Righteous among the nations!

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8550
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Righteous among the nations!

Post by been-there » Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:13 am

What since the 1970's has becoming increasingly enshrined in the public consciousness under the political rubric "holocaust' is being challenged. We here are the latest crop of the vanguard. We represent currently a minority. But we are a growing minority.
Certain people who were born into families regarding themselves as 'Jewish' have been powerful exposers of truth concerning the manipulative and coercive nature of this political rubric. These 'Jews' have been powerful exposers of aspects of that manipulative narrative because the fallacious ad hominem attack of anti-semite cannot credibly be levelled at them, and thus their testimony, and their argument pierces that often bogus and desperate defence.

Here is an article about one such champion of truth: Gideon Levy

http://mondoweiss.net/2015/10/facing-hecklers-gideon
Great response by Levy in the video excerpt Part 2 at 15:14.
'They will kill us! Holocaust! Holocaust.' Israeli paranoia needs professional help."
I think this applies not only to Israeli Jews. It is a sad fact that Jews worldwide are a victim of the holocaust narrative. It has been deeply traumatising for them. Imagine being conditioned from birth with that narrative with all its sadistic/masochistic detailed nightmarish exaggerations and quite insane inventions.

Levy explains how it is that Jews around the world have been able to live happily with a brutal and murderous land theft and occupation because of three deep-rooted beliefs/blindnesses, one of which is rooted in this flawed WW2 'holy H' narrative:
One, we are the chosen people, we can do anything we want, and international law doesn’t apply to us.
Two, we the Jews are the biggest victim in history and the only victim in history. Golda Meir said after the Holocaust Jews have the right to do whatever we want.
And third, that Palestinians are not exactly human beings. “Killing Palestinians is not really a violation”.
Short excerpt:

Whole speech:
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8550
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by been-there » Fri Jan 22, 2016 5:40 am

In a continuation of this mirror of the H industry's parading of people presented to the world's population as 'righteous gentiles'

...here is Gilad Atzmon.

Image

Atzmon is the grandson of a man who he himself describes as a “veteran Zionist terrorist,”.
He is an internationally-acclaimed saxophonist, musician and composer, born and raised in Israel — a Sabra.
Atzmon, says that like his peers, he “didn’t see the Palestinians” around him. “Supremacy,” he writes, “was brewed into our souls.”

His musical journey became a catalyst for a huge change in his outlook. “On a very late-night jazz programme, I heard Bird (Charlie Parker) with Strings. I was knocked down. The music was more organic, poetic, sentimental and wilder than anything I had ever heard. …” And the most extraordinary thing about Atzmon’s first encounter with the iconic American saxophonist was this: “I realized that Parker was actually a black man. … In my world, it was only Jews who were associated with anything good. Bird was the beginning of a journey.”

He has written a book, 'The wandering who?' in which he assesses 'Jewish' identity. He divides “those who call themselves Jews” into three main categories:

1. Those who follow Judaism.
2. Those who regard themselves as human beings that happen to be of Jewish origin.
3. Those who put their Jewish-ness over and above all of their other traits.

Throughout his book, 'The wandering who?' it is the third category that Atzmon considers “problematic,” and which he probes with magnifying glass and scalpel. It is a category that includes Zionists and anti-Zionists, religious and non-religious Jews. He quotes Chaim Weizmann:
“There are no English, French, German or American Jews, but only Jews living in England, France, Germany or America.”
In what Atzmon and others call “the Holocaust religion” he has written that “Jewishness is the materialisation of fear politics into a pragmatic agenda.”
In the modern Holocaust religion, vengeful, omnipotent Yahweh has been replaced by the unchallengeable “truths” of the Holocaust—past suffering cited to justify Israel’s ethnic cleansing and expansionism, its formidable arsenal of nukes and other weapons, its threats and wars of aggression.
Atzmon wrote:“It took me many years to understand that the Holocaust, the core belief of the contemporary Jewish faith, was not at all an historical narrative, freely debated by historians, intellectuals and ordinary people.
…historical narratives do not need the protection of the law and political lobbies.
…The fate of my great-grandmother was not so different from hundreds of thousands of German civilians who died in deliberate, indiscriminate bombing, just because they were Germans. Similarly, the people in Hiroshima, who died just because they were Japanese. Three million Vietnamese died just because they were Vietnamese and 1.3 million Iraqis died because they were Iraqis.”
Image
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/03/who ... re-we.html
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Friedrich Paul Berg
Posts: 3111
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 1:21 am
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by Friedrich Paul Berg » Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:08 am

