses? I say the media. My question is, why does such a small minority in America have such a big influence in political opinion and social opinion? They will clearly be bias when dealing with foreign policy and Christainity or Islam.



Quote:

I think a bigger question is why do so many people hate Jews? Hitler's views were not exactly rare at the time. I think it's just envy. If you are poor and you see someone from a different background doing much better than you, you suspect that they are scheming against you.

I see you clearly know nothing about this issue, freediver, except of course for the most 'popular' politically correct view, of course.  ::)

1) Jews are by far the biggest RACISTS (Yes, that's right 'Racists') on the planet.
I've always thought, "If thinking your race is superior to another, why is it then that the Jews can say they're the 'Chosen people?'"
Have you ever heard the opinion of the Jews about the Arabs? Pwwwaor. Talk about one-eyed. Is it any wonder that people don't like them? When people act above you, you generally get your ass kicked, or better yet, gassed. I think they have quite a nerve to declare themselves a separate race or culture within someone elses community and declare themselves superior. It's the same as the Lebanes, except in a more articulate way.

2) Most Jews support immigration and multiculturalism. Immigration, because A) They get cheap labour. B) Because it says in genesis (Or Exodus, forget which one) that they have to except outsiders as the Egyptians did to them. And Jews support Multiculturalism (Not surprisingly) because they're a different culture themselves living within a dominant culture. Probably also to get the attention off themselves. -Bare in mind though, not every Jew supports multiculturalism, as there are odd ones out in every culture and race. Immigration and Multiculturalism isn't exactly the most 'popular' of policies among host countries.

3) Jews and the New Testament. Jews have always been scapegoated by Christians and Muslims throughout history for killing Christ and generally acting like assholes (Betraying moses etc).


The list goes on... but I couldn't be bothered listing em' right now. Freediver, do further research into this topic, it's a lot broader than you think, and I think most people would find it quite shocking and disturbing than the 'politically correct' views of Jewish people. For example, did anyone know that David Beckam is Jewish??? A betcha you didn't.  ;)

Quote:

I think a bigger question is why do so many people hate Jews? Hitler's views were not exactly rare at the time. I think it's just envy. If you are poor and you see someone from a different background doing much better than you, you suspect that they are scheming against you.

Maybe these are some reasons why:

Jews got off to a bad start by being the only people allowed to charge interest on loans during Roman (or was it earlier?) times. Obviously, things have changed since then, but the stigma sticks as Jews being very money focussed.

Judaism considers its people to be chosen by God. This is often misconstrued by non-Jews as a sign of superiority.

Judaism is a very strong religion, with a focus as much on race as on spirituality. In a sense, it is viewed as a closed shop to outsiders, which can be confronting.

Fatalism. Many Jews consider they are destined to suffer, as this is proclaimed in the scriptures, and so they are prepared to suffer. Correct on a literal interpretation. The same argument could be used for being recognised as the chosen people. Christians are 'lucky', in the sense that Jesus was the lamb of God who took on the suffering and died for them.

Quote:

Hitler was too ambitious.

He was a megalomaniac and narcissist. And like all leaders who hold such views, is destined to fail.

One thing that does annoy me about modern Jewish doctrine is the continual focus on the Holocaust, as if they were the only victims. What about the homosexuals, gypsies and disabled?

Why isn't there more focus on the decimation of the Ukrainians by Hitler and Stalin? There may have been over 20 million killed, which is 3 times the number of Jews massacred.

Read in a web article from Oxford Uni in Britian the other day that Adolph was a bit of a pill popper(amphetamines) and a heavy one at that.Would explain a lot

DonaldTrump has it, really Jews (not necessarily all) can be very racist people. Israel is one of the worst countries for continuing aparthied like conditions with the way they treat native arabs. Completely foreign Jews have rights to land and such in Israel that native muslims are denied. Segregation is enforced and there exists laws for Jews and laws for non-Jews. Israel has also invaded surrounding countries and maintains occupied land to this day.

Hitler, with good reason or not, seriously did believe Jews posed a threat to his country. This was not baseless either, I'm not up on the full story but I do believe there were certain actions during the first world war involving Jewish betrayal that some nationalists saw as one reason they lost the war. The Nazis rose at least in part on this belief. It is true though that he lost the war because of ambition, not from a flawed ideology. One of the most important things to come out of the Nuremburg trials is the realisation that these men were perfectly sane and rational characters, not the rabid psychotics that people make them out to be. There is an important lesson in this fact alone - it was nationalism, not insanity and flawed ideology that fuelled the Nazi fire.

I really hate to point the finger at people here but Jews tend to be highly insular people and bring a lot of ill will upon themselves through their beliefs and behavior. I mean zionist beliefs in the 21st century is a bit stupid. Until Israel pulls out of its occupied territories, pulls down its walls surrounding said territories and gets religion completely out of its political system, loads of middle east tension and conflict will continue. Doing these things may not make violence end overnight, but it is an absolutely necessary first step - especially if we are really serious about this supposed 'war' on terrorism. It is important to note at this point that many native Jews in Israel do believe that they need to pull out of occupied territories and get religion out of government. So we can't just say "the joooz the jooooz!". It is stupid individuals that cause problems at the end of the day, not an entire religion.

Quote:

I don't think there are many Jews within the OBVIOUS positions of power throughout the world... ie... politics.

Are you serious? Kissinger (ex secretary of state), Wolfowitz (current world bank president), Wolfensohn (world bank president before Wolfowitz), Greenspan (previous chairman of fed reserve), Joseph Liebermann, both the current governor and mayor of NY are Jewish.

Although not a politician, I reckon Monika Lewisnky had some clout!  ;)

Given that Judaism is the second largest religion in the US, I don't think it is disproportionate representation. As far as I know, there has never been a Jewish president.

Quote:

I really hate to point the finger at people here but Jews tend to be highly insular people and bring a lot of ill will upon themselves through their beliefs and behavior.

This isn't confined to Judaism... Taliban, Amish, Shiite, Chrisitan fundamentalists. What about the Pilgrims (presbyterian) who founded America? They were so insular, they travelled across the Atlantic to get their own way! ;)

None of the Jewish people I know are orthodox, they all seem pretty normal to me.

Quote:

Read in a web article from Oxford Uni in Britian the other day that Adolph was a bit of a pill popper(amphetamines) and a heavy one at that.Would explain a lot

The german army survived on amphetamines, and is one of the reasons they were so successful. Psychosis contributed to a lack of discipline in the troops, and their eventual downfall.

AUShole wrote on Mar 10^th, 2007 at 6:06pm:

This isn't confined to Judaism... Taliban, Amish, Shiite, Chrisitan fundamentalists. What about the Pilgrims (presbyterian) who founded America? They were so insular, they travelled across the Atlantic to get their own way! ;)

A very good point, but the context was the Jews. I did try to mention that it is individuals at the end of the day, not groups :)

Quote:

Are you serious? Kissinger (ex secretary of state), Wolfowitz (current world bank president), Wolfensohn (world bank president before Wolfowitz), Greenspan (previous chairman of fed reserve), Joseph Liebermann, both the current governor and mayor of NY are Jewish. Although not a politician, I reckon Monika Lewisnky had some clout!   As far as I know, there has never been a Jewish president.

When I say OBVIOUS power positions... I mean world leader positions.

Whenever I say Jews hold power throughout the world, people look at you like you're an idiot saying, "Is George Bush Jewish? Is Tony Blair Jewish? Is Kim Jong Il Jewish? You're just a stinking anti-semite!!!"

See what I mean by 'less obvious' positions of power?

-I don't consider bank owners or lawyers as 'obvious' positions of power, but 'less obvious' positions of power. The kind of positions of power that have an impact on society that hardly anybody realises.



Quote:

Given that Judaism is the second largest religion in the US, I don't think it is disproportionate representation.

Really? That's interesting. Last time I checked, there were something like 17 million Jews in America's 250 million. I guess that just depends whether you classify Catholics and Protestants as 'separate religions' or not, hey?

Quote:

One thing that does annoy me about modern Jewish doctrine is the continual focus on the Holocaust, as if they were the only victims. What about the homosexuals, gypsies and disabled? Why isn't there more focus on the decimation of the Ukrainians by Hitler and Stalin? There may have been over 20 million killed, which is 3 times the number of Jews massacred.

I hate to say it Aushole, but I'm in full agreement.

Bang! Another reason they're hated. Because they're STILL getting compensation from the German Government when other races/cultures who've been subjected to the same kind of punishment throughout history have gotten squat.

And it also makes Jews look like the stereotypical image of them being greedy.

Trump,

So you say that John Howard was a jew?This would back up what my Bulgarian friend told me about Howard.. he said to me exact words..'Howard was treasurer .. a dirty jew.' He said they coveted jobs that meant they were in control of positions of wealth. World bank etc.

I had a friend of mine who was an old man who is not alive anymore tell me this..he was in WW2 as part of Hitlers army..The ss?

He briefly and secretively related stories of train loads of jews being transported to the gas chambers etc. He had a very keen interest in the war long after it was finished.