Judaism is Racism! Jewish racism is a luxury that the world cannot afford much longer. The only way such obscenity might be defended against the rising tide of well-informed anger is with a nuclear war--which no one can afford, not even the US.

Friedrich Paul Berg
Learn everything at: http://www.nazigassings.com
Nazi Gassings Never Happened! Niemand wurde vergast!
There were NO “limited gassings!” There were NO homicidal Nazi Gassings at all!
http://www.nazigassings.com/Railroad.html

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8550
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by been-there » Fri Jan 29, 2016 6:49 pm

Cory Lubliner was just a child during the war and thus has quite naturally accepted, believed and repeated much of the false propaganda, about the Jewish collective war time experience. But he is quite unique in that as a Jewish person interred in concentration camps he has been brave and honest enough to refute the lies that are regularly told by other Jews of those things which he personally experienced. For this quite unique honesty he joins the ranks of righteous 'Jew'

Image
Oy vey, another hoax!

If any literary agent, publisher, editor or screenwriter were to seek my advice, it would be this: if any purported Holocaust memoir from a Polish Jew sounds like fiction, it probably is.
https://cobylubliner.wordpress.com/2008 ... ther-hoax/
We were all experiencing the War, a many-fronted war, ... I have not been able to accept the singling out of this one front, horrible as it may have been, as a unique epoch-making event that requires its own grandiose name, its own capitalised dictionary entry, its own academic discipline called “Holocaust studies.” It is in this sense that I count myself as a Holocaust denier.
I have a rule of thumb that I have followed for sixty years: any Polish Jew’s account of his or her experiences during World War II must be taken with a grain of salt.
Coby Lubliner wrote:Confessions of a `Holocaust Denier' by Coby Lubliner,
a jewish person who is what is called a “Holocaust survivor.”


What I question (and that’s why I have put quotes around “Holocaust survivor”) is the appropriateness of labeling the experience that I survived (six years of imprisonment in ghettos, labour camps and concentration camps as a child during World War II) — an experience that was, to me, simply a part of the War — as part of something that, for me, did not exist until it was invented in the late 1950s and never seemed anything but a pretentious literary metaphor for what was supposedly a unique experience of Jewish suffering.

When, as a nine-year-old, I spent a month in Buchenwald, it never occurred to me that those of my fellow-inmates who were Gypsies, Soviet prisoners of war, or Danish policemen arrested for helping the Jews escape, were undergoing experiences that were different from mine. We were all experiencing the War, a many-fronted war, one of whose fronts happened to be the war ... that the German state waged against the Jewish people. Ever since, for over half a century, I have not been able to accept the singling out of this one front, horrible as it may have been, as a unique epoch-making event that requires its own grandiose name, its own capitalised dictionary entry, its own academic discipline called “Holocaust studies.” It is in this sense that I count myself as a Holocaust denier.
Now, when it comes to assessing the totality of the European Jewish experience of World War II — as opposed to an individual experience — a survivor’s opinion should weigh no more nor less than anyone else’s.
One of the precursors of denialism[?], Paul Rassinier, who died in 1967, asked: “Were Jews murdered?and answered: “Yes, but not as many as one thinks. Were there any gas chambers? Yes, but not as many as one thinks.”