He would from some of the things he told me have been a 'war criminal'... I was rather shocked by the things he said.

The part about Howrad being a jew fascinated me though and i wondered if it were true and if Id heard him properly.

Howard is a devout christian.
He even followed christian GWB and his deciples into iraq!

The only Jew i can think of thats in government is minister for roads (NSW) Eric Roozendaal.

---

wrote on Mar 11^th, 2007 at 7:36pm:

Trump, So you say that John Howard was a jew?This would back up what my Bulgarian friend told me about Howard.. he said to me exact words..'Howard was treasurer .. a dirty jew.' He said they coveted jobs that meant they were in control of positions of wealth. World bank etc. I had a friend of mine who was an old man who is not alive anymore tell me this..he was in WW2 as part of Hitlers army..The ss? He briefly and secretively related stories of train loads of jews being transported to the gas chambers etc. He had a very keen interest in the war long after it was finished. He would from some of the things he told me have been a 'war criminal'... I was rather shocked by the things he said. The part about Howrad being a jew fascinated me though and i wondered if it were true and if Id heard him properly.

I think your friend said 'Jew' as an insult rather than 'fact.'

We all know Karl marx was the father of modern communism- and he was a jew, The original version existed as the ''KIBBUTZ'' WHICH IS THE SPITTING IMAGE OF COMMUNISM/SOCIALISM.
Perhaps we should not thank marx only, but jews in general, for communism.

ANOTHER REASON FOR THE DISLIKE OF JEWS!

---

Apparently, a few of the founding members of communism/Socialism in Russia were Jewish. Trotsky immediately springs to mind. And there has been some debate whether Lenin had a Jewish background.

The majority of the first leaders were jews.
Also does anyone remember the mass murder of 20 million Russian christians in 1920?

Quote:

Also does anyone remember the mass murder of 20 million Russian christians in 1920?

That was a famine caused by the commies wasn't it?

And thats how most jews died in the concentration camps of the late 40's.
A very tiny amount were shot or gassed.-if they ever were gassed.

True. There's so much emphasis put on this 'holocaust' garbage, whereas, the Russian famines of the 20's and 30's killed about 40 million... were overlooked...

40 million dwarfs the Jewish 3 million, so why is so much emphasis put on the Jews and not the Russians? Simply because Jews have the uncanny ability to get people to feel sorry for them.

And the reason they could achieve this??

THE JEWS OWN THE BLOODY MEDIA. :o

Not the russians.

Quote:

And the reason they could achieve this?? THE JEWS OWN THE BLOODY MEDIA.   Not the russians.

I know this may sound far-fetched to those who are new to this subject... but what AusNat is saying is 99.9% correct. Do some quick research on it. You'd be surprised how influential Jewish people are in the media.

;)

---

;D

---

Bang! Another reason they're hated. Because they're STILL getting compensation from the German Government when other races/cultures who've been subjected to the same kind of punishment throughout history have gotten squat.

Can you provide some links on this please?

http://www.ushmm.org/assets/frg.htm#6

;D

---

DT, that link you gave took mere to this:

In 1981, the Bundestag decided to make up to DM 100 million available for payments to non-Jewish victims of the Nazi regime who had previously been unable to receive compensation.

And it took forty years to recognise non-Jewish victims...  :o

Anyway, I coud have SWORN reading an article where it read that Jews were the overwhelming majority receiving compensation from the German Government.

I might try looking for stats to prove this later in the week. I'll keep you updated.

Were the jews the majority of the victims? How long did it take them to offer compensation to the jews, and was that compensation for jews only?

Quote:

Were the jews the majority of the victims?

NO.  Soviet troops.

Soldiers don't get compensation. That's just the way things are.

Quote:

Were the jews the majority of the victims? How long did it take them to offer compensation to the jews, and was that compensation for jews only?

Well... as far as I'm concerced freediver, the figures of Jewish deaths of 6 million is actually rather exaggerated. I think a more accurate figure is 3 million or less. That's the original figure that they had at the Nuremburg trials. Over the years the figure rose to 4... 5 .... 6 million.



Quote:

Soldiers don't get compensation. That's just the way things are.

Even if they're prisoners of war? I 'think' that may not be true, freediver.

What of the people of DRESDEN :'(

---

Quote:

What of the people of DRESDEN

Indeed. Where's the war compensation for the bombing of the German city of Dresden that killed thousands upon thousands of innocent German civilians?  :-? Especially since this bombing had NO MILTARY targets.

I wonder if there were any Jews left in Dresden. ::)

Quote:

I wonder if there were any Jews left in Dresden.

Probably.

Both sides bombed civilian targets in WWII.

After WWI, the allies sought to extract compenation from Germany for the damage caused by the war. The crippling impact this had on Germany is considered a major cause of WWII following WWI so closely.

It is kind of irrelevant to the discussion of compenation for civil injusitice.

Does anyone know how Hitler died?

He was supposed to have taken  cyanide pill and then he died of syp[hillis..but was there a hard and fast concensus in the end of how it actually happened?...He might stil be alive..plenty of WW2 surivors still with us today. 8-) :( ;) :-X :-/

wrote on Mar 15^th, 2007 at 10:17pm:

Does anyone know how Hitler died? He was supposed to have taken  cyanide pill and then he died of syp[hillis..but was there a hard and fast concensus in the end of how it actually happened?...He might stil be alive..plenty of WW2 surivors still with us today. 8-) :( ;) :-X :-/

Ha ha ha ha Syphilis very funny, nice way to twist history. I see you fell for the Bolshevic propoganda.!
He took a bullet to the head, and cyanide he chomped on as the trigger was pulled.

He'd be 117 years old now!

The official story: bullet in the head... cyanide.

If you'd like to see a fairly accurate and unHollywoodised story of Hitler, look up the movie, 'Downfall,' Auzgurl.

It's a refreshingly realistic look at Hitlers life.... or death... whichever.

Thank you Aus nat and Trump ..I will find that movie if possible.

I have a deep interest in WW2, always have and not sure why its so important to me.

zoso wrote on Mar 10^th, 2007 at 5:40pm:

DonaldTrump has it, really Jews (not necessarily all) can be very racist people. Israel is one of the worst countries for continuing aparthied like conditions with the way they treat native arabs. Completely foreign Jews have rights to land and such in Israel that native muslims are denied. Segregation is enforced and there exists laws for Jews and laws for non-Jews. Israel has also invaded surrounding countries and maintains occupied land to this day.

Have you ever been to Israel?

I am not Jewish but i have been there, and the country is far from segregated. In Jerslem i came accross Jews working with Arabs and arabs selling and buying things to and from jews. Further more in Nazereth which is predominently Christian arab the native arabs love the Israeli's and fully support the Israeli army like in the attack on Lebanon recently.

The only reason Israelis own all the land in the occupied territoires is that they bought it off the inhabitents. When they invaded the did not simply requesition land, the land was bought by private Israeli citizens from Private Jordanian or Egyptian Citizens.

Palestinians never had a soverign land. In fact in 1948 when England pulled out of Israel the Palestinians were given the chance for one when the UN partitioned Israel between Jews and Palestinians each getting their own portion of the land. The Palestinians however wanted the entire country to themselves even though over millions of jews already lived there and so they declared war on Israel along with Jordan Syria and Egypt.

I will repeat this the ARABs declared war on the Jews first not the other way around.

They then unexpectadly lost and thats how this all started.

Quote:

I am not Jewish but i have been there,

Judging by your statements, i think you are.

 
Quote:

In Jerslem i came accross Jews working with Arabs and arabs selling and buying things to and from jews.

Must have been one hell of a fight over the price!! ;D



Quote:

The only reason Israelis own all the land in the occupied territoires is that they bought it off the inhabitents. When they invaded the did not simply requesition land, the land was bought by private Israeli citizens from Private Jordanian or Egyptian Citizens.

From the israeli government.



Quote:

Palestinians never had a soverign land.

ARE YOU SOME KIND OF MORON?? Ever read the written works of Lawrence of arabia?


Quote:

The Palestinians however wanted the entire country to themselves even though over millions of jews already lived there and so they declared war on Israel along with Jordan Syria and Egypt.

Why not, its THEIRS. Ok, let us so called christians take back jerusalem as it is rightfully?, ''christian'' land.


Quote:

I will repeat this the ARABs declared war on the Jews first not the other way around.

BULLSHIT

You are so wrong Pender.  



[The Zionists harnessed the negative energies of the Western world--its imperialism, its anti-Semitism, its Crusading nostalgia, its anti-Islamic bigotry, and its deep racism--and focused them on a new imperialist project, the creation of a Western surrogate state in the Islamic heartland.

To the West's imperialist ambitions, this new colonial project offered a variety of strategic advantages.

Israel would be located in the heart of the Islamic world; it would sit astride the junction of Asia, Africa and Europe; it would guard Europe's gateway to the Indian Ocean; and it could monitor developments in the Persian Gulf with its vast reserves of oil.