Both of my parents survived, and I had no siblings. I have no tattoo (though I sometimes perversely envied those who had them). I was never beaten or starved. After the War I went on with school at the normal grade level. And when I recently visited the Buchenwald memorial site, the foremost thought in my mind — unrepentant cinephile that I am — was to find the location of the barrack where I saw my first movie; never mind that my first screen image was of a smiling Hitler on horseback, introducing a newsreel. The search for the site of the barrack where I actually lived took second place.

My youthful concerns were internal in part because that is the nature of youth, but in part also because, in my memory at least, the Holocaust as a subject of worldwide interest did not emerge until the sixties, with the Eichmann trial as beacon. I don’t recall being aware of Elie Wiesel and his cohort until, perhaps, the late 60s.

I first encountered the word “Holocaust” in the title of a book published in 1965: Holocaust and Rebirth, Bergen-Belsen, 1945-1965(2). The book is of some personal interest to me, since I spent the last months of the War, after Buchenwald, in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, and several years after the War as a resident of the DP camp there; my name and youthful pictures can be found in the book.
In order to find out whether my youthful self-absorption might have clouded my memory, I performed a little computer-aided experiment. I checked the list of titles that the library of the University of California at Berkeley lists under the subject heading of “Holocaust, Jewish (1939-45).”
Of the 344 items, thirteen carry publication dates before 1960 (from 1943 to 1958, to be exact), and another four from 1961 to 1964; in other words, about a book a year. But the lustrum 1965-69 brings 34 entries, with the H-word first appearing in the title of the aforementioned Bergen-Belsen book. And the rhythm is maintained in subsequent decades: 63 entries for 1970-79, 129 for 1980-89, 101 for 1990 to 1998.
BERGEN-BELSEN
When Anne Frank and her sister Margot were ...in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp in March of 1945, there was a sizable group of Jewish children from Amsterdam — more than fifty — living in a special compound in which they were adequately fed and received a modicum of medical care... This facility, housed in a bungalow known as the Kinderbaracke (children’s barrack),...
While the children were supposed to be under sixteen to live in the compound, at least two of them seemed to be older; they had lied about their ages so as to remain with their younger siblings. Anne Frank, fifteen at the time, was in principle eligible for the Kinderbaracke; in all likelihood she chose to stay with her older sister.

The facility was managed by a woman named Luba Tryszynska, herself a Jewish prisoner from a town in eastern Poland that is now in Belarus; when she spoke Polish it was with a marked Russian accent, and she seemed to pass for Russian. She was assisted by two other Jewish women: Hermina (I don’t know her surname), from Czechia, and Hadassah (Ada) Bimko, from Sosnowiec, Poland, who had studied medicine in France before the war and served as the doctor for the compound.

In addition to the parentless children overseen by Luba and her assistants, the barrack also housed, across the hall from them, young women with infants of their own.
After the war the children were repatriated to Holland and reunited with what was left of their families. Many of these families had been in the diamond business and the children came to be known as the Diamond Children. Luba got to accompany the children and was received by Queen Wilhelmina, who, it seems, called her “the Angel of Bergen-Belsen,” a title that she boasts to this day.

Like a number of other Polish Jews liberated in Germany, Luba went to Sweden, where she married a fellow Polish Jew. When they moved to the United States, she became known as Luba Tryszynska-Frederick, but kept her angelic title.
In 1998 the A&E network ran a documentary called “The Angel of Bergen-Belsen” in its Investigative Reports series. Most recently, an as-told-to children’s book titled Luba: The Angel of Bergen-Belsen (written by Michelle R. McCann) was published by Tricycle Press with a 2003 copyright.