For the West as well as Europe's Jews, this was a creative moment: indeed, it was a historical opportunity. For European Jews, it was a stroke of brilliance. Zionism was going to leverage Western power in their cause.

As the Zionist plan would unfold, inflicting pain on the Islamic world, evoking Islamic anger against the West and Jews, the complementarities between the two would deepen. In time, new complementarities would be discovered--or created--between the two antagonist strains of Western history.

In the United States, the Zionist movement would give encouragement to evangelical Protestants--who looked upon the birth of Israel as the fulfillment of end-time prophecies--and convert them into fanatic partisans of Zionism.

In addition, Western civilization, which had hitherto traced its central ideas and institutions to Rome and Athens, would be repackaged as a Judeo-Christian civilization.

This reframing not only underscores the Jewish roots of the Western world, it also makes a point of emphasizing that Islam is the outsider, the adversary.

Zionism owes its success solely to this unlikely partnership. On their own, the Zionists could not have gone anywhere.

They could not have created Israel by bribing or coercing the Ottomans into granting them a charter to colonize Palestine.

Despite his offers of loans, investments, technology and diplomatic expertise, Theodore Herzl was repeatedly rebuffed by the Ottoman Sultan.

It is even less likely that the Zionists could at any time have mobilized a Jewish army in Europe to invade and occupy Palestine, against Ottoman and Arab opposition to the creation of a Jewish state on Islamic lands.

The Zionist partnership with the West was indispensable for the creation of a Jewish state. This partnership was also fateful.

It produced a powerful new dialectic, which has encouraged Israel, both as the political center of the Jewish Diaspora and the chief outpost of the West in the heart of the Islamic world, to become more daring in its designs against the Islamic world and beyond.

In turn, a wounded and humiliated Islamic world, more resentful and determined after every defeat, has been driven to embrace increasingly radical ideas and methods to recover its dignity and power--and to attain this recovery on the strength of Islamic ideas.

This destabilizing dialectic has now brought the West itself into a direct confrontation against the Islamic world.]

http://www.radicalleft.net/blog/_archives/2006/11/27/2526566.html

When they invaded the did not simply requesition land, the land was bought by private Israeli citizens from Private Jordanian or Egyptian Citizens.

Sale between private owners does not grant control to a foreign government. Otherwise those Israeli's would have bought land in a foreign country. The purcahse is meaningless without approval of the foreign government.

I will repeat this the ARABs declared war on the Jews first not the other way around.

Right, the jews just 'peacefully' declared a chunk of land to be their own country....

In addition, Western civilization, which had hitherto traced its central ideas and institutions to Rome and Athens, would be repackaged as a Judeo-Christian civilization.

Are you saying that wasn't the case prior to WWII?

Pender, you must be saying something wrong when both the liberals and nationalists disagree with you!!  :D

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Children-of-Holocaust-survivors-sue/2007/07/16/1184559706863.html

A group representing thousands of children of Holocaust survivors filed a class-action lawsuit against the Germany government, demanding Germany pay for their psychiatric care.

The Israelis, calling themselves second-generation Holocaust survivors, say the scars of the Nazi genocide on their parents have crossed generations. Many still live with an irrational fear of starvation and incapacitating bouts of depression, the lawsuit claims.

The lawsuit marks "the very first time that the German government will be asked to take responsibility and to care for those of the second generation in Israel and indeed, worldwide," lawyer Gideon Fisher said before filing the suit at the Tel Aviv District Court.

The suit seeks to set up a German-financed fund to pay for biweekly therapy sessions for 15,000 to 20,000 people, or about 7.3 million euros ($A11.58 million) a year for three years.

Baruch Mazor, the fund's director, said four to five per cent of the 400,000 children of survivors in Israel require treatment. Since many cannot hold steady jobs, they cannot pay for their own treatment, and aid from the Israeli government and health insurance has been inadequate, he said.

It was unclear what standing the Israeli court would have in a damages case against a foreign country.

WTF :o

They cant do that! >:(

FVCKIN JEWS. And they wonder why they are so hated. Such cheats and scabs.

freediver wrote on Jul 17^th, 2007 at 11:51am:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Children-of-Holocaust-survivors-sue/2007/07/16/1184559706863.html A group representing thousands of children of Holocaust survivors filed a class-action lawsuit against the Germany government, demanding Germany pay for their psychiatric care. The Israelis, calling themselves second-generation Holocaust survivors, say the scars of the Nazi genocide on their parents have crossed generations. Many still live with an irrational fear of starvation and incapacitating bouts of depression, the lawsuit claims. The lawsuit marks "the very first time that the German government will be asked to take responsibility and to care for those of the second generation in Israel and indeed, worldwide," lawyer Gideon Fisher said before filing the suit at the Tel Aviv District Court. The suit seeks to set up a German-financed fund to pay for biweekly therapy sessions for 15,000 to 20,000 people, or about 7.3 million euros ($A11.58 million) a year for three years. Baruch Mazor, the fund's director, said four to five per cent of the 400,000 children of survivors in Israel require treatment. Since many cannot hold steady jobs, they cannot pay for their own treatment, and aid from the Israeli government and health insurance has been inadequate, he said. It was unclear what standing the Israeli court would have in a damages case against a foreign country.

even i think this is just sad.

Very stereotypical move by the Jews.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Holocaust-trauma-affects-descendants/2007/08/20/1187462144233.html

Descendants of Holocaust survivors have higher than average rates of depression, anxiety and trust problems three generations on, Australian research shows.

A new study from the Queensland University of Technology has highlighted the profound influence the Holocaust had both on its direct survivors and their relatives more than 60 year after the World II atrocity.

The researcher said the traumatic after-effects of the Holocaust flowed to subsequent generations through the way survivors interacted with their children.

"Survivors were either over-protective or clingy because they were fearful that something would happen to their children or they were dismissive and pushed their children away in an attempt to prevent any future hurt," Ms Beck said.

"These parenting patterns are highly likely to be repeated, so the cycle of trauma transmission continues."

The study showed that the most affected survivors - those who spent time in concentration camps or were the sole survivor in their family - had children who were the most affected.

The research has implications for many war-torn countries around the world such as Iraq where large groups of civilians were being traumatised, Ms Beck said.

freediver wrote on Aug 20^th, 2007 at 7:41pm:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Holocaust-trauma-affects-descendants/2007/08/20/1187462144233.html Descendants of Holocaust survivors have higher than average rates of depression, anxiety and trust problems three generations on, Australian research shows. A new study from the Queensland University of Technology has highlighted the profound influence the Holocaust had both on its direct survivors and their relatives more than 60 year after the World II atrocity. The researcher said the traumatic after-effects of the Holocaust flowed to subsequent generations through the way survivors interacted with their children. "Survivors were either over-protective or clingy because they were fearful that something would happen to their children or they were dismissive and pushed their children away in an attempt to prevent any future hurt," Ms Beck said. "These parenting patterns are highly likely to be repeated, so the cycle of trauma transmission continues." The study showed that the most affected survivors - those who spent time in concentration camps or were the sole survivor in their family - had children who were the most affected. The research has implications for many war-torn countries around the world such as Iraq where large groups of civilians were being traumatised, Ms Beck said.

Now thats just a load of steaming crap. My grandfather went through hell at the hands of the Bolsheviks yet my father and i are just fine.
And every other human on earth does not cop the punishments of their ancestors unless the situation still exists.
Its all bull, They only go on about it so we can keep feeling sorry for them and so the world can keep supporting Israel. Once this stops, Israel will crumble as they will go broke.

Some people seem to WANT to cling to their past bad experiences.
To endlessly relive them and carry them with them wherever they go.

I have bad past experiences. Anyone else ?
As corny as it sounds, eventually I forgave them and myself.
Then I could move forward.

Mind you, if there was a big financial incentive to "pleading damage" .... maybe I'ld have holden onto the bad times for a bit longer .

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Chinese-WWII-slaves-miss-out-on-compo/2007/08/30/1188067198546.html

A Japanese court rejected a lawsuit filed by dozens of Chinese seeking compensation for being forced into slave labour during World War II, a court official and a lawyer for the group says.

Morita said the judgment appeared to take its cue from a Supreme Court decision in April that ruled individual Chinese citizens lost their right to seek redress from Japan following the 1972 signing of a Japan-China Joint Communique restoring bilateral ties.

Under the communique, Beijing abandoned its right to claim war reparations from Japan. Critics, however, argue the document only affects China's government, not individuals.

Japan's military shipped hundreds of thousands of men from China and other Asian countries to Japan to work in coal mines and factories during World War II to make up for domestic labour shortages. It also forced Asian women into sexual slavery for Japanese troops.

Understandable why a jap court turned down chinas right for compensation against japan.

How did Hiltler really die?
Some say Syphliss..others say poison..etc..

But how did he actually die.?





http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:cIZm7XgGEgF_bM:http://www.firstworldwar.com/features/graphics/hitler_fuhrer.jpg

suicide, pill and gun together.

watch downfall

http://news.smh.com.au/germany-bans-two-extremist-groups/20080507-2bwt.html

German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble has banned two far-right organisations he described as "reservoirs of organised Holocaust deniers."

Schaeuble, Germany's top security official, said in a statement that the organisations' activities were in violation of the nation's constitution. Denying the Holocaust is a crime in Germany.

"The organisations are reservoirs of organised Holocaust deniers," Schaeuble said in a statement.

"Their activities include disseminating anti-Semitic propaganda and praising the tyranny of the Nazis" over the internet, as well as in printed leaflets, Schaeuble said.

The two groups were identified as Collegium Humanum and Bauernhilfe eV, with bases in the western German states of North Rhein-Westphalia, Lower Saxony and Hesse.

Authorities confiscated material through searches of 30 premises in the various states early Wednesday, the statement said.

Back to the original questions of why Hitler hates the Jews so much.....

It was said that Hitler was inspired or heavily influenced by a manuscript called The Protocols of the the Elders of Zion. He refered to it several times in his book Mein Kampf and has endorsed it a number of times in his many speeches. The Protocols were required reading by all in the Nazi Party and the Hitler Youths and was/is often time used as justification for the Holacaust.

The Protocols was a literary hoax originally written (supposedly by the  Mensheviks) to incite hatred against the Bolsheviks during the Russian revolution. It pretended to be minutes to a secret meeting of Jewish/Zionist elders. It noted plans for world domination via control of the banking and media institutions. They were supposedly a secret society akin to the Illuminati and the Freemasons.

Modern Nazis still quote from The Protocol and profess its authenticity despite being proven to be a hoax.

Many others seem to carry on the same theme, even if not specifically endorsing 'the protocols'. Like fretting about the number of Jews in Hollywood or something silly like that. Luckily for the Jews the Muslims have drawn those people's attention. It's much easier to construct a conspiracy around a religion if it proselytises.

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Jul 18^th, 2007 at 11:47pm:

Very stereotypical move by the Jews.

Very stereotypical view of the Jews.   ::)

Fear and hatred of Jews has been entrenched in European history since not long after the dawn of the Christian era. Hitler didn't invent it. Every nation in Europe has had its period of virulent xenophobia aimed at people of Jewish descent. Even the great religious reformer and the instigator of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther, despised Jews and railed against them.

The holocaust was the last, the most deadly and many times over, the greatest evil ever committed against the Jews (or a people) and it had its roots in the unfounded belief held by many in Germany, including Hitler, that Germany lost the first world war because of an enemy within… The Jew. Even Kaiser Wilhelm II after he abdicated and exiled himself to the Netherlands blamed Jews for his and Germany’s downfall (although he reformed when he witnessed the horrors of Nazism). Europeans have had a pathological tendency to blame Jews for everything and this has been lampooned with the humorous punch line ‘The Jews did it’ (as in ‘Global warming?... the Jews did it).

Hitler didn’t invent European xenophobia towards Jews, he (and the German generals who ensured his rise to the Chancellory) evoked it to realise an innate European desire to inflict great suffering on the Jewish people.

Do you think it's true that Hitler is largely responsible for a lot of the anti-Jewish sentiment across the middle east?

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2008 at 3:29pm:

Do you think it's true that Hitler is largely responsible for a lot of the anti-Jewish sentiment across the middle east?

While there has always been an ongoing dialectic between Islam and Judaism it seems that Nazi Germany was largely responsible for anti-Jewish sentiment in the Middle East. I guess it’s a bit like what happened with Hindus and Muslims during Partition in India. Having lived side by side for hundreds of years, the peace is destroyed in a bloodbath on a biblical scale after British involvement in their affairs.

The strangest place that anti-semitism can be found is in Japan despite the fact that there is virtually no Jewish presence in the country.

It appears that the European anti-Jewish pathology has found a home even in an Asian monoculture.

There are claims  that Hitler's paternal grandfather was Jewish, with the name Frankenberger. His stepfather's name was Alois Hikler or Heidler.

As an aside, Hitler blamed Bolshevism in the Soviet Union on the Jews, and also cited the influence of the Jews on Wall Street. He used this to justify why they 'must be stopped'.

The hatred of jews goes way back.
We have seen 'Pogroms" against jews as far back as you want to look.

As soon as they took up the role of money lending,  often with, what many thought should be called, usury rates of interest.

The stereotypical figure of a conniving duplicitous miser, has been one which the jewish people have had great trouble ridding themselves of, despite some of the greatest philanthropists and humanitarians ever, being jewish.

Or alternately, they may just have a knack for really pissing people off:) ;D

muso wrote on May 16^th, 2008 at 5:53pm:

There are claims  that Hitler's paternal grandfather was Jewish, with the name Frankenberger. His stepfather's name was Alois Hikler or Heidler. As an aside, Hitler blamed Bolshevism in the Soviet Union on the Jews, and also cited the influence of the Jews on Wall Street. He used this to justify why they 'must be stopped'.

Yes, there are some claims but they have never been substantiated. Even his nephew, the English William Hitler, although always threatening to expose the Hitler family's Jewish heritage had no evidence of it and could only repeat family hearsay. Given the illegitimacy peppered through Hitler's family tree, the Jewish connection was most likely once used to infer rape against a maternal grandmother while she was a servant for a Jewish family. Probably more close to the truth is that she liked to get around and could not be certain who the father of her child was. Hitler's family lived in 'back blocks' areas of Austria where poverty was rife and illegitimacy not uncommon.

Hitler, along with most Germans and other Europeans (particularly in the East) blamed Jews for just about everything.

helian,


Quote:

While there has always been an ongoing dialectic between Islam and Judaism it seems that Nazi Germany was largely responsible for anti-Jewish sentiment in the Middle East

Do you have anything that remotely backs that up?

anti-Zionist riots began in Palestine in the 1920's due to the fact the British had flooded Palestine with Jews and was busy signing agreements to guarantee a national homeland for them there, and because Jews had begun forming militias. I doubt anyone from the Middle East had even heard of Hitler in that time.

So I think it had more to do with the fact the Jews were working to take over and dispossess them of their country than it had to do with Hitler. Btw, Hitler was pro-Zionist, as it served his goal of ridding Europe of Jews.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 9^th, 2008 at 6:09pm:

helian, Quote: While there has always been an ongoing dialectic between Islam and Judaism it seems that Nazi Germany was largely responsible for anti-Jewish sentiment in the Middle East Do you have anything that remotely backs that up? anti-Zionist riots began in Palestine in the 1920's due to the fact the British had flooded Palestine with Jews and was busy signing agreements to guarantee a national homeland for them there, and because Jews had begun forming militias. I doubt anyone from the Middle East had even heard of Hitler in that time. So I think it had more to do with the fact the Jews were working to take over and dispossess them of their country than it had to do with Hitler. Btw, Hitler was pro-Zionist, as it served his goal of ridding Europe of Jews.

Attached is one source (among many)...

http://www.yale.edu/isps/seminars/antisemitism/seminar_papers/Kuntzel_2.pdf

"Berlin wanted at all costs to prevent the birth of a Jewish state and thus welcomed the Mufti’s advances. Arab antisemitism would now get a powerful new promoter."

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 9^th, 2008 at 8:51pm:

"Berlin wanted at all costs to prevent the birth of a Jewish state and thus welcomed the Mufti’s advances. Arab antisemitism would now get a powerful new promoter."

Doesn't that suggest that anti-Semitism already existed in the Middle East prior to Hitler rather than Hitler being responsible or the instigator of anti-Semitism in the region?

Acid Monkey wrote on Aug 9^th, 2008 at 9:11pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 9th, 2008 at 8:51pm: "Berlin wanted at all costs to prevent the birth of a Jewish state and thus welcomed the Mufti’s advances. Arab antisemitism would now get a powerful new promoter." Doesn't that suggest that anti-Semitism already existed in the Middle East prior to Hitler rather than Hitler being responsible or the instigator of anti-Semitism in the region?

Quote:

While there has always been an ongoing dialectic between Islam and Judaism it seems that Nazi Germany was largely responsible for anti-Jewish sentiment in the Middle East

It appears Nazism was largely responsible for anti-semitism in the Middle East (certainly for its propagation) not solely responsible. The source refers to some anti-semitism already established in Palestine pre-1933 but it was not widespread until the Nazi propaganda machine began to spread the evil word, having a particularly strong effect among illiterate Muslims of the region.

As our Muslim friends here will tell you, Islam appeared to be far more tolerant of Christians and Jews at the turn of the 20th century than it was leaving it. For that, Europe (Germany in particular) I believe, is largely to blame.

Quote:

Arab antisemitism

Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron, considering that Arabs are in fact the largest and most purely Semitic people in existence?


Quote:

Attached is one source (among many)...

Since the guy is a Zionist and half of his books/talks seem to be about claiming Muslims are Nazis, could we expect anything less from such quarters? Guy sounds like a bit of a loon to me. anything to take the pressure off the atrocities of Zionism. If anything, Zionism is about the closest modern successor to Nazism, certainly not Islam.


Quote:

but it was not widespread until the Nazi propaganda machine began to spread the evil word, having a particularly strong effect among illiterate Muslims of the region.