Luba’s story is that one night in December of 1944 she heard the crying of fifty-four Dutch children who had been abandoned in a snowy field behind her barrack. “Some,” as the McCann narrative tells us, “were just babies tucked into pillowcases.” After a conversation in which the oldest of the children told her that their parents had been taken away on a truck and that the children were left to die in the cold, Luba “gathered the group together and led them back to the barracks.”
“The next morning,” the story continues, “fifty-four stomachs were rumbling, but Luba was gone. … Suddenly, the door flew open. ‘Quickly, take this,’ Luba called to Hermina, handing her a steaming pot. Seconds later she returned with another.” And, further: “It was a miracle Luba performed for months during that winter. To get food for the children, Luba had to walk across the camp to the kitchen area twice a day, and each time she had to pass through a gate guarded by Nazi soldiers.”

I have a rule of thumb that I have followed for sixty years: any Polish Jew’s account of his or her experiences during World War II must be taken with a grain of salt.

When it comes to Luba’s story, I find it very hard to imagine that the SS, or whoever was in charge, would simply abandon a large group of children to their fate in a field,... What’s more, right around the same time, when the male population of what was left of the ghetto in Piotrków, Poland, was brought to Buchenwald and was found to include eleven boys under sixteen, steps were taken to get these boys out of Buchenwald (which was a labour, not an extermination camp), and an elaborate journey by passenger train was organised, involving special compartments and several train changes.
And where were these boys taken? Why, to the Kinderbaracke in Bergen-Belsen.

Oddly enough, none of Luba’s accounts seem to have ever acknowledged the presence of children from her own country, or, for that matter, of Hadassah Bimko, except that, according to the book, “[w]henever the children got sick, Luba went to a Jewish doctor for help.” This, however, is immediately followed by the statement that “[t]he other women in the barracks did their part to care for the children as well.”
The fact is that “the other women” soon became irrelevant, since early in 1945 the children were moved to the special barracks that became the official Kinderbaracke. Once there, the children from Holland and Poland were joined by yet another group – of some thirty – from Bratislava, Slovakia. And this group, too, is unacknowledged in the story.
In fact, some newspaper accounts printed shortly after the war, duly referenced in the book, speak of 94 children having been liberated. But there is no attempt to reconcile this number with the 54 “Diamond Children” who are the exclusive subject of the tale.
Likewise, the official status given the Kinderbaracke is absent from Luba’s account. As she tells it, it was a clandestine bootstrap operation until the end. “Every day the children got more and more hungry, until they couldn’t even feel their hunger anymore. And soon many of them were sick... One evening Luba looked around the barracks. The children were so thin. Many were suffering from typhus. The next morning… the guards were gone, and at the camp entrance huge tanks rolled through the gates. The British army had arrived. The war was over... Inside the dark barracks, [the British soldiers] saw a few women prisoners surrounded by swarms of children.”
The barrack was, in fact, brightly lit by the sun on liberation day, and the “few women prisoners” were Luba, Hermina and Hadassah. While the typhus epidemic was quite virulent and deadly in the camp population at large, those of the children who were touched by it had rather mild cases and recovered quickly. I was among them.

Hadassah herself gained a fair amount of renown after the war. First, as Ada Bimko, she was a prosecution witness in the trial of Josef Kramer (the commandant of Bergen-Belsen) and his minions, in the course of which she testified to the presence of gas chambers at Auschwitz. (This testimony earned her a prominent place in the literature of denialism.) Later she married Josef Rosensaft, himself a Bergen-Belsen survivor, and, as Hadassah Rosensaft, she wrote and lectured about the Holocaust and served on various Holocaust-related bodies in the United States. And she, too, does not appear to have ever referred to her association with Luba Tryszynska.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26941
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by Nessie » Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:16 pm

Been-there accepts Cory Lubliner's version of events whole heartedly and without criticism. His demand for critical analysis is suspended when he hears what he wants to to hear. It is only those who agree there was a genocide and it should be called the Holocaust who shoudl be "taken with a pinch of salt."
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by DasPrussian » Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:31 pm

Why did Been There omit this sentence from his block quote ?

"I admit that I was luckier than most survivors. I have always been aware of my good luck, and of others (older than me) whose fortune was far harsher than mine."