Ahhh right, so those poor naive Palestinians, were being dispossessed of their homes, watching a colonial power walk in and turn their country over to a previously 2% minority. who were forming militias and arming themselves to the teeth... yet they needed some half-wit in Germany to tell them they should start hating those who were doing this?

The fact is the anti-Zionist riots began in the early 1920's before Hitler was even relevant to the Middle East, and the fact is Muslims are not anti-Semitic anyway, especially not Arabs, since they are themselves the main group of Semites. Associating Muslim's legitimate right to anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is just ridiculous. Anti-Zionist sentiment then spread to other parts of the Arab and Islamic world as the Zionists began raiding Arab villages and causing atrocities against the people of the land they were infiltrating, and news of this spread.

You've disregarded the clear facts, and instead posted a link to Zionist propaganda which is full of false accusations against Muslims, aimed at furthering the cause of the Zionist dispossession of the Muslims/Arabs of Palestine from their homes.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:30am:

Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron, considering that Arabs are in fact the largest and most purely Semitic people in existence?

While it appears to mean a hatred of Semitic people, wherever I have seen it used, the term anti-Semitism refers exclusively to anti-Jewish sentiments. There may be people who hate Arabs and Jews for whatever reasons, but I have never heard the term used to define this hatred collectively, have you?


abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:30am:

Ahhh right, so those poor naive Palestinians, were being dispossessed of their homes, watching a colonial power walk in and turn their country over to a previously 2% minority. who were forming militias and arming themselves to the teeth... yet they needed some half-wit in Germany to tell them they should start hating those who were doing this? The fact is the anti-Zionist riots began in the early 1920's before Hitler was even relevant to the Middle East, and the fact is Muslims are not anti-Semitic anyway, especially not Arabs, since they are themselves the main group of Semites. Associating Muslim's legitimate right to anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism is just ridiculous. Anti-Zionist sentiment then spread to other parts of the Arab and Islamic world as the Zionists began raiding Arab villages and causing atrocities against the people of the land they were infiltrating, and news of this spread. You've disregarded the clear facts, and instead posted a link to Zionist propaganda which is full of false accusations against Muslims, aimed at furthering the cause of the Zionist dispossession of the Muslims/Arabs of Palestine from their homes.

What was Grand Mufti al-Husseini’s role in securing Nazi support for the German “anti-Semitic” propaganda campaign in Palestine? And also in encouraging Muslims to support the German war effort? Was he aware of the lethal nature of Nazi anti-Semitism?

I see Arab-Israeli conflict as the result of a European sickness that, mainly through Nazism, found itself at home in the Middle East. Had Nazi Germany not been determined to make Jews stateless and ultimately to exterminate them altogether, then firstly there would not have been any interest in running a massive propaganda campaign to reach out to Arabs within and beyond Palestine or assisting an Arab religious leader in his endeavours to prevent a Jewish state.

Secondly without the Holocaust the chances of Zionism becoming as popular as it did would have been greatly reduced. The sheer numbers of displaced European Jews both after the proclamation of the Nuremberg laws and the the war - many extremely lucky to be alive – would not have arrived in Palestine in their tens of thousands. Europe had no moral right to object to this migration, given the nearly two millennia of persecution to which every European nation has, at some time, subjected Jews. Neither had Canada and the US with European anti-Semitism entrenched there as well.

There may still have been conflict, but I believe that it wouldn’t have been anywhere near the same scale that it has descended to as a result of Nazism.

Quote:

While it appears to mean a hatred of Semitic people

It's more than appearance, that's what it means. It's akin to Muslims claiming anti-Muslim sentiment is actually anti-Human sentiment, when you consider the % of Semites that are Jews compared with the % of Humans that are Muslims, we'd be more than justified in using such terms.


Quote:

the term anti-Semitism refers exclusively to anti-Jewish sentiments

If that's what you're actually referring to, then use that term. Why would you use a term that actually means a group several magnitudes the size of what you actually mean? Perhaps it's because Judaism is a religion and not an ethnicity, so in order to make it appear more like an ethnic hatred, you have to refer to incorrect terms like Semite. Quite hypocritical that when it comes to hatred against Muslims, all of a sudden defining a group by their ethnicity is irrelevant, "We're only attacking the religion, so it's ok".

Either way, 'Arabic anti-Semitism' is still an oxymoron, and an enormous one at that, considering Arabs make up about 90% of Semites.


Quote:

What was Grand Mufti al-Husseini’s role in securing Nazi support for the German “anti-Semitic” propaganda campaign in Palestine? And also in encouraging Muslims to support the German war effort? Was he aware of the lethal nature of Nazi anti-Semitism?

Like most post-Caliphate Arab/Muslim leaders, he was misguided and astray. He was more of an Arab/Palestinian nationalist than he was a Muslim leader. He just happened to hold the post of "Grand Mufti" due to the position of his clan, not because he was any great Islamic Scholar.

The fact that he even encouraged Muslims to join the SS, is testimony to the fact he was a very unIslamic figure, as it's forbidden for Muslims to fight in the armies of non-Muslims.


Quote:

I see Arab-Israeli conflict as the result of a European sickness that, mainly through Nazism, found itself at home in the Middle East.

So it's got nothing to do with the fact a 2% minority began mass-immigrating into the land, forming militias, publishing statements they were going to expel the existing people of the land and turn it into a purely Jewish state??? All that is just secondary in your opinion?? Your argument defies logic.


Quote:

Secondly without the Holocaust the chances of Zionism becoming as popular as it did would have been greatly reduced.

Theodore Hertzl published his book 'Juden Staat' (The Jewish State) in 1901, which outlined the principles of establishing the state of Israel in Palestine. That was about 40 years before the Holocaust, so you've got some serious holes in your argument here. Zionism was well established by the time Hitler rose to power, and the Arabs had been protesting/rioting against it before he came to power to. The stage was already set for the conflict to occur, any propaganda effort by the Nazis was pretty much negligable if you actually look at the situation that already existed.

You've based your whole argument on Zionist propaganda, and I don't think you've actually examined the situation that already existed, nor looked at the dates at which certain events happened. My advice to you would be to get yourself at least familiarised with the general timeline of how these historical events unfolded, then you might be in a better position to speak some sense.


Quote:

Europe had no moral right to object to this migration, given the nearly two millennia of persecution to which every European nation has, at some time, subjected Jews.

They had no right to object nor to accept. It's not their land that they were migrating to. This is ridiculous as the claim the UN voted in favour of the creation of the state of Israel in Palestine, they've got no right to do any such thing. If the UN today voted in favour of establishing an Islamic state in Australia, because Muslims are 2% of the population, and because Muslims had a history here that predated the Europeans, would you or any other Australian accept it? After all we're suffering anti-Muslim persecution in Europe and the US and even in Arab countries, so why shouldn't we have a safe haven to escape to? The whole idea is just illogical, as illogical as it was back in 1948.


Quote:

Neither had Canada and the US with European anti-Semitism entrenched there as well.

Jews live a lot safer in the USA and Canada than they do in Palestine... Again more of your twisted logic.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:06pm:

It's more than appearance, that's what it means. It's akin to Muslims claiming anti-Muslim sentiment is actually anti-Human sentiment, when you consider the % of Semites that are Jews compared with the % of Humans that are Muslims, we'd be more than justified in using such terms. If that's what you're actually referring to, then use that term. Why would you use a term that actually means a group several magnitudes the size of what you actually mean? Perhaps it's because Judaism is a religion and not an ethnicity, so in order to make it appear more like an ethnic hatred, you have to refer to incorrect terms like Semite. Quite hypocritical that when it comes to hatred against Muslims, all of a sudden defining a group by their ethnicity is irrelevant, "We're only attacking the religion, so it's ok". Either way, 'Arabic anti-Semitism' is still an oxymoron, and an enormous one at that, considering Arabs make up about 90% of Semites.

I have always used the term “anti-Semitism” to refer to anti-Jewish sentiments. That is, by “osmosis”, how I’ve accepted the general use of the term. If I use it here that is what I mean, however, I will use “anti-Jewish” in this post.


abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:06pm:

Like most post-Caliphate Arab/Muslim leaders, he was misguided and astray. He was more of an Arab/Palestinian nationalist than he was a Muslim leader. He just happened to hold the post of "Grand Mufti" due to the position of his clan, not because he was any great Islamic Scholar. The fact that he even encouraged Muslims to join the SS, is testimony to the fact he was a very unIslamic figure, as it's forbidden for Muslims to fight in the armies of non-Muslims.

Nevertheless, he was hailed as a hero in the Middle East when he was allowed to escape from French custody into exile in Egypt to avoid a war crimes trial. Europe may have witnessed it worst expression of “anti-Jewish sentiment” in its history, but there was not yet enough shame to hold the Mufti to account.


abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:06pm:

So it's got nothing to do with the fact a 2% minority began mass-immigrating into the land, forming militias, publishing statements they were going to expel the existing people of the land and turn it into a purely Jewish state??? All that is just secondary in your opinion?? Your argument defies logic.

No, what I am saying is what caused Jews to migrate from Europe to Palestine in huge numbers was European persecution. The main drivers for the migration to Palestine was firstly largely due to rampant anti-Jewish pogroms in Russia which saw a large rise in the Jewish population in Palestine around the turn of the century until WW1. Secondly, the Nazi persecution during the 1930’s which again saw a massive leap in Jewish immigration and thirdly again another wave in the aftermath of WW2 and the Holocaust. Had these events not occurred, I don’t believe Jews would have migrated in the huge numbers that they did.


abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:06pm:

They had no right to object nor to accept. It's not their land that they were migrating to. This is ridiculous as the claim the UN voted in favour of the creation of the state of Israel in Palestine, they've got no right to do any such thing. If the UN today voted in favour of establishing an Islamic state in Australia, because Muslims are 2% of the population, and because Muslims had a history here that predated the Europeans, would you or any other Australian accept it? After all we're suffering anti-Muslim persecution in Europe and the US and even in Arab countries, so why shouldn't we have a safe haven to escape to? The whole idea is just illogical, as illogical as it was back in 1948.

The point I was trying to make was that European guilt meant that there was little support for Middle Eastern nations in their protestations against the existence of a Jewish state. Tthere was indeed a suggestion that a part of Australia (or Canada) be ceded to Jews for a homeland.


abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:06pm:

Jews live a lot safer in the USA and Canada than they do in Palestine... Again more of your twisted logic.

Jews may live a lot safer now, but before WW2, anti-Jewish sentiment was rife in the US, though not as virulent as the European strain. Many economic and political leaders spoke openly of their disdain for Jews (Henry Ford for instance).

Even on the eve of WW2 the SS St Louis with its 936 Jewish refugees was refused entry into the United States despite the fact that Jewish persecution in Germany was well known by 1939. Sending this ship first to Cuba then to the US was Hitler’s plan to prove to the Western world that they all harboured anti-Jewish sentiments as strongly as did Germany.

People don’t generally leave their homelands in enormous numbers when times are good. They only do so when there is no other choice. Those Jews who migrated to Palestine during the 1930’s prior to WW2 did so out of fear that they would endure a persecution like no other and that fear proved to be prophetic. The ones who left after the war (displaced persons) no doubt believed that Jews would never be safe in Europe and that the only guarantee of being free from state sanctioned brutality and murder would be to migrate to and support a Jewish homeland and that's what they did

I've heard this claim too. Hitler did a tour of the middle east to shore up allies. He did so by pointing to a 'common enemy' - the Jews - and ranting against him as was his style, which seemed to work on people. Obviously this would require some pre-existing animosity towards the Jews. But Hitler did have a strong role in turning it into the nasty political movement you still see today. Obviously the fact that Islam puts Jews in a politically inferior position didn't help, but that is nothing like the style of organised hatred that Hitler brought.

I'm surprised Abu isn't keen to take any opportunity to 'blame it on the west'. I guess that's because he prefers to justify ill treatement of Jews.

Quote:

a 'common enemy' - the Jews

It may have been a little like this daily show sketch, featuring steve carrell and steven colbert...
http://www.jibjab.com/view/110927

I think it is reasonable to say that the attacks on Jews are typically more racial than religiously motivated. I have never heard of anyone complain about the Jewish religion. Hitler didn't care whether the Jews he killed were faithful. He would have killed plenty of athiest Jews. The Jews in Europe were bound by far more than religion. They stuck together in order to survive. Even if they didn't share the faith, they still shared cultural ties with their extended family and the broader Jewish community. It is kind of ironic that this divide had started to break down in Europe when Hitler turned up. The Jews were participating in mainstream society in ways that made them largely indistuinguishable from other Europeans. The persecution of Jews in Europe was very similar to the persecution of Gypsies. Obviously there is no religious motivation involved in the persecution of Gypsies. Nor do they have their own unique race. However, being a Gypsie, like being a Jew, is something that is largely inherited from your parents.

Obviously anti-semitism may seem an odd term, especially in the middle east where there are lots of non-Jewish semites. But this kind of misses the point. If there were a more appropriate term, we would use it, but there isn't. It is pointless getting hung up on the technicalities of race. Any race is impossible to pin down in a strict genetic sense. To demand a scientific basis for the accusation of racism attributes to racist people far more intelligence than they actually have. You can make a racial issue over anything, as Hitler managed to do with the whole Aryan thing. What matters is not whether there is a unique race being attacked. What matters is the motivation for the attack.

Attacks on Muslims typically have a different motivation. While the gang issues with Lebanese etc could reasonably be called a racial issue, broader antagonism towards Muslims is based on the religion. Occasionally it has racial aspects, especially when Muslims are equated with Arabs, in which case it can look a  lot like the anti-jewish propaganda of Hitler. Cartoons in newspapers tend to play this up. But for the most part, if you take the religion away, the antagonism goes. If you add the religion to a person of any race, the antagonism will be there. People are genuinely concerned about the doctrine.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 10^th, 2008 at 12:06pm:

Quote: the term anti-Semitism refers exclusively to anti-Jewish sentiments If that's what you're actually referring to, then use that term. Why would you use a term that actually means a group several magnitudes the size of what you actually mean? Perhaps it's because Judaism is a religion and not an ethnicity, so in order to make it appear more like an ethnic hatred, you have to refer to incorrect terms like Semite. Quite hypocritical that when it comes to hatred against Muslims, all of a sudden defining a group by their ethnicity is irrelevant, "We're only attacking the religion, so it's ok". Either way, 'Arabic anti-Semitism' is still an oxymoron, and an enormous one at that, considering Arabs make up about 90% of Semites.

I think it's clear that whenever the term "anti-Semitic" is used (in the Western context) it is almost exclusively refers to anti-Jewish. Everyone in this boards knows what helian means by that term as do you.

That you chose to argue a small and pedantic point of contention is deflecting away from the subject especially when there is no confusion whatsoever at play.

You don't see whole groups of Muslims voicing indignation whenever the term anti-Semitic is used whereas you do with the Jews. This is because the everyone knows the context in which it is used. Maliks stresses against Sprint many times that he quotes from the Qur'an out of context. Context is always important.

I myself have used the term anti-Semitic when refering to those who hates Jews and has never being taken to task about it from you because you and everyone elses knows what it means in context.

I think you're nitpicking and being ultra politically correct.

Quote:

I have always used the term “anti-Semitism” to refer to anti-Jewish sentiments. That is, by “osmosis”, how I’ve accepted the general use of the term. If I use it here that is what I mean, however, I will use “anti-Jewish” in this post.

Even this term is incorrect. You should use the term anti-Zionism, as the opposition is clearly to the activities/ideology of Zionists and prior to the creation of the ideology of Zionism, Muslims/Arabs had no such problem or opposition to them.


Quote:

Nevertheless, he was hailed as a hero in the Middle East when he was allowed to escape from French custody into exile in Egypt

Allowed being the key word here. It's also rumoured that he worked for British intelligence from his exile in Egypt.. He was quite clearly a puppet of the various Western powers and he served their interests quite well. Seems in the end his loyalties were with the allies. Your pathetic attempt to use him to taint the image of Islam and justify the racist ideology of Zionist is lame.


Quote:

Secondly, the Nazi persecution during the 1930’s which again saw a massive leap in Jewish immigration and thirdly again another wave in the aftermath of WW2 and the Holocaust. Had these events not occurred, I don’t believe Jews would have migrated in the huge numbers that they did.

This is no way to avoid the point that anti-Zionist sentiment amongst Muslims/Arabs stems from the atrocities committed against them and the dispossession from their land caused by the Zionists, and not simply because some charismatic ranting European loon with a funny little moustache did a lecture tour of the Middle East.


Quote:

Tthere was indeed a suggestion that a part of Australia (or Canada) be ceded to Jews for a homeland

Never heard Canada was considered. Australia, Argentina & Uganda were the proposals I've heard of. They should've chosen Australia if you ask me. And not some patch of wilderness in the Kimberly as they proposed, but the Eastern seaboard states. Then we'd see how Aussies would support Zionism, after being herded into refugee camps in the deserts along the borders of South Australia and NT.


Quote:

Jews may live a lot safer now,

This is the point, those Zionists who've migrated to Palestine don't live safer, they fear getting onto busses cos they might get blown up or rockets might come crashing down on their rooves.


Quote:

but before WW2, anti-Jewish sentiment was rife in the US, though not as virulent as the European strain.

Yes but today it is not, yet Jews are leaving perfectly good homes and social/economic conditions in the USA to go and live in Palestine and further push the Palestinians into refugee camps and homelessness, can you justify this?


Quote:

Even on the eve of WW2 the SS St Louis with its 936 Jewish refugees was refused entry into the United States despite the fact that Jewish persecution in Germany was well known by 1939.

That's great that you recognise this was wrong, but it's still not the business of Muslims. If you wanna make a mends for the wrongs your civilisation has caused to the Jews do it with your own land and homes, not with ours.