He also omits the part where he informs us of the death toll in his own extended family :

"my paternal grandmother and maternal grandfather (their spouses had died before); four (out of five) uncles, four (out of five) aunts, and six (out of six) first cousins."

Then his view on the plausibility of an extermination policy :

"the leap from resettlement to massacre is not as great as some of us may think "

He also makes it clear he isn't a denier of the existence of gas chambers, which again BT omits :

"No, not that kind of Holocaust denier, like David Irving or Fred Leuchter. These are the self-styled experts, called “Holocaust deniers” by Deborah Lipstadt and her fellows, who call themselves “revisionists” (I prefer to call them denialists, an adaptation of the French négationniste) and who systematically claim, to name only a few key points of their doctrine, that the Nazis’ “final solution of the Jewish question” was meant to be the removal of the Jews from Europe, not their extermination; that no gas chambers existed at Auschwitz or anywhere else; that, on the whole, the Jews who died did so from starvation (not deliberate) and disease; and that the number of six million is a gross exaggeration. "

And then the bit that probably explains Cory's slightly different take on the holocaust based on his own personal experience ( Which BT does include )

"When, as a nine-year-old, I spent a month in Buchenwald"


Yep, one whole month !!!!

Good to see the deniers carrying on the tradition of putting forward 'witnesses' who actually contradict the deniers claims !!!
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8550
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by been-there » Fri Jan 29, 2016 8:44 pm

He was a child. What would he have understood of the bigger picture? He admits that himself.
He admits that most Polish Jewish survivor 'testimony' is false. This is quite unique as far as I am aware.

I understand that true believers will get their knickers in a twist over that and attempt to deflect from that. As DP and N have just done. But that merely shows their own denial, as I acknowledged that he supports key aspects of the holocaust narrative. I made that clear in my brief intro. I think that is revealing that DP was unable to take that in.
been-there wrote:Cory Lubliner was just a child during the war and thus has quite naturally accepted, believed and repeated much of the false propaganda, about the Jewish collective war time experience. But he is quite unique in that as a Jewish person interred in concentration camps he has been brave and honest enough to refute the lies that are regularly told by other Jews of those things which he personally experienced. For this quite unique honesty he joins the ranks of righteous 'Jew'

Image
Oy vey, another hoax!

If any literary agent, publisher, editor or screenwriter were to seek my advice, it would be this: if any purported Holocaust memoir from a Polish Jew sounds like fiction, it probably is.
https://cobylubliner.wordpress.com/2008 ... ther-hoax/
We were all experiencing the War, a many-fronted war, ... I have not been able to accept the singling out of this one front, horrible as it may have been, as a unique epoch-making event that requires its own grandiose name, its own capitalised dictionary entry, its own academic discipline called “Holocaust studies.” It is in this sense that I count myself as a Holocaust denier.
I have a rule of thumb that I have followed for sixty years: any Polish Jew’s account of his or her experiences during World War II must be taken with a grain of salt.
Coby Lubliner wrote:Confessions of a `Holocaust Denier' by Coby Lubliner,
a jewish person who is what is called a “Holocaust survivor.”


What I question (and that’s why I have put quotes around “Holocaust survivor”) is the appropriateness of labeling the experience that I survived (six years of imprisonment in ghettos, labour camps and concentration camps as a child during World War II) — an experience that was, to me, simply a part of the War — as part of something that, for me, did not exist until it was invented in the late 1950s and never seemed anything but a pretentious literary metaphor for what was supposedly a unique experience of Jewish suffering.
Last edited by been-there on Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by DasPrussian » Fri Jan 29, 2016 9:00 pm

been-there wrote:He was a child. What would he have understood of the bigger picture? He admits that himself.
He admits that most Polish Jewish survivor 'testimony' is false. This is quite unique as far as I am aware.

I understand that true believers will get their knickers in a twist over that and attempt to deflect from that. As DP and N have just done. But that merely shows there own denial, as I acknowledged that he supports key aspects of the holocaust narrative. I made that clear in my brief intro. I think that is revealing that DP was unable to take that in.
Where did you acknowledge he supports (present tense)key aspects of the holocaust narrative ? All you acknowledged was that he believed (past tense) in the so called propaganda.

You claim he admits most polish Jewish testimony is false ( maybe some more details and examples are required here so he can justify this claim ), but it becomes apparent he believes in the existence of gas chambers and extermination. So the whole narrative is pretty pointless from your point of view, isn't it ?
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26941
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by Nessie » Sat Jan 30, 2016 11:06 am

been-there wrote:He was a child. What would he have understood of the bigger picture? He admits that himself.
He admits that most Polish Jewish survivor 'testimony' is false. This is quite unique as far as I am aware.
He actually said he would take most with a pinch of salt. That means he would be critical and want further evidence of what they said. It does not mean he has stated most is false. You have misrepresented and been less than critical because he has said what your closed mind wants to hear.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8550
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Righteous among the nations!

Post by been-there » Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:32 am

Well, if everybody in North America is forced to attend, at school, training in sensitivity in Holocaust awareness; and is taught to study the Final Solution, about which nothing was actually done by this country, or by North America, or by the United Kingdom while it was going on; but let’s say — as if in compensation for that — everyone is made to swallow an official and unalterable story of it now. And it’s taught as the great moral exemplar, the moral equivalent of the morally lacking elements of the Second World War. A way of distilling our uneasy conscience about that combat.
If that’s the case with everybody — as it more or less is — and one person gets up and says, “You know, about this Holocaust, I’m not sure it even happened. In fact, I’m pretty certain it didn’t. Indeed, i begin to wonder if the only thing is that the Jews brought a little bit of violence on themselves” That person doesn’t just have a right to speak, that person’s right to speak must be given extra protection. Because what he has to say must have taken him some effort to come up with, might contain a grain of historical truth. Might in any case get people to think about why do they know what they already think they know. How do I know that I know this, except that I’ve always been taught this and never heard anything else?

It’s always worth establishing first principle. It’s always worth saying what would you do if you met a Flat Earth Society member? Come to think of it, how can I prove the earth is round?
Am I sure about the theory of evolution? I know it’s supposed to be true. Here’s someone who says there’s no such thing; it’s all intelligent design. How sure am I of my own views?

Don’t take refuge in the false security of consensus, and the felling that whatever you think you’re bound to be OK, because you’re in the safely moral majority.

One of the proudest moments of my life — that’s to say, in the recent past — has been defending the British historian David Irving who is now in prison in Austria for nothing more than the potential of uttering an unwelcome thought, on Austrian soil. He didn’t actually say anything in Austria. He wasn’t even accused of saying anything. He was accused of perhaps planning to say something that violated an Austrian law that says only one version of the history of the Second World War may be taught in our brave little Tyrolean Republic. The republic that gave us Kurt Waldheim, as Secretary General of the United Nations, a man wanted in several countries for war crimes. The country that has Jorge Heider the leader of its own Fascist Party in the cabinet that sent David Irving to jail. You know the two things that have made Austria famous and given it its reputation by any chance? Just while I’ve got you? I hope there are some Austrians here to be upset by it. A pity if not. But the two greatest achievements of Austria are to have convinced the world that Hitler was German and that Beethoven was Viennese. Now to this proud record they can add, they have the courage finally to face up to their past and lock up a British historian who has committed no crime except that of thought in writing. And that’s a scandal. I can’t find a seconder usually when I propose this but I don’t care. I don’t need a seconder. My own opinion is enough for me. And I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, anytime. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line, and kiss my arse.
Christopher Hitchens talking on free speech.
Hitchens discovered in 1987 at the age of 38 that his mother secretly regarded herself as Jewish and from a line of people who so self-identify. Which technically made him also Jewish in the perception of those people who claim such abstract tribal identity. He was, as he later wrote “pleased to find that I was pleased" to discover that he was what he himself described as "a non-Jewish Jew".
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 8 guests