If you want to be a warmonger Abu, then just spit it out.

Stop tap dancing around laying fault everywhere, except at Islam's door, and openly excusing all violent aggression done in Islam's name.

Say who you hate, why you want to kill them, and we can just put you in the fanatical loony category that is full of like minded Islamist supremists.

If you think you are justly defending yourself from aggressors, and therefore required by Islam to retaliate aggressively, let us in on the hit list.

My concern is that your hit list will look a lot like the white pages.

Quote:

I've heard this claim too. Hitler did a tour of the middle east to shore up allies.

Considering the Middle East was under the occupation of the British and French at that time, who was he seeking alliances from? There were few independant governments in the Middle East at that time, so if he was seeking political alliances, one would assume it was with the British? or the French?


Quote:

But Hitler did have a strong role in turning it into the nasty political movement you still see today.

You've not shown any evidence whatsoever, you're claiming victory on that one a little prematurely I think.


Quote:

I'm surprised Abu isn't keen to take any opportunity to 'blame it on the west'. I guess that's because he prefers to justify ill treatement of Jews.

As I've stated, the opposition to the Jews is purely political and is anti-Zionist. It's quite clearly an opposition to their mass immigration and subsequent creation of a state inside the Muslim lands. If you choose to continue ignoring the clear and tangible reasons, and point to suggestions by Zionists that's up to you. But I think you know that people generally develop a strong opposition to something based on negative EXPERIENCES of it, like being tossed out of their homes, having their possessions confiscated, having their houses demolished, having their farms bulldozed, having their cars run over by tanks, having their apartment blocks flattened by helicopter gunships, having their children shot by soldiers etc. That kind of stuff generally has more influence on an individual's negative attitude towards others, than some guy standing up on a podium 60 odd years ago ranting and raving, no matter how charismatic he was.


Quote:

Attacks on Muslims typically have a different motivation...

You will squeeze and squirm and do anything to deny the vilification of Muslims is the same as the vilification of Jews... Really pathetic.

About as convincing as your argument on the differences between war & terrorism :)

Acid,


Quote:

I think it's clear that whenever the term "anti-Semitic" is used (in the Western context) it is almost exclusively refers to anti-Jewish. Everyone in this boards knows what helian means by that term as do you.

Yes I do, but it's still very ironic when it's used against Arabs, who are themselves Semites.

The correct term to use is anti-Zionist, and frankly, I don't accept any other claim, because it's based on Zionist propaganda that's attempting to associate justified Muslim/Arab resistance to the invasion and occupation of their land with Nazism, when quite clearly the Zionist ideology is the one that most resembles Nazism in this situation.

Yes but today it is not, yet Jews are leaving perfectly good homes and social/economic conditions in the USA to go and live in Palestine and further push the Palestinians into refugee camps and homelessness, can you justify this?

The fact that Jews can live in the US is totally irrelvant, both from a moralistic perspective and for the motivation of the zionists. There are anti-semites in every country on earth, and no way to tell when they will next spring to power.

---

But I think you know that people generally develop a strong opposition to something based on negative EXPERIENCES of it, like being tossed out of their homes, having their possessions confiscated, having their houses demolished, having their farms bulldozed, having their cars run over by tanks, having their apartment blocks flattened by helicopter gunships, having their children shot by soldiers etc. That kind of stuff generally has more influence on an individual's negative attitude towards others, than some guy standing up on a podium 60 odd years ago ranting and raving, no matter how charismatic he was.

Plenty of people in the middle east hate the Jews even though they have never experienced that at the hand of the Israelis. In fact only a small minority could claim that.

You will squeeze and squirm and do anything to deny the vilification of Muslims is the same as the vilification of Jews... Really pathetic.

I said it has a different motivation. This is simply a statement of fact.

Your concerns about differentiating between 'Jewish', and 'Semitic", are obviously absent when talking about 'Jewish" and "Zionism".

Here is a little from an Arab show that uses a Mickey Mouse like character, to talk to very young muslim kids, it must make you so proud.


"Sanabel, what do you want to do to help the Al-Aqsa Mosque?" Farfur asks on the children's program of Hamas's Al-Aqsa television station. "We want to fight." "And what else?" "Wipe out the Jews."

Protests about using mickey mouse to promote such hatred saw them forced to withdraw the mouse character, which was followed by this..........

"International protests forced Hamas to take its Disney clone out of circulation. Al-Aqsa complied, but promptly turned Farfur's departure into an anti-Semitic statement: Farfur was clubbed to death by an Israeli official. Then the girl hosting the program turned to the camera and said: "You've seen how the Jews killed Farfur as a martyr. What do you want to say to the Jews?" A three-year-old girl named Shaima called into the show to say: "We don't like Jews, because they are dogs! We will fight them!" "Oh, Shaima, you're right," the girl in the studio replied, "the Jews are criminals and our enemies."


For the full article, titled
"Anti-Semitic Hate Speech In The Name Of Islam", follow the link;

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,553724,00.html

That's just sick. They are breeding a new generation of terrorists. Undoing that indoctrination will be a huge effort, but it is the only way to achieve peace. It's not likely to happen. All the Arab peace proposals won't make a lick of difference while the Palestinian children are foaming at the mouth.

Quote:

The fact that Jews can live in the US is totally irrelvant, both from a moralistic perspective and for the motivation of the zionists.

Perhaps you should direct this to helian not me. I'm not the one who just wrote an entire post using it as a justification for the Zionist invasion and occupation of Palestine.


Quote:

There are anti-semites in every country on earth, and no way to tell when they will next spring to power.

Yes, and according to your claims the most virulent anti-Semites are the Arabs of Palestine right? Which means that's the last place Jew should be going.


Quote:

Plenty of people in the middle east hate the Jews even though they have never experienced that at the hand of the Israelis. In fact only a small minority could claim that.

Out of sympathy for their fellow Muslims/Arabs.


Quote:

I said it has a different motivation. This is simply a statement of fact.

Is it? I don't think so. And it seems the exact same groups who are most vocal against the Jews are most vocal against the Muslims. The difference is the general public cheersquad doesn't feel as inhibited to join the chorus when it comes to Muslims, because it's not politically incorrect, as it is when it comes to Jews.


Quote:

Undoing that indoctrination will be a huge effort, but it is the only way to achieve peace. It's not likely to happen.

Still you blame the insignficant effect of propaganda, and completely ignore the effect of the actual oppression and violence from which the sentiments ultimately stem. Whilst you and others like you continue to address the situation in this manner, no not much will change. The propganda is another of the symptoms of this cycle of violence, it is not the root cause. That is quite obviously the existence of the Zionist entity in Palestine, which you don't seem to want to admit. You can use all the excuses you like, Hitler convinced them to hate the Jews, Hamas cartoons convinced them to hate the Jews, but at the end of the day, that kid... who's probably lost at least one parent and probably a few siblings, maybe even a limb to the IDF your 'concern' for their 'indoctrination' is empty and misplaced.

Yes, and according to your claims the most virulent anti-Semites are the Arabs of Palestine right? Which means that's the last place Jew should be going.

Obviously I wouldn't recommend a Jew live in the west bank or gaza strip.

Is it? I don't think so.

Which part of the claim do you disagree with? Do you think people discriminate against Jews because they fear the doctrine, or that they discriminate against Muslims because they don't like Arabs?

And it seems the exact same groups who are most vocal against the Jews are most vocal against the Muslims.

Sure, the nutcases oppose everything. So what?

Still you blame the insignficant effect of propaganda

You don't think cartoons encouraging children to kill Israelis is going to be a big problem in the future?

The propganda is another of the symptoms of this cycle of violence, it is not the root cause.

That doesn't make sense. You acknowledge that the violence is cyclical, but at the same time try to differentiate symptoms and root causes.

Hitler was over ambitious, but more importantly he was an incompetent military leader.

He showed a small amount of flaire but ultimately it was his generals and his grunts that did what was ordered of them. It was his ridiculous demands and interference that lead to the loss on the Eastern Front.

The splitting of his forces, doubling his supply lines therefore delaying the taking of Moscow, which he did not see as a crucial political and military target, and delays or non existant reinforcements. Remember how close they came to taking Moscow (within sight) and how much territory the Germans had captured.

Sure the Russians had moved much infrastructure even further east, but with Moscow captured as well as every major city west of Moscow I doubt that there would have been much the Russians could have done, in the short term anyway.

The Jewish issue did not rear its head that much during the war, only after and in fact probably directed more sympathy to the Jewish community than they had enjoyed in 2000 odd years. The jews have been historically resented in many countries and many cultures. And Hitler's hard nosed attitude to them before the war was generally accepted and sometimes well recieved by other nations. So what happened to the jews had little effect on the outcome of the war.

The Americans entering the war was not well recieved by Hitler, who was royally pissed off with the Japanese. Germany might have done better also if it had not been so anti-slavic, therefore had access to better quality allies in Europe. Especially as Italy proved to be a greater cause of trouble than the French had been able to muster. I would prefer that we don't come to France's rescue again. Should have let the Germans keep them.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 10:45am:

Yes I do, but it's still very ironic when it's used against Arabs, who are themselves Semites. The correct term to use is anti-Zionist, and frankly, I don't accept any other claim, because it's based on Zionist propaganda that's attempting to associate justified Muslim/Arab resistance to the invasion and occupation of their land with Nazism, when quite clearly the Zionist ideology is the one that most resembles Nazism in this situation.

I guess you'll be fine with the following terms so as to avoid confusion and/or misplaced sematics.

Anti-Zion = anti-Israel
Anti-Zionist = anti-Israelis
Anti-Jewish = anti-all-Jews
Anti-Semitic = anti-all-Semites (of which Arabs are 90% the majority)
Anti-Arabs = anti-90%-of-all-Semites
Anti-Muslims = anti-all-Muslims
Anti-American = anti-North & South-America (including Canada, Cuba, Chile)
Anti-US = anti-US
Anti-Western = anti-all-western-countries (including NZ, Iceland & American Samoa)
Anti-Asian = anti-all-Asian (from western to Eastern Asia)
Anti-Oriental-Asian = anti-Eastern-Asian
Anti-European = anti-EU (not including the UK)

Have I covered it all? Should we split the hair further?

;)

I'd like to see you split it further!

;D

Tough ask, Jordan. Let's see....

Anti-Judaism = anti-the-Jewish-religion-and-not-the-race
Anti-Islam = anti-the-Islamic-religion-according-to-the-prophet-Muhammad (not including Arhmadiyya)

That's all I've got.

;)

Anti-Judaist?

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 10:23am:

That's great that you recognise this was wrong, but it's still not the business of Muslims. If you wanna make a mends for the wrongs your civilisation has caused to the Jews do it with your own land and homes, not with ours.

I believe the Zionists chose the venue not the West (although most western nations do support the right of Israel to exist). Apparently they believe they have a right to dwell within the ancient borders of Israel.

Have you heard of Muslim Zionists? Hadn't heard of them myself until recently... I know it sounds like an oxymoron but apparently its true... there are some Muslims who are pro Zionism... They claim a line from the Koran grants that the Jews should dwell in the Promised Land.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 10:23am:

Allowed being the key word here. It's also rumoured that he worked for British intelligence from his exile in Egypt.. He was quite clearly a puppet of the various Western powers and he served their interests quite well. Seems in the end his loyalties were with the allies. Your pathetic attempt to use him to taint the image of Islam and justify the racist ideology of Zionist is lame.

But he did support the German war effort and encourage Muslims into the SS and he was a Grand Mufti, so in that way he did taint the image of Islam as The Great Silence during the reign of Pope Pius XII tainted the Catholic Church after WW2.

Quote:

I believe the Zionists chose the venue not the West (although most western nations do support the right of Israel to exist).

They requested oif the British to have it there, they didn't choose it and take it all by themselves. The British then allowed massive waves of immigration. Then other European powers helped to arm them, and then the USA. The whole creation of Israel and external maintenance of the state has been done by the West, to suggest they merely 'support the right to exist' is a gross understatement.


Quote:

Have you heard of Muslim Zionists? Hadn't heard of them myself until recently...

Yes I have, there's some Italian convert who proclaims himself a "Muslim Zionists", about as believable as Muslim homosexuals.


Quote:

They claim a line from the Koran grants that the Jews should dwell in the Promised Land.

A Prophecy is mentioned they will return back there, that doesn't mean we support it happening, it's merely something that's already written. It's like it is written that in the end times there'll be great devastation, doesn't mean we go around supporting great devastation. Or in the end times people will be having sex in the streets like donkeys (this one is almost here, in the West anyway), again doesn't mean we support it happening or call for it.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 4:38pm:

A Prophecy is mentioned they will return back there, that doesn't mean we support it happening, it's merely something that's already written.

But if it is a prophecy and if it is ordained by God, then surely, within that context, resistance is not only useless, it's sacrilegious.

Quote:

But if it is a prophecy and if it is ordained by God,

But it doesn't mean it's ordained, that's why I provided you with examples of other things that are prophesised. A prophecy is just news, it is not a commandment in favour of, nor against something.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 5:09pm:

Quote: But if it is a prophecy and if it is ordained by God, But it doesn't mean it's ordained, that's why I provided you with examples of other things that are prophesised. A prophecy is just news, it is not a commandment in favour of, nor against something.

But if God determines the veracity of a prophecy then it must come to pass by divine will... And if by divine will it must come to pass then what is the point of resistance? And is this resistance then in fact resistance to the will of God?

Quote:

But if God determines the veracity of a prophecy then it must come to pass by divine will... And if by divine will it must come to pass then what is the point of resistance? And is this resistance then in fact resistance to the will of God?

A Muslim acts according to the *commands* of God, not according to what is prophesised as a future event.

What is prophesied is that the people will be punished for disobeying the commands of God. Or something like that.

freediver, what exactly does that mean?

In the old testament, God broke up Israel because they were doing something wrong. I think it was written in future tense. It's similar to the end of days thing.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 6:51pm:

Quote: But if God determines the veracity of a prophecy then it must come to pass by divine will... And if by divine will it must come to pass then what is the point of resistance? And is this resistance then in fact resistance to the will of God? A Muslim acts according to the *commands* of God, not according to what is prophesised as a future event.

Then what is the point of the revelation if not to act on it? And there is only one possible righteous act (if it is true that God determines all future events and is not merely a passive observer) and that act would have to be submission (where God does not prescribe an alternative action).

If God chooses to reveal a future event to humanity, why would he not also expect submission to his will (acceptance of the event) when that event comes to pass?

Abu,

Muslims believe that the prohet Isa (Jesus) will return to this world and defeat the dajjal (anti-Christ) after which he will continue the rest of his unfinish life as a mortal.

Does this prophecy have any reverance with Muslims? Is this an important event in the Islamic "calender" of all things future (in this life or the afterlife)? Or is it just some prophecy that is not Allaah's command?

There seems to be some distinction between God's word for the now and God's word for the future.

Quote:

Then what is the point of the revelation if not to act on it?

It is purely news/information. Acting upon it is not really permitted. Prophecies are generally seen as a sign of the omniscience of God, and some of the 'signs' that he's revealed about the future can be seen as warnings, but that's about it.


Quote:

If God chooses to reveal a future event to humanity, why would he not also expect submission to his will (acceptance of the event) when that event comes to pass?

All events are by the will of God. Not all events are sanctioned by the commands of God to the Muslims.

You are mixing two different things up here. God's commands to the universe, in the general sense that he is the overall controller of all things and God's commands to the Muslims as religious laws and regulations they should follow.

To put it into simpler terms that you might be able to relate to. If I told my child "You're going to be naughty all day aren't you" Does that mean I'm commanding/advising my child to be naughty? No, I'm just making a pessimistic observation about how I believe he will behave. That prognostication does not insinuate any approval on my part whatsoever of the naughty actions though.

Quote:

Or is it just some prophecy that is not Allaah's command?

The Prophecy in and of itself does not carry a command, unless explicitly stated. eg. "I am sending such and such, you must obey him when he comes".

When Jesus (pbuh) returns, we will obey him, because he's a prophet, and it's compulsory to obey prophets, not because his coming was prophesised.

You're failing to make a distinction between mere news of an event in a prophecy, and the pre-existing commands related to that event. The pre-existing command related to people expelling you from your land is to fight and resist them. The pre-existing command related to following a prophet, is to follow him.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 10:20pm:

To put it into simpler terms that you might be able to relate to. If I told my child "You're going to be naughty all day aren't you" Does that mean I'm commanding/advising my child to be naughty? No, I'm just making a pessimistic observation about how I believe he will behave. That prognostication does not insinuate any approval on my part whatsoever of the naughty actions though.

Human prognostication is not divine revelation. Humans can be wrong, the deity cannot.

However, a closer approximation to my point along the lines of your analogy would be “The playground will be closed this afternoon, so you will not be able to play there today, no matter how hard you cry. Resistance is pointless.”

So if God reveals that the Jews will dwell in their promised land, then so they will. Wouldn’t any resistance to this therefore necessarily be doomed to failure?

If God reveals a future event, then that event must happen and railing against it will not alter the outcome.

Quote:

So if God reveals that the Jews will dwell in their promised land, then so they will. Wouldn’t any resistance to this therefore necessarily be doomed to failure?

For a start it doesn't say when they will be gathered there, and it also doesn't state how long they'll stay there, it just says they'll be gathered there.


Quote:

If God reveals a future event, then that event must happen and railing against it will not alter the outcome.

Yes it will come to pass, but when, we don't know. Also it doesn't imply any permanence about the state that the prophecy will bring about.

Your assumptions wrongly assume it would in this case.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 11^th, 2008 at 11:17pm:

For a start it doesn't say when they will be gathered there, and it also doesn't state how long they'll stay there, it just says they'll be gathered there.

The largest migration of Jews into the land since Babylon and 'gathered from a mingled crowd' is exactly the current situation. Could it be that the prophecy has been fulfilled?

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.